Ah, now I see. Thank you.
Two bits says its all about putting the squeeze on that multi-million dollar development project, which has access to New York as a major selling point. A further two bits says that if the project hired certain preferred consultants and construction firms, their problems would have disappeared.
Interesting that no one’s brought this up.
There are suggestions that the original plan was for the closures/lane diversions to go on not for four days only, but for a month:
Ah. But the Bricker / Chronos position is that Christie is “involved” because a senior member of his staff was instrumental in the lane re-assignments. I thought you were challenging that position. That Christie can not be held completely uninvolved in anything done by his senior staff.
Do you agree that even if Christie did not directly instruct his staff to arrange the lane re-assignments, that he is involved in the actions of staff whom he has trusted with that level of independence?
No, I don’t personally agree with the “Christie/Sokolich/Executive Branch leader is involved” just because someone in their organization decided to break the law or screw with traffic. I do consider the leader to be responsible for the actions of their organization, based on their position in the organization.
Christie is responsible but it hasn’t been proven that Christie was involved in the Great Lane Reassignment debacle.
It would be acceptable to me. I have no idea who j666 is or what he does. If he has new information and is willing to share it, why not? I’m in favor of more information and asking more questions.
The question would have to be why?
What was the purpose.
There have been a number of ideas suggested, that amount to two things
a) It was punishment
b) It was a shakedown.
It’s pretty hard to believe, that given the chaos caused ONE “bad apple” in Christie’s office could have done it alone - so that means that others had to have known about it, been complicit or “allowed” it to happen.
What was their benefit?
It’s difficult to believe that word of this didn’t get to the top…
But presumably it is a reason that would cause at least as much embarrassment to the Christie administration as the prevailing notation that it was political payback. Otherwise it would make sense for them to come forward and explain their actions.
Unless you can come up with another reason they are keeping silent. I suppose its possible that Jack Bauer got wind of a nuclear device that was going to go up the GW bridge and only the quick thinking of Christie saved New York, but they had to pretend it was a traffic study to preserve national security. So you have any other theories?
And by “Christie is responsible …”, you mean for the GLRD?
Allrightie, then.
(I propose we adopt the term the Great Lane Reassignment Debacle; it’s accurate and entertaining, and that more than a lot these days.)
Good luck with the adoption. 
Just to be clear -
responsibility -
noun [C/U] (DUTY)
› a duty to take care of something:
[C] With this promotion, Jorge’s responsibilities will be increased.
Parents must assume responsibility for their children.
involved with -
adjective (INTERESTED)
› interested in or taking part in an activity or event:
The couple was having a loud argument, and I was afraid to get involved.
Maria was so involved in her work that she didn’t hear me come in.
Christie is ultimately responsible for the actions of Kelly. Wildstein, Baroni, and Kelly were actually involved in the Great Lane Reassignment debacle.
I guess the personal viewpoints of the Great Lane Reassignment debacle depends on where you start. If you believe that the most often repeated, unsubstantiated rumor, of Christie wanting to punish Sokolich for not supporting him is true, then it’s easy to believe that the other unsubstantiated rumors must also be true.
If you start with no preconceived notions and try to solve the puzzle of the Ft Lee traffic jam, the current evidence points to Port Authority Wildstein and Port Authority Baroni. You would also question Kelly’s participation in the PA Wildstein and PA Baroni plan. Does Kelly’s involvement mean that Christie was involved? There has been no evidence provided, so far, of Christie’s involvement.
The media’s participation in the Great Lane Reassignment debacle is embareassing. They aren’t “reporting” the news. They have created/repeated the most popular unsubstantiated rumors and acting as if their stories are actually fact.
The media had Port Authority Baroni by the balls at his dog and pony powerpoint show. If this were “Of Mice and Men”, Baroni would be George and the media would be Lenny.
Lenny: When ya gonna show me the rabbits, George?
George: There are no rabbits Lenny. It’s records.
Lenny: When ya gonna show me the records, George?
George: I showed you the pretty pictures Lenny, isn’t that enough?
Lenny: I like to touch things George. I want to touch the records.
George: Don’t you believe me Lenny? I showed you the pretty pictures. You like pretty pictures. Let’s go talk to the farmers daughter. She’s pretty and I understand she has soft hair.
Lenny: OK.
And Baroni and Wildstein’s motives were what, exactly?
Anyone at the Port Authority who was *not *a Christie confidant mixed up in this yet?
If this is not a Christie thing, why are all the participants on his Rolodex?
“Weeks before a manufactured traffic jam at the George Washington Bridge overtook Fort Lee, N.J., at the behest of aides to Gov. Chris Christie, two people central to the scheme (Bridget Anne Kelly and David Wildstein) jokingly discussed engineering traffic problems at a less prominent site: the home of a local rabbi.”
Jews tend to vote Democrat, don’t they?
In the article cited, he is noted as a supporter of Christie, though not an “endorser” and served as a chaplain at Republican functions. Still, its hard to be sure about the political views of Jews, because they hate to argue.
I have no idea.
Rolodex? What’s that? hehehe, just kidding.
If this is a “Christie thing”, why haven’t the, at least, two political investigations and, at least, two federal investigations been able to prove that the, as of yet unconfirmed, rumor(s) about Christie being involved, are true? It certainly not from lack of trying.
What are you going on about? Why are you quoting definitions?
I asked questions. You (finally) answered them. Why are you dragging this part of the conversation on, and on, and on.
Look, the argument has always been that, if one start with no preconceived notions, it is difficult to conceive that a person who got elected in New Jersey would not know exactly what the executive staff was up, and it is impossible to respect a populist governor who does not put the needs of his constituents first.
You can tap-dance as hard as you like around that, but you have not reputed those two positions.
Involved or not, do you not realize that investigations take time, especially when the principals are claiming the Fifth?
(bold and shortened for clarity)
To help clarify my position, of course. That’s why I said, “Just to be clear”, right above the definitions. I thought it might be helpful.
How would any executive “know exactly what their staff was up” to 24/7? Or where their staff even “was” 24/7. This isn’t Russia. (Is this Russia?) Kelly and Port Authority Wildstein were considering a traffic jam for a rabbi. Are you jumping to the conclusion that Christie also ordered that?
There is nothing there to refute. There isn’t any proof that Christie was involved in the Great Lane Reassignment debacle. There is proof that Port Authority Wildstein and Baroni were.
We’re not asking that he know what they’re up to at every moment. We’re asking for him to take less than four days to find out what they’re up to. Heck, that’s being generous, since they were planning it for something like a month beforehand, and it took until months afterwards for him to take any action on it.