“Give me the money, I have a gub” as a bank loan application.
Best bank heist scene ever…
There was no traffic study. That, at least, has been established for some time. I’ve said that many times.
In this instance, I was specifically talking about how this traffic jam would have appeared to the drivers stuck in traffic.
Quote:
It’s a big deal NOW. On the first day, it was only a big deal to the people stuck in traffic. Except for the perpetrators of the lane reassignments, the first day looked like just another poorly planned traffic study to many people.
Did Mayor Sokolich believe, on day one, that this was a traffic study? And why would the mayor call the govenor’s office instead of waiting four days to call Port Authority Executive Director Foye? Was Sokolich confused as to who or what the Port Authority is and what they do?
Could you just lay out your argument rather than continue with this string of questions?
Sure. There is no proof that Christie ordered the lane reassignment and the media outlets have spent an unusually large amount of their time creating stories of how Christie might be involved.
What’s unusual about it? And what kind of proof do you think would be expected by now (beyond an admission by Christie or his immediate staff) whose absence should satisfy everyone to stop asking questions? Beyond that, do you think that everything else that has now come out regarding the way Christie has operated should also be dismissed?
According to whom? I have never in my life been stuck in traffic and thought, “Oh, this must have been one of those traffic studies that I’ve been hearing about.”
Well, yes, as the evidence piles up NOW that Christie and his crew were engaged in a particularly brazen bit of corrupt abuse of power.
Door hinge, would this be a fair summary of your argument? – “If it’s theoretically conceivable that something like this could have happened in the absence of malicious intent, then who cares that it might have actually been done with malicious intent?”
There’s possibly more: “And it’s all MSNBC’s fault for harping on it, no matter what they and everyone else in the media keeps finding. Anyway, we need to protect Christie so he can beat Hillary”.
Would that be accurate?
“There is, to date, no sworn affidavit from God Almighty countersigned by the Archangel Gabriel. Therefore, he is not guilty…”
That’s funny. lol.
No one should stop asking questions.
The media outlets should be asking better questions.
“everything else that has now come out” should also be subject to question.
Unless you believe Christie is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, in spite of the lack of evidence, and feathers should be gathered and tar brought to boil.
Wildstein and Baroni are obviously up to their eyeballs in the Great Lane Reassignment.
I think “what did Christie know and when did he know it?” is a fine question.
Which questions are being asked by media outlets that you think don’t need to be asked (and answered)?
What hard evidence has been piled up? There are rumors, innuendo, she said/she said, political spin, embareassingly poor reporting, whining.
I think it’s a fine question, also.
The media outlets should also be asking questions about the “speculations” directed at Christie’s involvement.
No, that would not be a fair summary.
No, that would not be accurate.
Even though doorhinge may think MSNBC stands for “Must Show Nothing But Christie”, I think it’s fair to say that MSNBC has spent 1/10 as much time on the GWB scandal as FOX has on Benghazi, with the difference being that there is a legitimate scandal about the GWB. Who knows, maybe ALL of Christie’s men will fall on their swords and refuse to sing and leave Christie untouched. But that’s not a good thing to bet on, in my view.
Perhaps you can’t stand to remember the facts. From the Wiki entry
So, the Fort Lee people did not wait four days.
Which pretty much proves malice.
I’m sure you are well aware that the Port Authority has NJ and NY people. Why would the mayor not try to contact the NJ people for this NJ problem. The mayor did not have the advantage of being able to see the communications between these slimeballs, so there was no reason for him to know about how futile his protests were. Remember also that Wildstein was angry that Foye was getting involved.
Were you equally outraged that someone might think Nixon was involved after Haldeman and Ehrlichman took a fall during Watergate?
So, some questions for you?
Is Christie such an incompetent manager that his staff runs riot without him knowing it?
Did Christie establish such a toxic environment in the governor’s office that his staff thought this crap was just fine?
The start signal implied that the jam was discussed previously. Was Christie involved? Directly or with a wink?