In Medieval Britain, King Henry II had a political problem with Thomas Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury. When it became obvious that the problem was intractable, Henry proclaimed to his minions: "will no-one rid me of this troublesome priest ?". Some his knights thereby rode off and assassinated Becket.
The full story is here.
Of course Henry II's defense was that he didn't order anyone to kill the Archbishop, it was just a transitory wish that happened to slip his lips. Of course, the reality in those days was that the King's wishes were effectively commands.
Similarly, Christie Christie, on August 12 of this year, ordered his staff to lay some consequences on the Senate Democrats, without saying so.
More below
Rachel Maddow has done a wonderful job of compiling the sequence of events on August 12 and 13 that led to the BridgeGate scandal
What was missing from her commentary was the money quote from Christie:
"I was not going to let her loose to the animals," Christie said. Later, he added: "What the ramifications would be for that going forward, [Senate Democrats] should have thought about before opening their mouths."
So, on August 12, Chris Christie told the world that there would be "ramifications" for Senate Democrats.
which leads us to:
“Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee,” Deputy Chief of Staff Bridget Anne Kelly emailed at 7:34 a.m. on August 13, 2013.
The recipient, a Christie troll at the Port Authority named David Wildstein, emailed back at 7:35 a.m., only a minute later.
“Got it.”
Those "traffic problems" were implemented the next month in Fort Lee, in the home district of the New Jersey Senate Democratic leader.
What we are seeing here is Chris Christie pulling a "Henry II" - publicly telling his staff to generate some "ramifications" with plausible deniability.
History blames Henry II for the assassination of Thomas Becket. Will history conclude that Chris Christie similarly "wished for" the disaster in Fort Lee?