Post shortened for clarity.
In other words, you’re kicking the crap out of that strawman you completely invented.
Have you no shame, sir? Have you NO shame?
I think Chris Christie murders and eats small children. I have as much proof for my claim as you do for yours.
No he obviously, really does not. If he brings red herring to a party, and you remark “I do not care for your red herring”, he says you made the biggest red herring remark evar! His posts in this thread demonstrate a lack of comprehension of the meaning of words, or a lack of integrity, or both.
I suspected you felt that way for some time. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? When did you chose to toss that aside?
Can you describe your own logical progression of thought that you used to reach your conclusion that Christie must be guilty? There’s no evidence that Christie is guilty (yet), so how did you reach your conclusion?
Did you make an instinctive decision and hope that some evidence will eventually surface that will fulfill your fondest hope?
There is no news media piece that states that Christie is unequivocally guilty. There is just the repeated association of Christie with anything and everything that is wrong with the Port Authority and New Jersey.
Can you describe your own logical progression of thought that you used to reach your conclusion that Christie must be guilty? There’s no evidence that Christie is guilty (yet), so how did you reach your conclusion?
Did you make an instinctive decision and hope that some evidence will eventually surface that will fulfill your fondest hope?
That’s the issue, though, isn’t it? Christie is associated with everything and everyone that is fishy at the Port Authority. In some cases, very closely associated. It doesn’t prove he’s guilty. But it’s a legitimate story to point out the associations and the related investigations. That’s all I’m seeing in the media, not anyone saying “he’s guilty.”
I can describe the logical progression of my **assumption **that Chris Christie ordered the Great Lane Reduction Debacle.
A Christie appointee and two subordinates are implicated in the GLRD +
Christie is one tough pol who ignored the Republican party leadership and the Tea Party when his state needed Federal money +
The heads of said appointee and subordinates did not come flying through the television at me (metaphorically speaking) =
Christie ordered it.
Not quite. While Christie is associated with many people, he is the governor after all, the evidence to date points to Port Authority’s Wildstein as being the ringmaster. I don’t have a problem with the media constantly associating Christie with Christie associates but it doesn’t actually prove anything.
The media’s Christie must be punishing Sokolich rumor is a different kind of story. There is no proof of that what-so-ev-ah. In order to make the Christie punishing Sokolich story more believable, the media added several other unverified rumors to it. Sokolich didn’t support Christie’s election. The same thing could be said about thousands of people and doesn’t prove anything. Then there was the unverified rumor, and poorly investigated news story, that it must be about a building project in Ft Lee. That rumor was so well reported that most people don’t even know the name of the project. Plus, there were no interviews with the buyers, sellers, builders, backers, or financiers of the project. One unverified rumor doesn’t prove the original unverified rumor. Add to that, a 3rd attempt to prove the unverified Christe punishing Sokolich. It must be about Christie’s feud with Democrats over state Supreme Court appointments. Of course Democrats are fighting with Republicans over court appointments. That’s to be expected in every State. It doesn’t prove the Christie punishing Sokolich story or that Christie was involved with the Great NJ Lane Reassignment debacle.
The Carl “Hey, remember me” Lewis story seems to have been reported simply because Lewis mentioned Christie’s name. It certainly wasn’t investigated by the media to see if Lewis’s story was based on anything other than Lewis’s sourgrapes over not becoming an official somebody in NJ. But at least we know that Lewis has moved to Houston, TX. :rolleyes: Reporting the Lewis story looks more like an act of desperation than proof of Christie’s involvement in the Port Authority screwing with Ft Lee traffic on the first day of school.
Mayor Hoboken claims Christie threatened to withhold Sandy funds from Hoboken. Except for the fact that the mayor didn’t actually have such a conversation with Christie, that shouldn’t get in the way of a media story. Mayor Hoboken did, however, speak with the Lt Gov… And the Lt Gov denies that she threatened the mayor or that Christie ordered her to threaten the mayor. The mounting evidence doesn’t reach the height of a one-ant anthill.
Port Authority’s Wildstein talked to several Port Authority engineers about how to restrict tollbooth traffic from Ft Lee. Port Authority’s Wildstein ordered the traffic lanes reassigned. Port Authority’s Wildstein made a personal appearence to oversee the moving of the traffic cones. Port Authority’s Wildstein ordered Port Authority’s Beroni to ignore Sokolich’s request for help. Port Authority’s Wildstein attempted to stop Port Authority’s Foye from stopping Port Authority’s Wildstein’s non-study study. Port Authority Sampson attempted to stop Port Authority’s Foye from getting involved and from talking about the lane reassignment with the public or media.
Sept 9th was a big day in Ft Lee. It was the first day of school and the lane reassignment took place.
