NJ Editorial Board On Christie: Impeach Or Resign If He Knew
Source: Talking Points Memo
Daniel Strauss January 31, 2014, 5:04 PM EST
The editorial board for The New Jersey Star-Ledger is calling for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) to either step down or be impeached if new accusations are proven true.
The editorial board made the call in an editorial published Friday afternoon shortly after The New York Times reported that the former executive that ran the Port Authority of New Jersey and New York said he had evidence proving that the lane closures at the George Washington Bridge were directed by Christie's administration.
"Forget about the White House in 2016. The question now is whether Gov. Chris Christie can survive as governor," the editorial began.
The board cautioned though that the claims of the former official, David Wildstein, needed to be proven true first.
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/star-ledger-chris-christie-wildstein-claims-evidence
In my opinion, it looks like the bully lied.
What will act II look like?
iandhr
(6,852 posts)To use Jon Stewarts phrase the bridge thing is "Piss for 3rd world corruption"
The Hoboken thing is "good old fashion Jersey corruption"
flamingdem
(39,313 posts)to see him try to hold on as the Hoboken mess unwinds.
Stuart G
(38,436 posts)The next segment, Christie will point to Obama..and say..........????
Turn in tomorrow, same time, same station,.. to see the next segment in the never ending saga..
"As Christie proves...The World Turns..(without him)".....
It is fun to watch a true bully twist in the wind...
flamingdem
(39,313 posts)Sandy. Tough guvner but thanks for helping Obama!
Good times
bkanderson76
(266 posts)ashling
(25,771 posts)Dopers_Greed
(2,640 posts)Can't wait to watch this unfold.
otohara
(24,135 posts)I'd make sure I'd have evidence that my boss knew too.
LiberalEsto
(22,845 posts)By Star-Ledger Editorial Board
on January 31, 2014 at 4:19 PM, updated January 31, 2014 at 6:56 PM
Excerpt:
"If this charge proves true, then the governor must resign or be impeached. Because
that would leave him so drained of credibility that he could not possibly govern effectively. He would owe it to the people of New Jersey to stop the bleeding and quit. And if he should refuse, then the Legislature should open impeachment hearings.
By the governor's own standard, lying is a firing offense."
snip
"When you layer on top of this the criminal investigation in Hoboken, and a separate investigation of Sandy spending by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, it becomes difficult to see how Christie can function. It should be clear even to him now that he should step down as head of the Republican Governors Association.
This is a shocking development. Christie is now damaged goods. If Wildstein's disclosures are as powerful as he claims, the governor must go."
Full editorial at link:
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2014/01/chris_christie_should_resign_i.html#incart_river
Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)LiberalEsto
(22,845 posts)calimary
(81,350 posts)And I'm rather amused at watching Michael Isikoff blather on, on camera. All he's doing is to opine and then opine some more, with a bit of a brush-by of analysis thrown in so it sounds good. I stand by my original assessment of this dude - that he couldn't investigate his way around the inside of a paper bag unless there was a Clinton and a stained blue dress in there. He keeps saying - "we don't know WHY..." Well, if you're an investigative reporter, Isikoff, aren't you supposed to come up with some of the answers already? Isn't that supposed to be your job? Oh, I forgot - your all-GOP sources aren't helping you on this one, are they! All you're capable of "investigating" are Democrats, and especially sex scandals. And since there isn't much of either in this one, you're sitting there hogging face-time and opining and pontificating and then opining some more.
I'm still waiting for Michael Isikoff to impress me in a truly objective, non-partisan, non-salacious way. Anybody here old enough to remember Rona Barrett? She was mainly an L.A. ABC-TV and ABC network show-biz columnist/commentator and she dished her fair share of Hollywood gossip. Hated being called a "gossip columnist," but she did a lot of that aside from entertainment news. She had a segment every morning on "Good Morning America." She started at local L.A. television KABC and then went to the network. She moved to NBC and wound up not a very good fit. She ended up leaving NBC and television in general. That was during the 60s and 70s. Sorry to carry on about "old days," but it's instructive to know and consider what's come before - from which we can learn a lot as far as more successfully navigating the present.
What I'm getting to is - Isikoff reminds me of her on his many on-camera turns. She had a way of sitting - at a slight angle behind the long anchor desk. Sometimes it was her whole upper body facing very slightly off-camera including her face, or her upper body facing forward but her head cocked to one side. BUT her eyeballs looked back over toward the camera. It was body language of the first order. It rendered this sly-looking, sidelong gaze that suggested all kinds of meaning! Strike that pose yourself and see if it doesn't make you feel slightly sneaky/dirt-dishing/"Psst! Don't tell anybody but..." and even a little conspiratorial - wink-wink. It was almost the kind of posture you make when you're flirting and smiling while shaking your finger and saying "naughty-naughty!" Rona Barrett used that posture every night, and it conveyed powerful visual meaning. It undermined her argument that she was no gossip columnist - because dammit, sitting and looking sidelong at you that way from behind her desk made her look like one!!!
And I still remember Michael Isikoff copping that pose every night on TV when the Washington press corp(se) was digging into Bill Clinton's underwear drawer around the Monica Lewinsky witch-hunt. GOD he loved it. You could tell he was relishing every word and every camera-second! He damn near needed a bib! As near-slobbering as Chris Matthews becomes when he gets his little self all worked up. And he sat that way, with this conspiratorial "naughty-naughty" pose looking sidelong at you from his seat on the set. He doesn't have anything that meaty here. It's gotta be sex and Democrats to get a - um - rise out of him. He's an investigative reporter. He shouldn't be sitting there all afternoon repeating how "what we still don't know is the 'why'." Well, dude, that's your job. You are supposed to be an investigative reporter. You with the hot job on a big cable network. Where were you when the "peons" at the local New Jersey newspaper and online news service far away from the lights and cameras uncovered this story? Where are you now when it should be everybody else BUT you saying "what we still don't know is 'why'." You call yourself an investigative reporter? Well then, investigate. It could still put you in the running for a Pulitzer or something. At the moment, though, the big awards seem to be gravitating toward the Little Guy at the Local Paper like the Bergen Record or some humble community blog.
George II
(67,782 posts)...that Rowland not only wouldn't finish his term in office but, as he put it, "wouldn't finish his term at large". Turns out Rowland copped a plea a few months later and spent a year in jail.
I wouldn't be surprised if Christie suffered the same fate - if he was involved in the incident or even the "cover up", he has violated federal law.
MuhkRahker
(104 posts)And answer the question yourself...
[link:http://newbrunswick.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/wildstein-attorney-christie-knew-about-bridge-lane-closures-bridgegate-scheme-oceancity|
joanbarnes
(1,722 posts)aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)Personally, I think having this bounder as the face of the Republican party is ideal.
Cha
(297,378 posts)$orry Greedy a$$$.