|
The probe being detailed today is from Christie's guy and is thus basically worthless, right?
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
Teddybear posted:The probe being detailed today is from Christie's guy and is thus basically worthless, right? Apparently it shows that Christie was told about the lane closures way earlier than he said he was...
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:The probe being detailed today is from Christie's guy and is thus basically worthless, right? It's not worthless. It is the best possible spin that Christie's people can put on the facts and acts as a sort of "this is the least guilty he could possibly be". Given that it already has revealed he knew of the lane closures earlier than he admitted, that's...not great for him. It certainly shouldn't be treated like an independent investigation but it's still useful data.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
This is pretty funny. Apprently christie's pal who put together the report didn't interview Bridget Kelly, Stepian, Wildstein or Beroni, you know the only people who they place blame on for this. Also they out Kelly and Stepian as having an affair!
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:This is pretty funny. Apprently christie's pal who put together the report didn't interview Bridget Kelly, Stepian, Wildstein or Beroni, you know the only people who they place blame on for this. Also they out Kelly and Stepian as having an affair! I think they're claiming that they refused to be interviewed, and it wasn't for a lack of trying. I really hope this report pushes one or all into the arms of the Feds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:I think they're claiming that they refused to be interviewed, and it wasn't for a lack of trying. If this doesn't make them flip then they have no ammo to flip with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
What's Christie's end game at this point? Is he trying to stay in office? Stay out of jail? There's no way he's deluded enough to think he has a shot at the White House (or even the nomination) in the next election right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
Helsing posted:What's Christie's end game at this point? Is he trying to stay in office? Stay out of jail? There's no way he's deluded enough to think he has a shot at the White House (or even the nomination) in the next election right? He clearly does or he wouldn't be in Vegas groveling in front of Sheldon Adelson right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
Helsing posted:What's Christie's end game at this point? Is he trying to stay in office? Stay out of jail? There's no way he's deluded enough to think he has a shot at the White House (or even the nomination) in the next election right? I think his main goal is stall and spin, with the hope something bigger comes along to eclipse attention and allow people's notoriously fickle memories to consign the whole affair to the "that thing that happened a while ago and must've been resolved by now" category. If he can manage all of that, there's juuuuuust enough time remaining he might rehabilitate himself enough for a 2016 shot, particularly if the rest of the GOP field remains largely dominated by lightweights and lunatics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
I wouldn't underestimate the weakness of the GOP presidential field. He doesn't stand above them all anymore but it's not like anyone else is baggage free.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
I just don't think you want someone with that many public and easily understood scandals going into the general. People have a hard time grasping complex financial crimes but being a huge dick and closing a bridge because you got your feelings hurt is easy for everyone to understand. Something like that is going to get brought up a bunch against him and will really just constantly be a speed bump he has to deal with instead of solidifying his platform and getting momentum. Straight ticket Republicans probably won't care but he's really poo poo all over the absurd idea that he was ever a middle of the road, bipartisan hero.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
I think that's true, but I also think if things don't get worse (that's a giant "if") it's no more of an albatross than Mitt Romney being an incredibly rich venture capatilist. In that it's a giant minus on him that might even do him in, but if the GOP has no choice I can see them trying to play through it. He's already going that direction by declaring the whole thing liberal conspiracy no. 2453/\10
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I think that's true, but I also think if things don't get worse (that's a giant "if") it's no more of an albatross than Mitt Romney being an incredibly rich venture capatilist. In that it's a giant minus on him that might even do him in, but if the GOP has no choice I can see them trying to play through it. He's already going that direction by declaring the whole thing liberal conspiracy no. 2453/\10 Yeah, except people were able to spin Mitt Romney being a venture capitalist into a good thing. How exactly do you spin "I closed a bridge because I was butthurt, and there are emails from my aides that prove it" into a good thing? Not to mention the Sandy relief funds thing, the sale of the WTC debris as political gifts...I mean, these things are not as easy to obscure. Christie's also in the same jam Mitt was--he has no friends on the far right to come to his aid, as he's already an apostate to them for acting civil towards Obama. Plus, Mitt's GOP rivals couldn't go after him for being a business-minded robotic CEO-type, because those guys make up the Republican Party's donor base. Christie, on the other hand, did something that Cruz and Paul will have NO compunctions about going after him for. My money is on that greasy weasel-faced gently caress Scott Walker. He's dumb enough where the neocons will be able to control him, and inoffensive enough to both wings of the GOP where he can gather enough support from both sides without having to lean one way or the other. Fritz Coldcockin fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
