General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRachel Maddow's theory about the GWB seems unlikely to me, however...
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/an-alternate-theory-of-the-bridgegate-scandal-111611971764
We know the traffic-bomb was aimed at the mayor of Fort Lee because the various texts and emails say it is about the mayor. Repeatedly.
So the Maddow theory that it was aimed at the leader of the NJ senate is at odds with the facts. The people were chortling about fucking over the mayor. Specifically.
Call that the Strong Maddow theory... that the move was aimed at the Dem leader of the NJ Senate.
But the Weak version of the Maddow theorythat the blow-up over judges was a contributing factorhas merit in providing context for the sense of total war on Democrats that would lead to something that had been discussed and planned (fucking the mayor) actually being done.
We know that what the NJ senate did made Christie insanely-angry, so the context and time-frame probably matters.
And the fact that the Senate leader represents Fort Lee would be a lagniappe. (Love that word.)
Our invasion of Iraq didn't have fuck-all to do with 9/11, while also having everything to do with 9/11. 9/11 provided the emotional environment in which an existing idea (invade Iraq) became and action.
And in that sense, I really appreciated Maddow's report for the context it provided.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)And that the Dem leader possibly targeted had shot down two early judicial nominees, which caused his huge hissy fit on 8/12. It could be a cumulative thing too.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)But on the other hand... who gets mad at their state senator for a traffic jam? It's so much more a mayor type of thing.
I agree with you that it was likely cumulative and that all these things were factors.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)especially affluent communities. It stuck out that Bergen was a stronghold. I know if we still had our former Dem Mayor (jailed for corruption) instead of his replacement, he would have picked up an endorsement here too- even though we are pretty liberal here. It's about $$$, and corruption, and the threat of future damage to the area's economy. There;s a boom in Ft Lee, and they were sending out warning shots.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)I doubt that those who did it had any allusions that it would prevent any democrat from getting reelected. To them it was just payback to democrats in general for supporting their politicians.
As Maddow pointed out, the timing fits perfectly. On one day, Christie is calling democrats "animals" and the very next morning they are calling for the bridge to be shut down.
Christie himself pointed out that he had no revenge motive against the Fort Lee mayor, and the mayor agreed. So why target him either? There had to be a reason, and Maddow's fits far better.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)So they were also gloating about it causing trouble for a Democratic mayor AND mocking how it was sticking a bunch of Democratic voters children in traffic and in general displaying that as far as they were concerned anyone not a Republican who was getting slammed by the mess they were making was getting what they deserved.
So? That doesn't in any way invalidate it being the fight over the Judiciary being the thing that kicked it all off. That e-mail going out from his office the very next morning after Christie essentially announced the the state that the Democrats should have thought about the repercussions of their actions? Assuming that's a coincidence is silly.
arthritisR_US
(7,303 posts)ii is cumulative, retribution on the senator and the mayor. I think the mayor just added fuel to the fire.
Spazito
(50,629 posts)The retribution was because of the Senate Democrats' actions re judicial nominees by Christie after his egregious and unprecedented decision re the re-appointment of Judge Wallace. It was targeted toward the citizens of Fort Lee for electing Democrats, especially the Senate leader.
It makes little sense, imo, for such drastic action to be taken against a Mayor who hadn't even been asked to endorse Christie, other Democratic Mayors didn't endorse him and there was no retaliation against them so one has to ask why Fort Lee, what was it that caused Christie/his inner circle to 'pull the trigger' on a retaliatory plan that obviously had been pre-planned ahead of time? Christie has a major meltdown late in the day about the Democratic Senate and, lo and behold, at 7:30 the next morning, the retaliatory action is put in play. The timeline fits and Rachel's theory makes much more sense, imo.
This is a guy who punishes the people of his own state for not voting Republican. That's how vindictive he is.
If this guy ever gets into the White House, half the country will be retaliated against for not voting for him.
Spazito
(50,629 posts)their refusal to extend UI and cutting food stamps. They think the poor and vulnerable invariably vote for Democrats, they are wrong of course but their actions are, imo, retaliatory just like Christie/his inner circle's actions against the people of Fort Lee, imo.