I question how much truth there is in most advertising. As I understand the process, an organization decides what criteria the commercial/advertising must meet. Multiple bids are accepted for consideration. Bids that do not meet the criteria are rejected and the lowest bidder, that meets the criteria, wins.
There is a paper/email/twitter trail of communications between the parties involved. Unlike some rogue Port Authority wildman reassigning lanes because he wanted to prove how tough or influential he was.
It should be much easier to prove Christie’s involvement/non-involvement in the TV commercials approval.
You need to get your evidence to the federal investigators ASAP. They’re still looking for “hard, absolute evidence” that Christie was actually involved.
No, they already have that, too, just like everyone else in the country. What they’re looking for is not evidence of involvement, but evidence of criminal activity. Which I admit that I do not have: The evidence is still also consistent with mere incompetence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos
Wait, doorhinge, how is it relevant that you have no authority in New Jersey?
I responded that it was not relevant - that I have no authority in NJ.
There was a 4-day traffic jam in Ft Lee, NJ. The residents and commuters called the Mayor’s office, dare I say, demanding that Sokolich DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. It would have been obvious that the lane reassignments were a result of a Port Authority action. As Mayor, the most obvious choice of action would be to contact the Port Authority demanding an explanation and a reversal of the lane reassignments. AND keep calling until he reached a person in authority who could correct the situation.
Four days later, Port Authority Foye was informed, not by Sokolich, that there was a Port Authority lane reassignment in progress that had NO budget, NO history of meetings to discuss the need for such a “traffic study”, NO history of a decision to give the go-ahead to such a “traffic study”, and Port Authority Foye immediately ordered an end to the non-study study.
While Sokolich was still floundering about wondering why Baroni wasn’t calling him back.
Sokolich has never said that he had personally contacted Christie about the traffic jam during the traffic jam. Sokolich has said that he hopes Christie wasn’t involved in this. If Sokolich had actually, personally, talked to Christie about the traffic jam in Ft Lee, I would think that Sokolich would have publically mentioned that by now.
I think the commercial case is going to be impossible to prove criminal intent. The selection process by its nature can’t be 100% free of bias. Even when approached with the best of intentions, one company’s pitch may resonate with the selection committee for intangible reasons. I wouldn’t waste my time barking up that tree, sure it looks odd that the company that showed Christie in a flattering way got the bid but you’d have a devil of a time proving that was the deciding factor.
I’ll put my faith in the US Attorney. If he feels that there is evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Christie, let him present that case. If not, he’ll let us know. In any event, Christie’s 2016 dream is over. If guilty, he needs to worry about staying out of prison. If innocent, he is exposed as being an incompetent manager.
The news reports I see are saying basically what you are saying. No evidence yet of Christie’s fingerprints on this scandal, but lots of questions still unanswered.
I never said that I know Christie is guilty. I strongly suspect it, and I know that he is either guilty or incompetent, but I can’t rule out the possibility of incompetence.
Because there was an actual, documented process involved, I would think that decision making process involved in the TV commercial would make that an easier case to make. Did the commercial(s) that wasn’t chosen meet the criteria of the selection committee? If they didn’t, then case closed. If the TV commercial not chosen did meet the criteria AND it was the lowest bidder, then why wasn’t it chosen? The committee has some ‘splainin’ to do. Had the criteria changed? Had pressure been illegally applied to dump one in favor of the other? Did the selection committee authorized taxpayer dollars be spent, not on the lowest bidder, but to appease the powerful?
I also have faith in the U.S. Attorney. I have no faith in the political investigation. 7 Democrats and 4 Republicans pretty much guarantees a 7 to 4 vote that Christie stole the Lindbergh baby.
Not necessarily. My workplace has a process for hiring and promoting. They form selection committees and ask each candidate the same questions. And the result is always that the same person that everyone knew would get the job before the interviews even start winds up getting it. They simply hear what they want to hear during the interviews and pick who they want to pick. Same thing with the commercial. The selectors simply decided that the firm that featured Christie was the most qualified and you can’t prove that they did not do so objectively.
According to Wiki, there are 565 municipalities in the U.S. state of New Jersey. There are five types of municipality in the state—boroughs (250), cities (52), towns (15), townships (245), and villages (3).
Christie is responsible for all of them plus all of the inter-state issues, state parks, state budget, state taxes, state energy, state recovery from a really big storm, and everything else state related. It appears that Christie has quite a bit more responsibility than Sokolich. Wait. Hold on. Stop everything. One of the state’s mayors can’t handle what at first appears to be a traffic jam in his city. The State’s business can wait while the governor straightens everything out for him. Really?
If Christie hadn’t been made aware that Ft Lee was under attack by Port Authority Wildstein and Baroni, why would Christie chose to embareass Sokolich by doing the mayor’s job? Extraordinary, as well as, ordinary traffic jams are something people expect their mayor to handle. No one has come forward to say that they had personally informed Christie that Ft Lee had a Port Authority traffic jam. Or that Sokolich needed help doing his mayoral job. Not even Sokolich has said he personally contacted Christie.
I fault Sokolich for what Sokolich couldn’t accomplish.
Ya know, now that you mention it, I’ve never seen Spider-Man and Chris Christie at the same time. You don’t suppose they are the same person do you?
I would hope that hiring and staff promotions would be handled differently than capital expenses and the various media promotions (billboards, radio and TV ads, pamphlets, buttons, maps) of the State. Less subjected to individual bias. Maybe not.
However, “IF” the NJ selectors actually have that much leeway, there would be no point in even having an investigation. And there is an investigation.
If it’s not relevant, why did you introduce the argument?
You introduced a completely irrelevant topic, Sokolich’s effectiveness, and steadfastly refuse to support you argument, address any argument that Sokolich could not legally take any action, or describe any legal recourse Sokolich had.
When called out on the shameful hollowness of your arguments, you switch to a different topic until you are pressed there and, it appears, you believe we have forgotten the details of what you said earlier, then bring up Solkolich again.
then you don’t understand the advertising pitch process very well.
There will normally be two components -
the “hard” part that says “two different radio ads, three press ads” etc etc
Then the soft part - the soft part is the creative process of how well the ad agency interprets and targets the audience, how creative they are and the sorts of ad they produce.
A GOOD business development manager will be talking to one or more of the decision makers to get “insight” as to what the selection committee is looking for. Here it is very easy to steer someone in a particular direction.
The “pitch process” is one thing. That would be the producers efforts to insure that their product would be chosen.
I’m under the impression that the feds are investigating how the TV commercial(s) were selected by the selection committee? Was political influence/pressure used to chose one commercial over another or did the commercial(s) chosen A) actually meet the specified criteria and B) was the lowest bidder win?
Are the commercial’s “business development managers” also the target of the federal investigation?