I'd say Romney being a rich capitalist was as much of a drawback as Christie being an rear end in a top hat was, in that you could spin it as a positive, but then Romney's wealthy detachment lead to the 47% video and Christie being an rear end in a top hat lead to the bridge fiasco. I don't think Romney would've gotten the nomination if the 47% video had broken before he locked it up, not because Republicans would've disagreed but because they'd have seen it as the liability it was going into the general, and the same is true here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Dolash posted:I'd say Romney being a rich capitalist was as much of a drawback as Christie being an rear end in a top hat was, in that you could spin it as a positive, but then Romney's wealthy detachment lead to the 47% video and Christie being an rear end in a top hat lead to the bridge fiasco. I don't think Romney would've gotten the nomination if the 47% video had broken before he locked it up, not because Republicans would've disagreed but because they'd have seen it as the liability it was going into the general, and the same is true here. I don't know. Given Romney's demeanor and past actions, you always sorta knew that the stuff he said in the 47% video was how he's always felt--he said it in that room because he didn't think he was being recorded. We knew Christie was a blustering rear end in a top hat, but did anyone think he'd do something like shut down a bridge during rush hour out of spite?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Dolash posted:I'd say Romney being a rich capitalist was as much of a drawback as Christie being an rear end in a top hat was, in that you could spin it as a positive, but then Romney's wealthy detachment lead to the 47% video and Christie being an rear end in a top hat lead to the bridge fiasco. I don't think Romney would've gotten the nomination if the 47% video had broken before he locked it up, not because Republicans would've disagreed but because they'd have seen it as the liability it was going into the general, and the same is true here. Me too. I think a President Romney was a much scarier scenario when he was a "reasonable" Republican Governor from a Democrat state but that 47% video surfaced it became clear he was an out of touch elitist that had a disdain for the people he considered beneath him, and the Democratic attack ads were able to stick better. Christie is going into the general with that albatros around his neck so they have the time to choose someone less odious. The problem for the Republicans is that all of their front-runner guys are scum so they have to hope they can find a person without something so obviously terrible that can coast on anti-Obama sentiment among conservative voters, and apathy and disillusionment from progressives. Alter Ego posted:I don't know. Given Romney's demeanor and past actions, you always sorta knew that the stuff he said in the 47% video was how he's always felt--he said it in that room because he didn't think he was being recorded. We knew Christie was a blustering rear end in a top hat, but did anyone think he'd do something like shut down a bridge during rush hour out of spite? Anyone with any sense could see Romney for what he was but that video really was a chilling visual slam dunk that you couldn't ignore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
The verbal gymnastics Romney's people used to try and spin it were amusing though. First it was "he was taken out of context", then when the context made it worse, they basically just clammed up and went "YOU KNOW WHAT HE MEANT, OK  ". Quite funny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:The verbal gymnastics Romney's people used to try and spin it were amusing though. First it was "he was taken out of context", then when the context made it worse, they basically just clammed up and went "YOU KNOW WHAT HE MEANT, OK Haha yeah. "YOU KNOW WHAT HE MEANT, OK " oh yes we did guys.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
Radish posted:Haha yeah. "YOU KNOW WHAT HE MEANT, OK I will never stop laughing about how his campaign, and his wife in particular, spent so much time during and after the election whining how if we only knew the real Mitt, we'd never have voted for Obama. We knew the real Mitt, Ann. We knew him. And that was the problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:I will never stop laughing about how his campaign, and his wife in particular, spent so much time during and after the election whining how if we only knew the real Mitt, we'd never have voted for Obama. Her post election statements are pretty golden too, you riff raff sure hosed that vote up and got what you deserved. *dressages away*
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
What exactly would Scott Walker run on? Wisconsin is completely hosed right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
They would frame his anti-union policies as a "success" and dispute any evidence to the contrary; it's not like anyone in the media would call them on that lie. Walker might also use his recall win to try and frame himself as a Governor with bipartisan support and only disliked by the far left. He seems like a really weak candidate but he might be the best they can find without the last name Bush.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:I think they're claiming that they refused to be interviewed, and it wasn't for a lack of trying. I believe they pled the 5th. A couple of days ago Christie put out these 'I'm just a human being trying my best, I'd like to see you do a better job' tweets, it was really weird.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
"I may not remember what he said, but I do remember what he didn't say!"quote:Christie: I Can't Recall What Port Authority Exec Told Me During Lane Closures
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
