Jim Russell had elaborate Christie (phat as phuck) related fantasies.

Christie is a good example of the downside risk of waiting for the perfect cycle to run for President rather than striking while the iron is hot.

He's a huge longshot in 2012, but not the dead out of the gates horse he is this go round.

Ever since William Howard Taft got stuck in the White House bathtub, people swore off ever voting for an obese President.

Christie should either drop weight or drop out.

Alan, you are way off on your read of the David Samson situation, as evidenced by the fact that you think he and Bridget Kelly are at all anywhere near comparable or that Samson is a "small fish".

well he probably only weighs like 200 lbs, that's a pretty small fish compared to CHRIS CHRISTIE who, incidentally, is a bit ... fat, yo.

Chuck Todd sure grilled Christie pretty damn good on Meet The Press this morning.

It was pretty funny. Bridgegate is not a stain on his administration, nothing has been proven in court...but Benghazzi and the emails is a stain on the current administration. This exchange right after he proclaimed his bona fides as a states attorney.

First time I watched this. But as a CDN your guys elections or run up to who represents them is a hoot.

Chuck didn't lay off lots of tough questions. Christie is good at having an answer.

not sure if posted elsewhere but the Bridgegate trial just started

Interesting that both the prosecution and defense agree on one thing: Chris Christie absolutely knew about the bridge closings whether or not he ordered them himself

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/201..._as_the_t.html

Ahahahaha, this headline brings back so many memories. RIP, ikes.

Total shocker that the fat man was in on it. He worked the cones after all.

Putting gate in the title of a scandal is old and tired. These days it should be called bridgeghazi.

Namath12:

Maybe this is just my subjective opinion, but judging by the photo of Ms. Kelly it looks like the stress of being "thrown under the bus" by Governor Christie and then charged with a crime and having to go on trial is aging her fast.

I still think the prosecutors are after Christie. If they get convictions of Ms. Kelly and Mr. Baroni, they'll promptly offer them [both] lenient sentencing deals provided they agree to testify against the Governor. This is playing out just like the Watergate scandal. The prosecutors were after Nixon from the get go, but in order to get the "big fish" they had to start by getting convictions against the smaller fish and work their way up to Nixon. Chris Christie has to hope and pray that Kelly and Baroni are not convicted.

It's Poker 101, gotta isolate the whale. In this case, literally.

I'm pretty sure that if these two were going to throw Christie under the bus to save their own skins we wouldn't have made it to trial. If they've already told investigators that Christie didn't know/wasn't told, and presumably they did else Christie would be under indictment as well, it's going to be really hard to reverse themselves once they're convicted.

TBF "I want to whack you with a lead pipe" might be a term of endearment in NJ - like "You dirty bastard" or "Go **** your mother".

Christie caught a break with this story barely registering given this crazy news cycle. He is still done unless Trump wins.

A lot of my fraternity brothers are from New Jersey, and they they taught me that eff you is a normal greeting there.

"Eff you, Donald" might be a good way for Hillary to start off the first debate. Maybe she can arrange to have her back to the cameras and say it under her breath.

Namath12:

The virtually identical scenario played out in the Watergate caper. While awaiting trial, all five of the Watergate burglars, (i.e. Frank Sturgis, Eugenio Martinez, James McCord, Bernard Barker and Virgilio González), plus G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt all insisted that "higher ups" in the Nixon administration had "no knowledge" of what they were doing or why they were in DNC headquarters planting bugs. (Of course, these assertions were total outright lies.)

All during the time all these men were insisting that nobody above them was involved, (and prior to their convictions), they were being paid "hush money" to keep quiet. (If you listen to the documentary "Watergate Plus 30: Shadow of History" there is a recorded telephone conversation between Howard Hunt and Charles Colson, Special Assistant to the President, where Mr. Hunt complains "... our lawyers haven't been paid" and "... surely money is the cheapest commodity." Colson, who had recorded the conversation in order to "protect" himself, later acknowledged that he knew exactly what was going on: Hunt, Liddy and the other five were blackmailing Nixon. The "deal" was that the five burglars - plus Liddy and Hunt - would fall on their swords and take all of the responsibility - and all of the blame - in exchange for full pardons from Nixon before he left office. This plan fell apart when one of the convicted burglars, James McCord, had a pang of conscious and wrote the infamous letter to Judge Sirica in which he stated that perjury had been committed [in the trial] and money was being paid for the defendants to stay quiet. After that bombshell exploded, there was no way Nixon could issue pardons - it would have been a virtual admission of his own guilt.

