Friday, January 31, 2014

Christie's Appointee Claims Christie Had Advance Knowledge of Bridge Closing

That would be none other than David Wildstein, (pictured on your left, with the glasses)a high school friend of the governor whom he appointed to head the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which controls the George Washington bridge, a major traffic artery between New Jersey and New York that was apparently closed deliberately for 4 hours during rush hour as political revenge on Fort Lee’s Democratic mayor, Mark Sokolich for not endorsing Christie in his re-election run for governor last year. At least one woman died as a result.

Wildstein was fired by Christie, after a ridiculous press conference that boiled down to "Hey I didn't know nuthin'." He claimed that he hardly ever even spoke to David Wildstein, someone he's been intimate friends with for years.

So Wildstein, angered at being hung out to dry had his attorney Alan Zegas tell the media, according to Pravda-on-the Hudson who broke the story that 'evidence exists' that Christie knew all along what was going on. If that's true, the old question of 'what did he know and when did he know it' just got answered.

This is making big news among the pundit class, but I could care less from the standpoint of Christie's political prospects.He's been a lousy governor fiscally and in terms of social policy as well as an Obama ally, and I have no use for him. I can't imagine why anyone else would, especially anyone who considers themselves a conservative. The blimp has crashed and burned, and Christie has learned what all RINOs learn eventually...Democrats and their shills in the dinosaur media will kiss your posterior endlessly as long as you serve their purposes and attack other Republicans. They will ooh and ah,write flattering articles, give you favorable press and literally fellate you on the air as one of those wonderful 'moderate Republicans'...until you are perceived as a threat. And then they will demonize you and accuse you of everything from cheating on your taxes to luring little children into your ginger bread house and eating them.

Buy the ticket, take the ride.

But for giggles, just compare this treatment with the treatment Hillary or president Obama got over Benghazi, Fast and Furious, IRS-Gate or any of the other myriad scandals the administration has been involved with.

At this point, it doesn't even matter anymore if Christie knew or didn't know about the bridge closings. It'll still be used to beat him over the head and destroy him, no matter how cozy he got with the President to help him win the 2012 election. And it serves him right.

Somewhere, Mitt Romney is chuckling and shaking his head.


B.Poster said...

I would say that it is unlikely that Mr. Christie knew about the bridge closing per say. Here's what I think happened. He informed certain members of his team to retaliate against Mr. Sokolich. It was then left up to various members of Mr. Christie's team to determine how to go about this. At least that's my working theory.

Nevertheless this does NOT bode well for Mr. Christie. The fact that people associated with him would behave in such a manner does not represent him well. The old saying goes we are the
company we keep applies here.

Mr. Christie is clearly not fit for any public office. I'd agree with your assessment that the blimp has crashed and good riddance. If key members of the top management of a private corporation behaved in this manner, the CEO would be axed even if he/she had no involvement. The same should apply to Mr. Christie and other top government officials.

With this said their are HUGE differences between this and the scandals affecting Mr. Obama. With the possible exception of the Obamacare challenges, this is MUCH worse. The chief difference that stands out is closing down a main section of the highway during rush hour affects ordinary Americans in ways that Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and IRS-Gate do not. Because of the length I will compare and contrast them in the next post.

Specifically I'm stuck by the massive stupidity involved in what members of Mr. Chcristie's team did with "bridgegate." If you shut down or slow traffic during rush hour to conduct a "traffic study" the odds are pretty near 100% that on any given day someone would die because emergency personnel cannot get to them. The fact that the person who died was a 90 year old woman whose family does not blame this on the delays means that members of Mr. Christie's staff and very likely Mr. Christie himself were EXTREMELY fortunate that she was the only one.

B.Poster said...

As stated in the previous post, the difference between "bridge gate" and the scandals you mention are vast with "bridge gate" being far worse. Specifically with bridge gate thousands of commuters and others who may need emergency assistance are placed at risk whereas the impact on the lives of Americans as a whole. I'll take each one at a time.

Benghazi: When a diplomat chooses to serve in a foreign country especially one where there is an active war zone, they agree to a certain level of risk. They understand this, their families understand this, and the American people understand this. The same applies to the security personnel. As for the idea that troops, planes, helicopters, or whatever could have been scrambled quickly to rescue these people is absurd in spite of what a partisian congressional probe might claim. In order to maneuver, these assets are working out of foreign countries. In order to deploy them, first the permission of the host government will need to be obtained, then over flight privledges would need to be sought and obtained. All of this is going to take significant time to accomplish. As for what armaments will be allowed by the security personnel, this will be a matter of negotiation between the host country and the US personnel. Again a certain level of risk is accepted and understood by all who accept these assignments. With this said, blaming Benghazi on an obscure video is despicable and stupid. Lying about this as team Obama did an impeachable offense or should be. With that he clearly showed himself unworthy of the office he holds.

Fast and Furious: The people mostly affected were some border patrol personnel who were killed and some Mexican nationals. While this is tragic, border patrol personnel and their families agree to a certain level of risks when these jobs are undertaken. As for the Mexican nationals, this is tragic as well. Mexico is fully capable of representing them. The could bring charges in the ICC or push for trade sanctions against America. Getting this through would be quite easy given the hostility toward America right now. In order to this, the Mexican government involvement in this might get revealed. Truth is they are up to their necks every bit as deeply as the US government is. Operations of that magnitude are not conducted nor could they be conducted without the involvement of the Mexican government. Even if US officials attempted to conceal such a thing, Mexican government operatives working in the US government would reveal it to them. Essentially Mexico has been disrespecting the US and it's territorial integrity for decades. It should come as no surprise to them that perhaps they were disrespected. I think the laws of sowing reaping apply here.

B.Poster said...

IRS Gate: The IRS and the US government have always been hostile to conservatives and conservative groups, at least going back the last several decades. Targeting of these groups is really nothing new. If there's a silver lining in this, maybe now that it seems more in the open changes can be made but it seems unlikely as Americans are politically a left of center people. As such, there'd be much agreement among the American people regarding the targeting of conservative groups. The affect on the population as a whole is very minimal.

The various other scandals: "Obamacare" is perhaps the worst. Clearly people can't keep their policies in some cases, premiums are being doubled and even worse in some cases, and policies are being canceled and the replacement policies cost more and are inferior in many cases. This affects vast numbers of people. The other scandals mentioned directly do not.

It's going to be hard for the media to gin up support for outrage against policies that have little affect on the public. The people are more likely to yawn and move on to something else. In contrast, things like "bridge gate" affect vast numbers of people, at least from NJ. Furthermore it's easy for people to envision how a similar decision by government officials in their area would have a devastating impact. It's harder for people to comprehend things like Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and IRS gate that have little impact on their daily lives. This is the primary reason there is little coverage o these things. Of course the secondary aspect of less coverage is the media does shill for Democrats in general and Mr. Obama in particular. You are spot on to point this out.

Anonymous said...

You have it backwards. Wildstein is on the left in that picture (with the glasses).

Rob said...

Thanks for the correction...I edited the article to reflect it.