The term “Great Lane Assignment” is easy and simple to understand and describes the traffic problem perfectly. Maybe a change to the “Great NJ Lane Assignment” would be acceptable to you?
I don’t know which media outlet or blogger began using the term “GWB” to also describe the “GW Bridge scandal” but it makes discussing and searching for “GWB” (either one) items difficult and confusing. I mentioned it might be confusing in post #693. “GWB Scandal” doesn’t work for me.
No, I did not imply that.
I would think the context would make it clear whether people are referring to a bridge or a former president.
No, I don’t. Sometimes that’s the only exercise they get. 
I’ve read where Lewis was going to start a club and I’ve read that Lewis had a club. Which story is true?
What I haven’t found is proof that Lewis was actually involved with a club when he was asking Christie for a job with a title.
Then why did you ask …
… with respect to this event? The discussion is not about “anyone in [an] administration”, but a Chief of Staff.
Were you referring to some-one else in the administration? That would not change the fact that the Chief of Staff was instrumental in the lane closing.
Are you accepting that the lane closing were immoral if not illegal? If not, what is the relevance of your question to the topic?
Please clarify why you used the term “anyone”, if not to minimize the importance of the individuals involved.
No, I was speaking in general. “Is every Executive Branch leader…” means “every” EB leader not just Christie.
That’s the $64 question, isn’t it. If “they” could prove that the Great NJ Lane Reassignment was actually about punishing the mayor of Ft Lee for not endorsing Christie, that would have also have been the proof that it was Christie who ordered the traffic cones moved.
The “punishing the mayor for his lack of support” rumor was the first of many, as of yet unproven, rumors.
Bridge Scandal? Bridgegate? Christiegate? Maybe we need a poll. I’m curious where “Great Lane Assignment” would place
I’m sorry that GWB is difficult and confusing to you. As a resident of the area and a user of the bridge I’m familiar with the GWB everyday in traffic reports and news. You’ve previously told us that it was basically just a local traffic jam but your dogged attempts to trivialize the scandal seem quite at odds with the low importance you ascribe to it.
Realistically, how long before we can expect some sort of resolution as regards Christie’s involvement (or not) in this case, and some sort of solid “reason” as to what the goal was?
Originally, when Wildstein had ordered the lanes reassigned, this only appeared to be poorly planned lane reassignments for a traffic study. It didn’t receive a 24/7, nationwide media push. The media didn’t start it’s major push until Kelly’s message about “time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee” proved that this wasn’t just a traffic jam but a deliberate attempt to disrupt traffic in Ft Lee.
The “why” hasn’t been established yet.
Personally, I don’t really mind if the “why” is never definitively established. I’m okay with removing Christie from office just because he’s a fucking Republican.
You weren’t asking a rhetorical question? If you were seriously asking if every executive branch leader should resign when any staffer does something illegal or immoral, why bring it up in this thread?
Why ask the question in response to the Bricker/Chronos argument that Christie is “involved” when his staff take public actions like lane closures? It doesn’t make sense that you are switching to a general discussion. This is about Christie, specifically, not the responsibilities of executive branch leaders.
Are you accepting that the lane closing were immoral if not illegal? If not, what is the relevance of your question to the topic?
Please clarify why you used the term “anyone”, if not to minimize the importance of the individuals involved.
Just to be clear, Christie’s Deputy Chief of Staff was Bridget Anne Kelly. It appears to me that Bricker was attempting to clarify a point under discussion. Christie, as the head of the Executive Branch, is “responsible” for the actions of his staff, aides, and COF. That doesn’t mean that Christie was actually “involved” in the lane reassignments. We’re, well, I’m still waiting for proof of that.
My point is that Christie, as well as all heads of Executive Branches of government, are responsible for the actions of their staff, aides, and appointments. They’re responsible to the taxpayers.
The reassignment of the lanes, personally overseen by Wildstein, was immoral. Whether it was illegal or not is yet to be seen (or maybe I didn’t get that memo, yet). Do you have any up-to-date info?
I have used the term “anyone” at times when I don’t have the name of the person involved. It wouldn’t necessarily refer to the past or present COF of Christie’s administration.
Are you under the impression that j666 is part of one of the ongoing investigations and that if he were, it would be acceptable for him to simply share what they’ve found on a messageboard?
Yes, of course it does. Responsibility is one form of involvement.
Why are you saying that the lanes were reassigned? Forgive me, but I’m under the impression that they were simply closed. Saying that they were reassigned implies that the 3 lanes were opened in a different place - were they?
All tollbooth lanes were open. There are two groups of tollbooths on the GW Bridge. One for the upper and one for the lower level but only for those going to New York. (People are always free to leave New York.) The reassignment only occurred for the lanes at the upper level, 12-lane tollbooth near the Ft Lee entrance ramp. The three far-right lanes are normally restricted, by traffic cones, to traffic coming exclusively from Ft Lee. The other nine lanes are normally used by mainline I-95 traffic.
Wildstein ordered that the traffic cones be moved, restricting Ft Lee traffic to the single far-right lane which had no electronic pass capability. The mainline traffic expanded from nine tollbooth lanes to eleven.
No closure. No bridge closure. No lane closure. No tollbooth closure.
But Wildstein really screwed up Ft Lee traffic for four days. Why? That’s not known yet.
As I understand it, there are 4 on ramps from Fort Lee, and 3 were closed. Lanes were NOT reassigned, they were CLOSED. Please, correct me if I’m wrong.
I think the emails make it pretty clear what the motive was. What they don’t prove is that it was Christie being vindictive rather than Kelly being vindictive.
this Washington Post story from Jan 9 graphically illustrates what’s supposed to have happened. Two of the dedicated lanes coming in from Fort Lee NJ were re-assigned to general interstate ttraffic, restricting Fort Lee traffic to a single lane. The two lanes were “closed” to Fort Lee traffic, but still open to traffic from Route 1 and the Interstate.
Small comfort to Fort Lee travelers, who were backed up outrageously without warning.