Skip to main content

View Diary: AP review: Christie's traffic jam didn't kill anyone ... but it could have (92 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  In the long run, (6+ / 0-)

    Bridgegate is not going to matter much, it's the rest of the story that has come out since as a result, that will take Christie down. And hopefully, take out his gang too.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:26:56 AM PST

    •  I completely disagree. (7+ / 0-)

      To those of us outside of the NE, a guy who looks and acts like Christie has a faint odor of sleaze and authoritarianism. But, that feeling might never have been enough to do him nationally in without Bridgegate. The idea of using your position as a public servant to fuck up the public painted a graphic picture of who he really is. And now his political career is in the toilet.

      The "rest of the story" feeds into everything I've mentioned, but it's still the idea of closing lanes of traffic for revenge that makes it all crystal clear. You can explain it in one complete sentence, and it's doom for Christie.

      •  Bridgegate ripped the veneer off of him (10+ / 0-)

        but while it is clearly a violation of the public's trust, it is not a huge criminal offense, where mishandling Sandy funds, using them as leverage to promote crooked deals really IS criminal, as in federal crimes that could land Christie and his associates in government housing.
        We wouldn't have heard about these more horrific crimes had he not overstepped and shut down the onramps. But like the Watergate break-in, the original incident was minor compared to what was revealed afterward.

        If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

        by CwV on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:41:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think I misunderstood your original post ... (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dirtandiron, elwior, CwV, rubyr, oceanview

          I was thinking "take Christie down" meant politically. You're absolutely right that the other stuff outside of closing the bridge will take him down legally.

        •  it doesn't matter if it's "criminal" (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dirtandiron, CwV, rubyr

          the man (or, at least, his administration) used the power of the office the public trusted him with to screw over his own constituents. the residents of New Jersey were the pawns in his personal political game. say what you will about this country, but people here won't stand for that shit.

          "Against the assault of laughter, nothing can stand." - Mark Twain

          by GrimReefa on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:53:48 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Was a law broken? Patrick Foye believed so (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CwV, rubyr, oceanview, cybersaur

            Actions taken that impeded emergencies vehicles are probably a violation of some state law.  

            •  Yes, laws were probably broken. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rubyr

              But chrississippi's point that Bridgegate would be a political waterloo rather than a legal one holds. They had to dig to find something illegal in that mess, but there's no question that using Federal money as a club to bludgeon local politicians in order to push through deals for your buddies is illegal, it's a brightline kind of thing.

              If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

              by CwV on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 09:41:10 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I think it will eventually be revealed (0+ / 0-)

                that Bridgegate was likewise about pushing real estate deals for your buddies, and at least as sinister as Hoboken-gate.

                But abuse of power and obstruction of justice were big enough crimes to bring down Nixon, and plenty big enough in my book, even if the motive was petty revenge.

                When you add in the fact that Bridgegate endangered lives--remember, we don't even know how long it was going to last, Foye brought it to a premature end, and Wildstein et al were furious, so "much longer than 4 days" is a reasonable guess--I still maintain, Bridgegate is a BFD.

            •  That's not how I understand Foye's point (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rubyr, CwV

              I understood him to say that the closure was illegal because it did not go through the proper bureaucratic procedures and channels with proper notice to himself and to the affected communities. (It's like putting electrical outlets in or whatever without getting the building inspector's OK.) That's why he ordered the lanes reopened ASAP.

              That's bad, and gets bureaucrats very angry, but I doubt very much it has criminal penalties attached.

              •  It was on one of the MSNBC shows that (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                CwV

                some guest attorney from NJ was talking about special laws pertaining to transit in NJ, re the bridge. I wish I could remember what, exactly, he said, but those specific transit laws might help to explain what Foye may have meant.

              •  When the little bureaucratic nicety of (0+ / 0-)

                "proper notice to the affected communities" is a matter of public safety, among other things, it's hardly a peccadillo

        •  I think Bridgegate (0+ / 0-)

          will ultimately be revealed to be a huge criminal offense.  When the facts finally come out

      •  I'm from the NE, Jersey in fact (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, CwV, sharman

        and Christie gave off a LOT more than a faint odor of sleaze.
        I read and heard a lot of things that the media barely mentioned or ignored.
        There was some very selective reporting, they could have easily gone the other way in reporting and highlighting things in Christie's past that would have painted a whole 'nother picture of him.

        He had the media in his pocket for whatever reason.
        In his case, they had the ability to make him or break him.

        They chose to make him.... again for whatever reason.
        We can speculate, but we'll probably never really know.

      •  If you like "closing lanes for revenge" (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, JG in MD

        No, make that "endangering lives for revenge," how does "endangering lives to extort advantages for your developer cronies" grab ya?

        No way Bridgegate was about petty revenge.  When the facts are finally out, blackmail over a development deal will be revealed as the motive.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site