Showing posts with label george washington bridge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label george washington bridge. Show all posts

Thursday, January 9, 2014

“Heartbroken”: Christie fires aide over Bridgegate, maintains he knew nothing

“Heartbroken”:ChristiefiresaideoverBridgegate,maintainshe

“Heartbroken”: Christie fires aide over Bridgegate, maintains he knew nothing

posted at 12:42 pm on January 9, 2014 by Allahpundit

Bridget Kelly, who wrote the now infamous e-mail about it being “time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee,” is out. Bill Stepien, his former campaign manager and nominee to head the state GOP, has also been asked to withdraw due to the “callous indifference” he displayed in the e-mail chain. That was enough for Christie fans on Twitter who are eager to rehabilitate him to draw a flattering contrast with Obama: When a Christie subordinate screws up, she’s out on her ass. Fair enough, although Christie has a lot more to lose right now in not sacrificing someone than our lame-duck president has in refusing to sacrifice Sebelius. And it’s not like O’s never accepted a resignation resulting from scandal. Would candidate Obama have canned a political aide who jeopardized his chances at the presidency like this has for Christie? We don’t have to wonder — he did, before ultimately bringing her back as an ambassador. Fearless prediction: If Christie’s elected, a contrite, reformed Bridget Kelly will also catch on in the administration somewhere. That prospect should keep her quiet even if she was in fact directly ordered by Christie to close the lanes on the bridge. And even if Christie doesn’t re-hire her down the line, someone else might — unless she decides to spill the beans on Christie, in which case her breach of loyalty will make her toxic in her industry.

As for today’s presser, it’s the same sort of political Rorschach as yesterday’s scandal news was. If you like Christie (i.e. you’re center-right to center-left), you’ll likely find this a masterful show of accountability and leadership. My Twitter timeline was packed with Republicans cooing that Christie had defused the bomb, even though he spoke not a word that wasn’t fully expected of him. If you dislike Christie (i.e. you’re a liberal or a tea partier), you’re skeptical that he’s telling the truth and irritated at how easy it is for a pol to get away with something like this. I don’t dislike him the way TPers do but I’m skeptical nonetheless. I find it hard to believe that Bridget Kelly is the mastermind of a revenge operation that extended to Christie appointees in the inner circle and at the Port Authority, especially in the middle of a reelection campaign. Even if Kelly wanted to punish the mayor of Fort Lee for not endorsing her boss, it’s mind-boggling to think that various members of Team Christie would have played along knowing that exposure could have jeopardized his reelection bid and presidential chances. It’s one thing for the candidate himself to be that reckless; it’s his life, after all. It’s another thing for subordinates to do it to their superior. That being so, how likely is it that Kelly, Stepien, and Wildstein would have instigated this retribution without any of them so much as mentioning it to him? They’ve briefed him on this before, at length, and no one said anything? Ever?

If you missed it last month, read this NYT piece from late December about Christie’s growing reputation for retribution against his political enemies. The best you can say in his defense is that Kelly, Stepien, et al. thought, based on what they knew of their boss, that he’d be fine with screwing Fort Lee with brutal traffic for a few days as punishment. Which makes me think this isn’t the last story we’ll hear about dubious forms of retaliation by Team Christie.




Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Christie on “Bridgegate”: I knew nothing. Have I mentioned I knew nothing?

Christieon“Bridgegate”:Iknewnothing.HaveI

Christie on “Bridgegate”: I knew nothing. Have I mentioned I knew nothing?

posted at 6:11 pm on January 8, 2014 by Allahpundit

Obama said the same thing about the IRS targeting tea partiers, of course. To which conservatives replied: That’s no excuse. Even if he didn’t order the targeting, bad behavior coordinated by multiple subordinates typically doesn’t happen unless they have reason to believe it’ll be tolerated up the chain. Usually, when they play dirty, they’re taking some sort of cue from their boss to do so, whether in broad ideological terms or direct marching orders. Does the same reasoning apply to Team Christie?

His defense, I take it, will be that it would have been madness for a sitting governor running for reelection to greenlight a tactic this petty when he was on his way to a landslide. It could only hurt him. (Of course, the same was true for Nixon and Watergate.) But that’s also the case for the staffers who ordered the bridge lanes closed — it could only hurt their boss to do so, and yet, for some unknown reason, they felt compelled to. Would they have dared to take a risk that huge without his approval, tacit or not?

Gov. Chris Christie has responded Wednesday afternoon to email exchanges made public earlier in the day linking a top aide to the George Washington Bridge lane closure scandal that’s been under investigation.

“What I’ve seen today for the first time is unacceptable. I am outraged and deeply saddened to learn that not only was I misled by a member of my staff, but this completely inappropriate and unsanctioned conduct was made without my knowledge. One thing is clear: this type of behavior is unacceptable and I will not tolerate it because the people of New Jersey deserve better. This behavior is not representative of me or my Administration in any way, and people will be held responsible for their actions,” the governor said in a statement.

And so, as predicted, we’ll be moving next to the “Kelly resigns” phase of the scandal followed by the media feeding frenzy over whether Christie himself had a role in the lane closings. I thought it’d be over in a week, but Jersey Democrats are crowing about laws having been broken and Jersey papers are now running stories like this:

Emergency responders were delayed in attending to four medical situations – including one in which a 91-year-old woman lay unconscious – due to traffic gridlock caused by unannounced closures of access lanes to the George Washington Bridge, according to the head of the borough’s EMS department.

The woman later died, borough records show…

Although he did not say her death was directly caused by the delays, [EMS coordinator Paul] Favia noted that “paramedics were delayed due to heavy traffic on Fort Lee Road and had to meet the ambulance en-route to the hospital instead of on the scene.”

Joshua Green thinks the scandal’s a big deal because it damages Christie’s image as a “nice jerk” who fights for the little guy. That’s basically right, even though I doubt it’ll have legs if it can’t be proved that he endorsed the lane closings himself. The question with Christie is figuring out where his abrasiveness springs from. Is it from righteous indignation at how public-employee unions loot taxpayers or does he just get off on pushing people around? The two aren’t mutually exclusive, but the more evidence there is of the latter, the better Scott Walker looks as a righteously indignant yet mercifully soft-spoken alternative. A lot of undecided “somewhat conservative” voters in 2016 will be measuring how much good they expect President Christie to do against how aggravating, and exhausting, it would be to put up with him day after day for four years. This adds some weight to that second arm of the scale.

Update: Good point:

Second look at Rubio?


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair