I see that rat has left the ship.
The trajectory of the shit has intercepted the locus of the fan. Friday afternoon, as usual.
Well, that’s it, then. Nothing else to see here. Everybody move along. Move along, now. Move along.
I’m glad that you can finally provide proof that Christie wanted her to.
When you were sorta paying attention, did you happen to see Christie’s response to the reporter who said that the inquiry/report had cost $1M?
How did you learn that Christie had spent $1M on the inquiry/report?
After hearing about it on MSNBC, I found this…
MSNBC also reported that “Kelly will be ‘fully cooperative’ if given safeguards by US Attorney”
HOORAY! It’s about time.
Just to be clear, Patsy Kelly’s lawyer is talking about her talking to the federal criminal investigators, right?
IF they cut her a deal?
A word that springs to mind regarding those tactics is insufferable. There really is no reason to engage.
I accept your insufferable comment as acknowledgement that you haven’t been able to provide proof that Christie was involved in the Great NJ Lane Reassignment. That doesn’t mean that the national conversation will end simply because you do not wish to participate.
All of which has nothing to do with whether Christie intentionally caused the Fort Lee traffic jam or not. I had no idea that roman numerals would prove to be so difficult to understand.
So long as you stack the deck in your favor, by insisting that it’s all about proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that Christie is directly and personally responsible, you cannot lose. Congratulations! Please note, however, that the original title is Christie or his staff. You have already accepted that his staff were responsible, so your righteous insistence of proof beyond doubt is absurd.
And this bit of drivel…
Subordinates as a general rule are instruments of their superiors will. Nobody would have obeyed them except that they thought they were reflecting the will and power of the governor. It is an entirely reasonable presumption, and it is more true to say that it is the opposite that must be proven, that they were not.
At this point, I’m thinking that they were misled to believe that it was Christie’s idea and will. It hardly matters, they are his people, his administration, and the responsibility rests squarely with him.
Did anyone post a link to the report?
It’s not my job “to provide proof that Christie was involved”. I think it’s possible that he wasn’t involved, though he likely was. Insufferable relates to your posting techniques. You answer NOTHING, just constantly sidetrack in a desperate attempt to deflect blame on to anyone but Christie.
Seriously? I’m so disappointed… 
And, he constantly asserts that others have stated that Christie was involved as “a fact,” when no one here or in the media has ever done so. He arguing with imaginary figures, but does so tirelessly. So, that’s something.
This is what I was looking for.
I’ve just started reading it; there are some word choices that look a bit slanted to me, but that’s all so far. If I find anything really interesting, I’ll post.
That report is a joke and I think it’s likely to push people to start talking. I don’t think we’ve heard the last about Bridgegate and Christies involvement in it.
I sure do hope we learn the truth before the 2016 Elections.
The Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher LLP report doesn’t speak very highly of Mayor Zimmer’s remembrances of events.
*3. Mayor Zimmer’s Allegations About Executive Director Ferzan Do Not Withstand Scrutiny
Mayor Zimmer’s allegations of her discussion with Executive Director Ferzan, in which she has claimed that he linked Sandy aid and “Rebuild by Design” to “how much development [she was] willing to do,” are likewise unsupported by the contemporaneous documentary evidence and eyewitness accounts.
a. Mayor Zimmer’s Recollection Of The Timeline Is Inaccurate
Mayor Zimmer’s account of the timeline of her last conversation with Ferzan is inaccurate. Mayor Zimmer alleged to the media on January 20, 2014, that Ferzan’s comments were made during a meeting “a month ago.” However, documents reflect that the last time Ferzan and Mayor Zimmer had a meeting was on November 25, 2013. At that meeting, Ferzan briefed approximately 20 to 30 or more mayors and staffers simultaneously to inform them about the second allotment of CDBG-DR funds from HUD.
Ferzan has unequivocally denied raising private development with Mayor Zimmer, or tying Sandy aid to anything other than the objective, transparent criteria. We have spoken with at least 10 eyewitnesses to Ferzan’s briefing, and not one supported Mayor Zimmer’s account. In fact, all of them said that Ferzan never tied Sandy aid to private development or anything other than the objective criteria of the programs at the November 25, 2013 briefing, and has never done so at any other meeting he has held relating to Sandy aid programs. Indeed, many witnesses that we spoke with in the Governor’s Office, the DEP, the DCA, and OEM said consistently and uniformly that Ferzan emphasized objectivity and transparency in allocating Sandy aid.*
Looks like more of the so-called mounting evidence against Christie falls by the wayside.