I guess he never though of the logic outcomes, either he's lying or he's such a incompetent leader he can have multiple senior staff members running amok in his administration without figuring out what's going on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Christie pulls that "let me tell you what X didn't say" or "let me tell you what didn't happen" bullshit all the time. I hope someone calls him out on it during the upcoming round of press interviews.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
There's a difference between being a predatory capitalist that has absolute contempt for the poor and being a petty fat bully that has no sense of proportion. One of these is the platonic ideal of the Republican party and the other is a guy that's trying to imitate Tony Soprano in real life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/27/bridget-kelly-chris-christie_n_5045866.html Can't see this take on it posted here. quote:The word "emotional" was used five times in the report. Three times, the word described the Jan. 8, 2014, session in which Kelly was fired. Those instances highlight Christie's sensitivity, noting he was "welling up with tears." A fourth time, the word was used to describe the "heartfelt" manner in which Christie begged his staff to come forward with information on the lane closings. Kelly is being thrown under the bus and its because she's a woman! Case closed people, we all need to apologize to Mr.Christie and allow him to become President for this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 11:11
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/27/bridget-kelly-chris-christie_n_5045866.html So loving pathetic. Most of what's in that Huffpost post is pretty much taken from Maddow's first segment last night: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/glitter-and-smiley-faces-in-christie-report-208847427953. She does an excellent job of tearing down Christie and his pet lawyer's apologias in the report and then finding a couple of actually interesting nuggets of info that they couldn't entirely avoid/ignore. And Steve Benen follows up this morning on the Maddowblog with a not very complimentary comment on Christies PR strategy that this report appears to be a central part of: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/chris-christie-playing-the-role-victim
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:What exactly would Scott Walker run on? Wisconsin is completely hosed right now. And yet he looks to be cruising to re-election... The democrats in that state need to get their poo poo together.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:The verbal gymnastics Romney's people used to try and spin it were amusing though. First it was "he was taken out of context", then when the context made it worse, they basically just clammed up and went "YOU KNOW WHAT HE MEANT, OK A couple weeks later, Romney appeared on a appeared on some show (Hannity, I think) and said that his remarks were completely wrong, which sounds like a thorough admission of wrongheadedness. In Game Change, however, it was revealed that Romney had meant to say that his phrasing was bad and that his underlying point was valid, but he misspoke his way into a more appealing statement. 
dilbertschalter fucked around with this message at 14:40 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Gorilla Desperado posted:So loving pathetic. Ahahaha never saw Maddows segments on it. Holy gently caress this is pure gold. Watch now how Kelly turns around and sues the report for slander in the next few days.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:Ahahaha never saw Maddows segments on it. You would think that if she has anything on Christie she will roll over now. mcmagic fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You would thing that if she has anything on Christie she will roll over now. Maybe. But if Christie is smart he would be pressuring her to keep quiet, take the fall, and get a reward after it all dies down. Once possible jail time is opened up, she'll probably roll over then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:Maybe. If that was the case the report would've looked very different. They tried to publicly humiliate her.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:Ahahaha never saw Maddows segments on it. mcmagic posted:You would thing that if she has anything on Christie she will roll over now. I hope that either she or Stepien or, for best value, both start negotiating for real now and come down like a ton of bricks on christie and co. The statement from Stepiens lawyer is kinda intriguing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
I'm still wondering, if you assume Christie was firewalled from decision making in the bridge closure, what made his staff think a) they wouldn't get caught, b) if they did get caught, they still wouldn't get fired for it, c) their boss would benefit in some way from it? Or why would Christie have picked such gigantic rubes? What kind of cabinet would a President Christie pick? E: to be clear, I don't think a former US Attorney was just blithely oblivious to this plot in his office to gently caress over a city full of NYC commuters by closing a bridge controlled by a joint NY/NJ authority. You just don't become an attorney of any size by being that ignorant. FAUXTON fucked around with this message at 15:00 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
Kelly needs to take Christie out on this. She probably knows where the bodies are buried, so to speak.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 15:08
|
|
|
Seriously the only plausible excuse for Christie at this point is that he's massively incompetent and that's not exactly an amazing trait for a candidate (although as we know it's not a deal breaker).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 19:29 |
|
|
McDowell posted:I believe they pled the 5th. They don't have to plead the 5th in this situation, they have no obligation to talk to Christie's personal Lawyer and it would have been stupid to do it. I think they are trying to assert the 5th to the investigators on the legislature, but the clown that put this report together has no jurisdiction over Kelley, Stepien, and the others.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 16:11
|
|
