I don't. Its serious because it's providing information about the type of executive christie is.

and Christie is in the process of becoming a national figure.

And Watergate wasn't Watergate, either -- that started with a security guard calling the cops about an office building break-in. Sure, Christie's a governor and Nixon was president, but Christie WANTS to be president. He should be allowed to get away with all this stuff just because people might get bored?

I think there's a green-eyed monster in the room.


rocktivity

Maybe Maher just wants him on his show like giving a forum for Issa? At this point it does not matter at all what MSNBC, reports Christie is going down on how his administration distributed money for political influence and gain. The accountants are going to get Christie not MSNBC. If Maher really wants Christie for entertainment purposes just wait he will eventually be available; that is if Christie is not wearing an orange jump suit.

and I have never considered him a political ally.

The audience applauded when she unapologetically disagreed with Bill.

Bill Maher.

she doesn't cover scott walker the same way and she sure didn't follow blago's implosion the same way.

Yeah, I know Christie was thought to be the possible new president. But, the same might be said for walker and blago had his aspirations.

All that said, I plan on watching Kornacki's 2 hour show on bridgegate this morning.

and that, in general, she LOVES a good political scandal. I think she just got in earlier w/ Christie- when there was just smoke, and now the fires are igniting all over the place. Like she said- we don't know a 1/10 of who exactly said and did what.
So it is developing day by day as docs are getting released.

Wonder if the Jerseyites who have been hurt by the storms and still waiting for FEMA funds while Christy has handed out millions to those unharmed, using taxpayers money to blackmail and payoffs to friends and accomplices, are bored with Maddow's daily reporting. Seems like Bill Maher can't follow or spend his time on the boatload of graft and greed unearthed by Maddow and her so very talented crew. Poor Bill he was basically nursed by the likes of Ann Coulter and his weaning from her ideas of truth and investigative journalism has been extremely difficult.

Jackasses like him are ALWAYS trying to draw parallels between the left and right, so they appear "above it all".

Maher should listen to the 911 tapes and then see what he thinks.

There's also a boatload of wider Christie corruption to cover.

to tell Maddow, a professional TV commentator,with a PHD in political science, what material she should or shouldn't include on her program. BridgeGate is not WaterGate but , who said it was. It is a very important political story that has already had a significant impact on American politics.

Keeping a scandal in the nation's eyes makes it harder for local interests to dismiss the scandals or to cave to local political pressure. It also encourages others who have been intimidated by the local powers to bring up further instances.

The more details that are available to the public, the better they can evaluate similar situations in their own backyards.


Good work Maddow.

I generally enjoy Bill Maher, but I think he is flat wrong about this. The scandal is now much wider than the question of whether Christie knew about or authorized the shutdown of three out of the four local access tollbooths to the George Washington Bridge. Christie's statements about when he found out about the closures have been contradictory, and the statement he made in his marathon press conference about his staff's lack of knowledge has been proven by documentary evidence to be outright false. Federal investigators appear now to be focusing in on the attempted cover-up of what happened as much as they are focused on the actual event. And in that respect, it seems to me this scandal very much parallels Watergate.

And also very much like Watergate, the investigation of one incident has led to uncovering evidence that seems to point to other scandals, some of which are potentially much more serious than the Bridge thing. We now have major questions concerning: (1) the Christie administration's alleged attempted shakedown of the Mayor of Hoboken over its much-needed share of Federal disaster relief moneys, of which Christie was the trustee, in order to extract approval of a development project proposed by a developer who was a client of of the law firm of David Samson, who was Christie's appointee to the chairmanship of the Port Authority; (2) of Christie's simultaneous redirection of $6 million in federal Sandy relief monies to the construction of an affordable housing complex for senior citizens in the town of Belleville, where there was relatively minor storm damage and whose Democratic mayor, unlike the mayor of Hoboken, agreed to endorse Chistie'e re-election bid; and (3) Christie's abuse of his influence at the Port Authority to create a position for his former ally David Wildstein, whose only function, according the Port Authority's Executive Director, was to serve as Christie's political operative, to name just three.

I'm sorry, but for a man who is (or was) a very likely prospect to be the GOP's 2016 nominee for President, scandals such as these, as well as the culture of corruption to which they point, are most definitely worthy of the kind of detailed reporting that Rachel Maddow, and also Steve Kornacki, have provided. Oh, and that reminds of of yet another parallel to Watergate. Those of us who are old enough to remember Watergate will also remember how many people, both among the media and the general public, said things like, "What's the big deal about a petty burglary?"