Two of three toll lanes are closed to traffic at a Fort Lee entrance and shifted to main highway traffic; daily massive traffic jams in Fort Lee began to occur during the rush hours and well beyond.[66]
The first of many inquiries by Mayor Mark Sokolich and other Fort Lee officials to PA managers, including Bill Baroni, and spokespersons go unanswered during the week.[13]
PA Police Lieutenant Thomas “Chip” Michaels, a Christie childhood friend, chauffeured Wildstein around the Fort Lee area on an observation tour,[56] and told Fort Lee Police Chief Keith Bendul that the toll lane changes were part of a month-long “test” to “relieve” traffic congestion on Interstate 95 approaches to the bridge at the expense of Fort Lee and surrounding towns.[224] He also suggested rerouting traffic to another bridge entrance, but Bendul proposed getting back all three regular toll lanes.[225] He updated Wildstein on traffic conditions throughout the week, via text messages.[56]
Friday, Sept 13 was also a big day for Ft Lee.
Foye sent e-mail that ordered toll lanes re-opened at the local entrance and stated he would find out how this “abusive decision” was made; Baroni forwarded the e-mail to Regina Egea, Christie’s Director of the Authorities Unit[65]
As they were copied on Foye’s e-mail, Baroni e-mailed Samson: “General, can I call you on this now?”[54]
Wildstein e-mailed Kelly: “The New York side gave Fort Lee back all three lanes this morning. We are appropriately going nuts. Samson helping us to retaliate.”[12]
The Record produced the first media coverage of the lane closures[66][227]
PA spokesman released an explanation that the lane closures were part of a week-long study to review traffic safety patterns.[73]
Christie’s office, Regina Egea (how do you pronounce Egea ?), was made aware of the non-study study on day 5. AFTER Port Authority Foye had already fixed the problem. Did Egea pass along the message to Christie or did the fact that the problem was now solved prompt Egea to chose not to bother the Governor with a problem that was no longer a problem?
Port Authority’s Wildstein tells Kelly that Port Authority’s Samson is going to help us retaliate against Port Authority’s Foye. I notice that Port Authority’s Wildstein didn’t ask Kelly to ask Christie to get involved in the retaliation.
Why hasn’t the alleged news media interviewed the Port Authority engineers and Egea? If they were actually trying to find out what had actually happened instead of repeatedly trying, and failing, to prove Christie’s involvement, that is.
This is what I consider a logical progression of thought. There are still many unanswered questions. Because Christie is a fucking Republican doesn’t answer any of them and weakens your camps position (not your personal position).
So, Doorhinge, I have a question for you which I do not recall being asked earlier in this thread. If your hypothesis is that Wildstein is the originator of the bridge snafu, and more or less ordered the ‘radio silence’ and all that has been established, what motives do you ascribe to his behavior?
I wouldn’t call myself a “camp.” The only question I consider worth asking and answering is: “Why should Christie not be governor of New Jersey (or hold any elective office anywhere)?”
Port Authority’s Wildstein is an asshole.
Christie received more votes than his opponent. According to the rules, he won the election. And the winner gets to be the governor.
I empathize with your problem, I also have English as a second language, I grew up speaking Texan.
You see, the word “not” in the question “Why should Christie not be governor of New Jersey (or hold any elective office anywhere)?” is crucial. You answer about the electoral procedure crisply and sharply answers a question as to why Christie should be governor.
But that wasn’t the question. That crucial word “not” means that you have answered a different question altogether. Answered it quite well, let it be noted, but that wasn’t the question. Had the question been “Why is Christie governor of New Jersey?”, your answer would have been entirely accurate, albeit simplistic to the point of condescension.
But it wasn’t. Don’t be embarrassed, we are here to help. To correct and to serve.
Yes, Christie Crony Wildstein certainly is. But he was only doing what Christie Deputy Chief of Staff Kelly asked him to, remember?
So, Doorhinge, do you have any theory as to why Kelly did what she did?
Christie Cronette Kelly wasn’t asking, she was telling.
To my eyes, the exchange strongly implies a preconceived plan of action, like Wildstien already knew what the words “time for some traffic problems” meant. I wouldn’t be all that surprised if they thought the plan was payback for political reasons, naively believing it was nothing more than hardball political shenanigans.
Still betting it was about alerting investors in that Fort Lee development that they were missing an opportunity for some excellent legal advice.
Where is the line between “hardball political shenanigans” and “graft”?
Same here, I was being a bit pedantic about “asked”.
“Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee,”
I agree that Kelly’s email was, most likely, a signal to Port Authority’s Wildstein. Kelly and Port Authority’s Wildstein understood what it meant. I don’t. Federal investigators should offer Kelly a deal and find out what the message actually did mean. Before the political persecution committee screws up the criminal investigation any more than it already has.
Was the phrase, “Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee,” an order to Port Authority"s Wildstein? Or was it a one if by land, two if by sea kind of message that Port Authority’s Wildstein had requested Kelly to supply when the time was right?
What is the name of “that Fort Lee development”? The media doesn’t seem to have thought that identifying the development was as important as creating a 3rd reason to justify the unverified Christie punished Sokolich rumor.
And those unverified rumors actually contradict each other. - Sokolich didn’t support Christie. That’s the reason, no wait, ignore the first rumor, we have a second, better rumor, but wait there’s more, we created a 3rd rumor. Look. The evidence is mounting. :smack:
Who speaks Texan? I’m still trying to decipher New Jersey. 
OK, “Why should Christie NOT be governor of New Jersey?” Christie doesn’t receive more votes than his opponent. According to the rules, he lost the election. And a 2nd place finish means he doesn’t get to be the governor.