And, yeah, I'd say it is confusing and plain gibberish in that wiki piece:

I mean, wtf wrote that? My money is on someone wearing a hat from 1776.

lol drop a wikipedia link and run. I can now see why you didn't post that mess before.

How many conservative groups that weren't named after specifically political organisations and/or movements were investigated?

The evidence isn't there that all conservative groups were investigated.

What Christie actually said:

Obviously, this doesn't reference the people who had already resigned.

Lol @ "I asked them if they broke the law and wanted to be investigated and possibly prosecuted and they all said no, that was good enough for me"

Worst potential world leader ever. Even his lies make him look bad.

Why did Lois Lerner plead the 5th?

Obviously.

Do you think Christie bothered to ask Wildstein and others why they resigned?

Probably, but how is that relevant again? Feel free to make an actual argument. The facts that are available to us do not show that Christie knew.

wins this thread

It's relevant to a competent governor, no?

You know that criminal convictions, even in murder cases, can be won on entirely circumstantial evidence, right?

We don't need Christie's fingerprints on the orange cones, you know.

btw, I was sure Christie was talking about ice cream when he started talking about cones.

That weasel-worded "I asked some of my staff and none of them volunteered that they were involved", combined with Christie calling Cuomo to ask him to call off Foye from digging, makes me think that it's pretty clear that Christie DID know something untoward had happened and was trying to insulate himself at least as far back as December.

ikes, at least you were wise enough to steer the discussion back to the Christie scandal and away from the IRS non-scandal.

I missed that you said 'probably'.

So why didn't Christie talk about the resignations during his presser? I don't think he did. Maybe so.

Seems like he would explain that in depth, in light of the brewing scandal.

Anyhoo, I get that you boldly claimed that this whole thing was no big deal in the other thread and that you are now in full ikesiswrongagain damage control.

every time something like this about a republicon hits the news, the nra gives you a free bullet for each post made on the internets mentioning the NSA, IRS or Benghazi.

I think there is a form on their website you fill out to claim your prize or something

Here's some Big Double C trivia:

What's the name of Christie's youngest child?



And why was Dep Chief of Staff Bridget Kelly using a yahoo account, about which Christie surely knew?

http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/11/52...ernment-emails

Left wing haterade over Bridgazi is going to endear Christie to the right wing nutjobs he needs to make it through the primaries. Fatman 2016.

Yahoo accounts are popular amongst dumb government officials who think it will help them avoid FOIAs. Not automatically archived on government computers

Until Christie is actually linked to this, the fallout from this will be minimal on any presidential aspirations he has. This isn't an out there position at all.

Wildstein looked and sounded really shook when invoking the 5th. Seemed terrified. My guess is that he flips on Christie. Or perhaps he wants Christie to think that so he can extract a bigger payoff to keep his mouth shut.

btw, you forgot to post all of that wiki link on the IRS:

So why did you only post "progress" and "progressive" numbers? There were def other liberal groups selected.

lol u and Issa. and lol wikipedia.

I really can't believe you posted that.

You literally have no shame.

There is some merit to what you are saying but I don't know if stupid is the right characterization. Like Ikes is not stupid, but he can come off that way because he is always on the wrong side of the groups supposed shared values. When you start with the constitution and try to keep slavery, keep racism, ****** rights, create huge programs that destroy privacy etc etc then yes you are going to come off as stupid quite often because you're just wrong. And those in the constitution are not the only values conservatives fight against. The democrats being slightly more righteous in their rhetoric and policies, not an intelligence gap, is the basis for their built in advantage. Conservatives are more evil than stupid. And this plays out in the different types of scandals like this one. Repub scandals tend to be more the result of some discovery of vindictive or greed motivated abuse of power. Democrat scandals tend to be some dude gettin some ass.

lol at hume.

Yeah, Christie is a victim of being a man in a feminized world because women never exact petty revenge for perceived snubs.

I know most people won't read this because lol deuces, but it's highly entertaining and I definitely recommend it.

You're assuming the American electorate won't fill in the dots. For better or worse, I think there are plenty of voters who will associate Christie with Bridgeghazi even if there's no smoking gun.

It's not the end of the world for Christie 2016, esp since there's plenty of time for people to forget about it, but it certainly is damaging.

I think you are highly, highly overestimating the typical voter's ability to remember a story from almost three years ago that didn't affect them at all.

I mean, that may be true with this story if no smoking gun ever turns up because it won't be a huge deal if it's never linked to Christie, but lol at making that blanket statement. BENGHAZIIIII didn't affect the typical voter personally and it would 100% be the right's biggest rallying cry against Hilldog 2016, four years after it happened.

You think Rand and Cruz won't remind voters during primary debates and in tv commercials?


How valuable do you think your recommendations are? On a scale from 4 to minus infinity?