Good god -
Even I can see that’s answering a question not asked…
Do people really think we’re so stupid?
Mayor Zimmer also seems to have a faulty recollection of her interactions with the Lt. Governor. Was Zimmer simply forgetful or was she trying to mislead the public by duping the media? (I apologize in advance for GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP use of roman numerals in their report.)
*a. Mayor Zimmer’s Exchange With Lieutenant Governor Guadagno
Mayor Zimmer has alleged that, two days after she sent a May 8, 2013 letter to Governor Christie requesting more Sandy aid, the Lieutenant Governor, having met “w/ the Gov.,” “created” a public event at a ShopRite in Hoboken, invited Mayor Zimmer to attend, and then, after the May 13, 2013 event, “pulled [her] aside in the parking lot” to deliver “a direct message from the governor” that “if you don’t move ahead” with the Rockefeller Group’s project, “we’re not going to be able to help you” with more Sandy aid. Mayor Zimmer further alleged that the Lieutenant Governor said to her at that time: “I know it’s not right. I know these things should not be connected, but they are and if you tell anyone, I’ll deny it.” In other words, to credit Mayor Zimmer’s account, one would have to believe that Guadagno, a former federal prosecutor and county sheriff, made a full confession—right there, out in the open, in the supermarket’s parking lot, immediately after that public event, with press and staff nearby—that she was doing something wrong, knew it was wrong, and was doing it anyway.
Our investigation found that Mayor Zimmer’s account of this exchange is, in material respects, demonstrably false:
(i) Guadagno did not meet with the Governor and then create this event to deliver his message to Mayor Zimmer. In fact, the decision to invite Mayor Zimmer to the event occurred midday on Friday, May 10, 2013 — before Guadagno met with the Governor at a senior staff retreat later that day, as contemporaneous documents show.
(ii) This was not a “created” event. It was weeks in the planning, as contemporaneous documents show.
(iii) It was not the Lieutenant Governor who “pulled” Mayor Zimmer “aside” to have this private meeting. It was actually Mayor Zimmer who requested the meeting, as contemporaneous documents show. And she requested that meeting to pitch her “(i)mportant idea” to fund a sweeping, post-Sandy flood mitigation plan for Hoboken.
(iv) It was Mayor Zimmer who had the Rockefeller Group on her mind, not Guadagno, as contemporaneous documents show. That is because the Rockefeller Group designed Hoboken’s flood mitigation plan—the same one that Mayor Zimmer was seeking Sandy aid to fund—but its development project, backed by lawyers she perceived as close to the Governor, had just suffered a setback before Hoboken’s Planning Board five days earlier when its application for redevelopment benefits was voted down. Mayor Zimmer was anxious about its status, having recently written the Governor complaining that “the solution to Hoboken’s flooding challenges cannot be dependent on future development.”
(v) Guadagno had to be firm with Mayor Zimmer during their private meeting, pushing back on Mayor Zimmer’s funding demands and unwarranted assumption that the stalled Rockefeller Group project was why Hoboken was not getting more Sandy aid. And we know what Guadagno said because she repeated it to the press that same day: “[While] the mayor is a great advocate for Hoboken, . . . the governor has to be an advocate for the entire state. We are trying to [do] the best we can with the resources we have.”
(vi) Guadagno has had no role in the Sandy aid decision-making process, which is formula-driven, based on objective criteria, and subject to federal oversight. Therefore, she personally could not have affected Hoboken’s Sandy aid allocations at all. Moreover, even though the Rockefeller Group project did not “move ahead,” Hoboken nevertheless then got all of the CDGB funding it applied for ($200,000), and its allocation for hazard mitigation funding is roughly equivalent to what other applying municipalities received ($142,080), and is likely to change when all the grant applications are rescored.
Both the Lieutenant Governor and Governor deny Mayor Zimmer’s allegations. And the Lieutenant Governor’s account of what transpired is corroborated by hard evidence, contemporaneous with the events in question. Mayor Zimmer’s isn’t.*
Mayor Zimmer’s isn’t. The alleged “mounting” evidence seems to be getting smaller and smaller. I can only hope that the federal criminal investigation finds a way to get Kelly to implicate Christie before the “mounting” evidence disappears altogether.