Skip to main content

View Diary: Chris Christie's press conference claims don't add up (155 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think the story adds up... (0+ / 0-)
    Christie claims he learned about the emails/texts yesterday along with the rest of us. That would mean that not only did his Deputy Chief of Staff/Port Authority appointees lie to him repeatedly since September, she/they didn't even tell him after the emails/texts were turned over to the legislative committee, which happened a couple of weeks ago. Given what was turned over and the number of people involved, that seems implausible.
    I disagree... this seems plausible to me.  Remember that the emails we found out about yesterday were personal account emails, turned over by Wildstein at the Port Authority, not by Kelly.  Kelly may have been scared shitless at this point, but she likely did not know what exactly had been turned over by others and may have been holding out hope that no link to her would have been discovered.
    Two of his own appointees were forced to resign over this weeks ago. Press reports were already reporting that documents turned over to the investigating committee were incriminating for his administration. But he says he didn't know those documents even existed until yesterday.

    Two weeks ago, Christie said his staff had given him a "full briefing" on the investigation. That emails were being turned over directly implicating his office didn't come up? His entire office staff figured that if they didn't tell Christie that emails ordering the traffic closure existed, he would never find out about it?

    Again, yesterday's emails were not turned over by his staff, so, again, I disagree; this seems plausible.  Unless an investigator or someone at Port Authority tipped them off, they would not know what was in those emails.
    This would all have been cleared up in an instant if Christie had verified just once that there was indeed a "traffic study" whose particulars meshed with the facts in question. He never did, and in fact was dismissive of reporters who asked whether he had done that. As hardball politician (and one who has no been no stranger to scandals) he never once asked for a scant page or two of paperwork that would have made the single biggest scandal of his tenure disappear in an afternoon? And that his staff was apparently unable to locate such paperwork on their own was unconcerning to him—his claim to the reporter asking the question was that if he produced such documents his opponents would just "find something else?"
    There is no question that Christie was dismissive of the issue, didn't take it seriously, etc.  But he may have been dismissive because he was sure he had no involvement, so it wouldn't touch him.    
    On a more petty point: how did Christie "not get a lot of sleep" for the past two nights when he claims he only found out about the connection to his office yesterday? That's one night, Mr. Ex-Prosecutor.
    It's journalistic malpractice if nobody asks about this.  A plausible explanation would be that he was tipped off the night before that the paper would be running a story that linked his administration to the scandal.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site