We The People

WeTheRussians

Artist – Nick Anderson

The New York Times published a story today containing evidence that the power of the Port Authority was abused by the Chris Christie administration long before the Washington bridge closure. Among the evidence is the Port Authority awarding pieces of steel from the World Trade Center to ‘carefully chosen mayors’ whose endorsements Christie sought.

It also includes a malicious plan to deceive voters on toll increases and make Christie look like the compromising good guy.

The initial projection for car tolls had been an increase of $4, spread over two years. But on Aug. 3, Mr. Wildstein, Mr. Baroni and Mr. Samson went to Trenton and met with the governor and members of his senior staff.

Mr. Christie instructed the group to propose a plan for a $6 increase for cars by 2014. He told them that he would publicly rail against it, and that the agency would then agree to a lower number, easing the inevitable political fallout while still getting new income, according to a person who was briefed by an attendee on the participants and what was said.

Christie never actually intended to pass a $6 increase, he just wanted to look good for accepting $4.

The Republican party probably a dodged a bullet by having all of this come out now rather than 2016. I doubt Christie will run at this point.

This entry was posted in Chris Christie, Open Thread, Russia and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • mrbrink

    In Illinois, Rod Blagojevich got 14 years for being stupid about leveraging a vacant senate seat, but at least we got open-road tolling and construction jobs out of him. He expanded healthcare to kids, sought to ban semi-automatic weapons, and he stood with the workers of Republic Windows and Doors by ordering all state agencies to stop doing business with Bank of America.

    What exactly is Jersey getting out of their piece of shit corrupt governor? Traffic jams and political leveraging of everything from disaster relief funds to wasting millions on a self-serving special election? Bravo, Jersey.

  • Christopher Foxx

    Christie never actually intended to pass a $6 increase, he just wanted to look good for accepting $4.

    IOW, he acted like most politicians, diplomats and any other people who get involved in negotiations or want someone to agree to an unpleasant deal. Start near one end so the place you’re going to end up is in the middle, then end up there.

    Bernard Woolley: What if he demands options?
    Sir Humphrey: Well, it’s obvious, Bernard. The Foreign Office will happily present him with three options, two of which are, on close inspection, exactly the same.
    Sir Richard: Plus a third which is totally unacceptable.
    Sir Humphrey: Like bombing Warsaw or invading France.

    • JMAshby

      This is a little different than simply staking out a tough position and compromising. This is faking the compromise part because you didn’t actually desire the original position.

      • Christopher Foxx

        I’m not seeing the distinction you’re trying to describe. When the used car salesman starts by telling the customer they can’t possibly sell the car for less than $1000 it’s just an opening gambit. Similar to the customer saying they can’t possibly pay more than $500. Neither is really expecting to get what they say they have to have; both know they have to start where they do to end up in some place acceptable. (If the customer is truthful that their real top price is $750 and opens with that they may never get the salesman to come down that far.)

        Christie has a lot of attributes worth of harsh criticism. I don’t see this one as really something unique. Jumping on him for this as if it’s something most politicians don’t do seems disengenuous. Similar to the recent posting on the Banter about folks complaining about Obama being on a comedy show (Between Two Ferns). Everyone has done it, why is it suddenly a big thing because this guy has?

  • D_C_Wilson

    Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones. As for the third message, it referred to a very simple error which could be set right in a couple of minutes. As short a time ago as February, the Ministry of Plenty had issued a promise (a ‘categorical pledge’ were the official words) that there would be no reduction of the chocolate ration during 1984. Actually, as Winston was aware, the chocolate ration was to be reduced from thirty grammes to twenty at the end of the present week. All that was needed was to substitute for the original promise a warning that it would probably be necessary to reduce the ration at some time in April.

    It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grammes a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grammes a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it. Parsons swallowed it easily, with the stupidity of an animal. The eyeless creature at the other table swallowed it fanatically, passionately, with a furious desire to track down, denounce, and vaporize anyone who should suggest that last week the ration had been thirty grammes. Syme, too-in some more complex way, involving doublethink, Syme swallowed it. Was he, then, alone in the possession of a memory?

    Excerpts from 1984, Chapters 4 and 5 by George Orwell.