Chris Christie faces a similar dilemma. The defendants in the current trial, Baroni and Kelly, may not be receiving (probably aren't receiving) "hush money" to hold back and not implicate the Governor directly, but all that changes if they're convicted. Christie will be in the same boat as Nixon - he won't be able to pardon Baroni and Kelly as that would be a virtual admission of his own guilt. Once Baroni and Kelly are facing the prospect of serious jail time, assuming they're convicted, they'll do the same as Wildstein - they'll start singing like Beverly Sills.

I get your point about Watergate but if that's what these two are doing it seems like the wrong way to go about it. If I were the one under indictment I'm on the phone to my attorney well before my arraignment telling him to make a deal with prosecutors for full immunity in exchange for my testimony against Christie, that'd be a no brainer.

Namath12:

From previous reports I've read, Bridget Kelly was initially inclined to remain loyal to Governor Christie - even after she had been ingloriously fired and personally disparaged by Christie himself. (Christie went out of his way to trash her in the press conference where he announced she had been fired.) In the aftermath of this (very public) humiliation, she seemed conflicted, so conflicted that for a time she agreed to be represented by a lawyer who worked for the Governor! (Why she was adopting this stance is anybody's guess. Maybe she thought the Governor had an excellent chance of becoming the next President of the United States and somehow [some way] there would be a White House job for her once this "Bridgegate thing" blew over.) It took about a month, and probably a certain amount of "persuasion" from family and friends, for her to realize that she was in deep doo doo and her "lawyer" very likely had a conflict of interest. Once all that dawned on her, she got a new lawyer and began to see her situation, with the help of her lawyer, more clearly.

I'm not sure about Baroni and what he's thinking. Politics, especially New Jersey politics, is a very down and dirty "hardball" business. (With all the public corruption we have going on down here, a lot of folks think the same thing about Alabama and Alabama politicians ...) It could very well be that Christie is aware of shady dealings both Baroni and Kelly have been involved in - the kind of shady dealings that could result in jail time for both of them - if brought to the attention of a prosecutor. There's also the possibility that both Baroni and Kelly think they can beat the case. To be convicted, all twelve jurors have to agree, so the Government has to have a very strong case. Some defendants, even against the advice of their lawyers, decide to roll the dice and take their chances. That may be the case here - Baroni and Kelly may have convinced themselves that they can beat the Government. If so, they're gambling.

After securing a plea deal from Wildstein and reviewing corroborating "evidence" which he claims he has, (evidence which has surely been carefully checked out and vetted), the Government - convinced that they have a strong case - very likely attempted to strike similar plea bargain deals with both Kelly and Baroni. When they were rebuffed, they did what prosecutors normally do in such circumstances: They filed charges against the non-cooperating conspirators. If the Government fails to get convictions against Kelly and Baroni, Christie probably survives. (Hell, who knows? He could wind up as the next United States Attorney General in a Donald Trump administration or some other plum job.) If the Government has a really strong case and convinces all twelve jurors to convict, the Governor will be lined up in the cross hairs and be the next target of an indictment - if he isn't impeached first.

I suppose we should be depressed and disheartened when "public servants" we are taught (in school) to look up to and respect are charged with corruption. I'm old (older) now. I've seen so much of this that I've become jaded - it no longer surprises me. In fact, I kind of enjoy watching politicians getting caught and held to account. It makes for great courtroom theatrics. If you love Shakespeare, it's a bit "Shakespearean" watching the mighty fall.

Future president Trump is obese.

Regardless of what anyone says I think it stands to reason that there is almost zero possibility Christie didn't know about the lane closures as they were happening. PA cops and all sorts of local politicians were calling all over NJ trying to find out why the hell the entire town was gridlocked.

Hoping Wildstein has some dirt on Christie that he can spring at trial. Would be the ultimate and fitting end to his career.