drsmooth wrote:Politically, the big guy shoulda sat hard on this one a lot quicker than he did. Too much mickey mouse shit

“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.”

His denials before today meant he either a) didn't think it came from within his administration or b) didn't think there would be any way for people to prove it came from within his administration. He's doubling down on not knowing anything. The fact that this took them all day to respond to means they might've genuinely been surprised that someone from within the administration was involved. Or maybe they were keyword searching everyone else's private email accounts making sure further subpoenas wouldn't turn up evidence incriminating Christie before making the denial.

It's risky because if he's shown to be lying, he's basically without a defense at that point. If he had copped to some sort of generic 'mistakes were made' half apology, it might've gone away. If he's telling the truth, I suppose it's not that risky.

jerseyhoya wrote:The fact that this took them all day to respond to means they might've genuinely been surprised that someone from within the administration was involved.

No issue with what you've laid out but I gotta admit I was thinking more in terms of the past few weeks

is there really any chance that his deputy chief of staff kept this from him entirely until today? because christie not only denied it, he denied it in spectacular fashion while openly and sarcastically mocking reporters for daring to ask if he had any inkling. he even said in one press conference something like "we all know why this story continues to linger, and it's because of my big national profile."

iunno, it's definitely possible that this will do his rep some damage. then again, if he loses like 40 lbs before the 2016 election no one will remember this

td11 wrote:is there really any chance that his deputy chief of staff kept this from him entirely until today? because christie not only denied it, he denied it in spectacular fashion while openly and sarcastically mocking reporters for daring to ask if he had any inkling. he even said in one press conference something like "we all know why this story continues to linger, and it's because of my big national profile."

iunno, it's definitely possible that this will do his rep some damage. then again, if he loses like 40 lbs before the 2016 election no one will remember this

Sure. You think a deputy Chief of Staff would be eager to go into Christie and mention that she did have a role in the lane closings, especially after he issued a denial? At that point she might be looking at being fired no matter what. Not hard to imagine her thinking 'maybe if I don't say anything it won't be in the subpoenaed documents since it was private email and heck we both deleted it and we can just pretend this never happened'.

The Democrats on the committee have had access to the subpoenaed documents since before Christmas, while Assembly Republicans were only allowed to look at them today for the first time, though the Democrats had leaked to the Bergen Record this AM before the GOP even got their chance. Wildstein and Baroni have both lawyered up, and I don't know how directly involved they were in preparing the documents to satisfy the subpoena or how anxious they would be to try and reach out to people in the administration even if they did know that email was included given the potential legal difficulties they are in and how that might compound them. There weren't that many friendly avenues to receive the news from if Christie didn't already know.

yeah that's fair. it just seems incredible to me that no one in his admin nor he were tipped off at any point so that he could stop giving these unequivocal denials repeatedly in public for weeks.

but it would be really really fun if it came out that he knew about it

jerseyhoya wrote:Sure. You think a deputy Chief of Staff would be eager to go into Christie and mention that she did have a role in the lane closings, especially after he issued a denial? At that point she might be looking at being fired no matter what. Not hard to imagine her thinking 'maybe if I don't say anything it won't be in the subpoenaed documents since it was private email and heck we both deleted it and we can just pretend this never happened'.

why not let Christie do the tapdancing, you aren't paid to

I don't think he knew about it, but I don't think he had to, nor do I think it remotely occurred to the underlings that the boss might not approve. The action unfolded from the tone he set and the culture he helped create. All political operations are prone to small, petty, ugly behavior, but his is known to revel in it.

I have no idea whether or not this kills his presidential ambitions. It doesn't help, but I'm doubtful he had much chance anyway, as a somewhat ideologically heterodox northeasterner with a functioning brain and inconsistent pandering skills.

Edit: I also don't get why the deputy CoS didn't come out sooner, fall on her sword and assert that Christie had no knowledge or involvement. Legal exposure maybe, but I assume the backers would have provided for her.

Bizarre

Wonder if the same people saying that Obama is accountable for everyone in his administration's actions will apply that to Christie as well.

Christie is ultimately responsible for what his appointees do, and should apologize and take some responsibility for what happened. But ultimately he should bear more of the burden for blame if he played an active role in this happening, and if he didn't it won't be a big thing moving forward.

And you could very easily flip your gotcha hypothetical to "Wonder if the same people saying that Obama is accountable for no one in his administration's actions will apply that to Christie as well"

Prediction: Christie will be as accountable as Obama.

jerseyhoya wrote:Christie is ultimately responsible for what his appointees do, and should apologize and take some responsibility for what happened. But ultimately he should bear more of the burden for blame if he played an active role in this happening, and if he didn't it won't be a big thing moving forward.

And you could very easily flip your gotcha hypothetical to "Wonder if the same people saying that Obama is accountable for no one in his administration's actions will apply that to Christie as well"

doesn't reflect well on christie's ability to keep his staff in-check, which is odd because his record shows that he's a great manager.

some right-wingers on my feed as posting that "'Thank You' Letter To Obama From A Single Texas Mom", in which one of her "complaints" is that she can't afford health insurance.

I don't even

they need to pass and act that makes her care affordable to her

jerseyhoya wrote:The fact that this took them all day to respond to means they might've genuinely been surprised that someone from within the administration was involved.

Or maybe it took them all day to formulate a plan for moving forward.

I had said several times previously that I didn't think Christie had anything to do with it but it is becoming increasingly difficult for me to believe that now. If this had all been the brainchild of Wildstein and Baroni, perhaps in some misguided effort to impress CC for some reason, I could buy that The Governor may not have known anything about it. But when the "order" comes from a deputy chief of staff it becomes much tougher, if not impossible, to believe that CC hear a thing about this until it was nearly over. Does Christie's name appear under any of the black redaction ink? Would Wildstein really take orders from Kelly without assuming it came from CC? I also found it interesting that Sokolich suspected retribution from the beginning; almost as if he were warned something like this might happen.

I am very interested to hear what CC has to say at 11. If his comments do not include "Ms. Kelly and Mr. Stepien are no longer a part of my Administration" you have to wonder how "outraged and deeply saddened" Christie really is. This Samson character should be looking at a pink slip as well but I know CC does not have that power stand-alone.

Christie's personality and management style doesn't add up with being oblivious about this. Someone as in control as Christie would have been clued in long before now, if not given the go-ahead before the fact. He professes to be guilty of neither the act nor a coverup.

There are only two possible scenarios here: Christie knew about it or his deputy chief of staff and other high-ranking officials in the administration were working in an established culture where they knew Christie would sanction -- and perhaps even reward -- this type of behavior.

You simply don't get this many aides going off the reservation so easily and gleefully unless they have a very, very strong sense that the behavior will be condoned. There's always the chance you get a rogue aide here or there. But, with this many involved? No way.

US Attorney in NJ to open an inquiry.

OK I was wrong. down goes Christie.

press conference live stream

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... -1.1570743