An alternate motive for the Fort Lee traffic jam?

Rachel Maddow proposed a possible alternate reason for Christie and/or his staff (allegedly) causing the Fort Lee traffic jam. There had been an ongoing political war between Christie and NJ State Senate Democrats over state Supreme Court appointments. That war had reached a boiling point the night before the “time for traffic trouble” email was sent. Christie made angry public comments calling the Democrats “animals” and at 7:34 the next morning that email was sent. And it just so happens that Fort Lee is in the district represented by Democrat Loretta Weinberg, who happens to be NJ Senate Majority Leader.
Here’s the video explaining it. Maybe someone can find a transcript and post a link to it.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

It actually seems more plausible than punishing Sokolich.

I found Madow’s research compelling.

I’m 90/10 that it’s the reason.

Does a State Senator care about a traffic jam in her home district? It’s not obvious to me that she’d even be aware of it.

Not that doing it to get back at the Mayor makes a lot of sense either. But at least in that case he’s someone who would be aware of the traffic situation and involved in efforts to fix it.

The one problem with the theory is that the comments in the e-mails seem to be directed against the mayor. Somebody makes a comment about how the traffic jam is causing trouble for “the little Serbian” (the mayor of Ft. Lee is Croatian), and, in response to the concern that Ft. Lee kids would miss school, the comment is made that they were all the kids of Buono supporters anyway.

I think it’s more plausible.

I’m not sure that it mattered whether or not Weinberg was immediately aware of the jam or the reason for it. The timing could indicate that this was basically a snit.

The endorsement explanation seems weak. There had to be many public figures who didn’t endorse Christie, and the mayor doesn’t recall any pressure for an endorsement.

It’s about looting the commons, a Republican tactic for enriching the rich since the Reagan era. Privatization baby!

Fort Lee is resisting and Crisp Crispy (he’s toast now) got caught throwing his weight around. Being the very good lawyer that he is, he can pull off a press conference with near Reaganesque teflon performance. But this shit is gonna stick because even the best courtroom performance isn’t going to quell the public anger about this.

Ask yourself, who in the Governor’s office set the example for this kind of hostile retaliatory behavior?

Regarding the comments against the mayor and Buono voters, they’re all Democrats and therefore they’re the enemy, so the comments could have been a matter of dismissing concerns about “collateral damage”.

Maddow’s research, as always, is first rate. I think she’s one of the finest TV journalists out there. I think her notion is quite plausible. Perhaps it was the primary motivation, perhaps the Christie syndicate thought they’d kill two birds with one stone and punish both the state senator and the mayor at once.

The other jaw-dropping thing that I can’t get over is the nomination of Christie’s Chief of Staff as Attorney General. So the Christie mob theory is that the scandal begins and ends with the Deputy Chief of Staff. Who better to be the state’s Attorney General than the Chief of Staff. Hello… can anyone say conflict of interest?

If you don’t want to click the link, here’s the money quote:

Huh. Here I have an edit button whereas I did not have one on my last post. I guess the edit button only lasts a few minutes?

When it was happening, the Mayor thought he was being retaliated against and the little Serbian comment makes me doubt this as a possible motive, and Weinberg seemed to doubt it too.

But I would love to know the true story.

FrY10ck, I wasn’t aware of the school situation. That would explain the comments against the mayor. Still, the timing makes me think that the SC fight was at least part of the motivation.

Christie (or his staff) may have had several motivations which all came to an emotional head. Combine that with Fort Lee being an easy target of a semi-defensible state action (a “traffic study” of the GWB) and you end up with several days of gridlock.

OK, Terr, whom do you think the governor’s office was retaliating against?

Bill Clinton?

Correct. The SDMB only allows editing of a post for 5 minutes after the post is initially made.

I keep thinking, who in the Governor’s office, who, who, who could possibly have set the example for this kind of hostile retaliatory behavior?

Which of those colored smilies indicates sarcasm?

Depending on how you use them, all of them.