• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Time for some TRAFFIC!

Bill Beroni today to the press, after being arraigned:

Outside of the courthouse, Baroni proclaimed his innocence to the media.

"I would never risk my career, my job, my reputation for something like this," he said, adding that he planned to testify in his own defense at trial.
Click to expand...


You know, I actually believe him on this point. He wouldn't risk everything for such a stunt... which makes think that he had absolutely no idea of the consequences when he did it. Cranial-rectal inversion.

Mr. Beroni, do yourself a favor -- Let the big boss take on his share of your consequences. In other words, cut a deal and blab all.
 
hgc said:
Bill Beroni today to the press, after being arraigned:

Quote:
Outside of the courthouse, Baroni proclaimed his innocence to the media.

"I would never risk my career, my job, my reputation for something like this," he said, adding that he planned to testify in his own defense at trial.
Click to expand...

You know, I actually believe him on this point. He wouldn't risk everything for such a stunt... which makes think that he had absolutely no idea of the consequences when he did it. Cranial-rectal inversion.

Mr. Beroni, do yourself a favor -- Let the big boss take on his share of your consequences. In other words, cut a deal and blab all.
Click to expand...


Let's not forget Wisniewski's comments about Baroni's testimony back in November of 2013. I tend to go with his insight for my assessment of these guys.

It did not go well. Chair John Wisniewski complimented Baroni on his ability to dance past direct questions, and called him smug. Linda Stender got into a shouting match with him. And Senator Loretta Weinberg, who represents Fort Lee, the town that figures into both the massive traffic jam and allegedly its reason, says the explanation amounted to "the dog ate my homework."
Click to expand...

I would have felt a lot better about Baroni if the highlighted were more along the lines of something like, "I would never risk our constituents' safety and welfare, possible damage to citizens' property, not to mention the harm to my reputation, that of our organization and the Governor's for something like this."

It was much too self serving to suit me. I think what he was really saying is more along the lines of, "Hey, I'm too smart to get caught in something as foolish as this, so I must be innocent."

ETA: Link to Chris Matthews' coverage with Baroni, and Kelly's, "I am not stupid."
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bridgegate-bill-baroni-bridget-anne-kelly-plead-not-guilty
 
Last edited:
Today, I am glad that I don't work for Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher.
 
I don't what is going to happen after Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher destroyed their work files presumably to create a false report for Christie. However, some of the possibilities include:

  • Having to refund the entire billing for the report.
  • Losing all future legal work with the State.
  • Disbarment of partners.
  • Being investigated as part of a conspiracy.
 
plague311 said:
? Did I miss something?
Click to expand...


This is the law firm that Christie hired for millions of $$ (paid by NJ taxpayers) to "investigate" Bridgegate scandal and produce a whitewash report. Bridget Kelly's defense has subpoenaed the work product from that report, and in particular to discover who provided the information provided in the report that she was involved in a relationship with one of the other central figures in the scandal, and the relationship ended at the behest of that other person. (Why that was included in the report is a mystery. There is no relevance demonstrated or even hinted at. As far as I know, they were both unmarried.)

The firm is claiming that the work product "doesn't exist." This is a huge problem, if true. As usual, something involving Christie is corrupt, rotten and stinking. It's mind-boggling that he still thinks he's running for preznit.
 
Last edited:
hgc said:
This is the law firm that Christie hired for millions of $$ (paid by NJ taxpayers) to "investigate" Bridgegate scandal and produce a whitewash report. Bridget Kelly's defense has subpoenaed the work product from that report, and in particular to discover who provided the information provided in the report that she was involved in a relationship with one of the other central figures in the scandal, and the relationship ended at the behest of that other person. (Why that was included in the report is a mystery. There is no relevance demonstrated or even hinted at. As far as I know, they were both unmarried.)

The firm is claiming that the work product "doesn't exist." This is a huge problem, if true. As usual, something involving Christie is corrupt, rotten and stinking. It's mind-boggling that he still thinks he's running for preznit.
Click to expand...

Ah, my googlefu was weak. I couldn't really find anything. Thanks!
 
N-n-n-n-n-n-necro thread!!!!

In the light of all the scandals going on we might as well get a presumptive Trump VP in on it. For some reason the phone Christie used around the time of the Bridgegate scandal has gone missing! Per the article:

Christie has said he doesn’t have the phone. A spokesman for U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman said prosecutors never got it, and they relied on the law firm that Christie hired to examine its contents and turn over evidence. The law firm said in a June 28 court filing that it “returned the phone” without saying who received it.
Click to expand...
 
plague311 said:
I'm not surprised. Now with that the FBI or whoever is looking into it now, can tear the entire thing apart.
Click to expand...

I for one look forward to the head of the FBI telling us that a political figure has betrayed the trust of their office, that they have lied about it, that the FBI is currently prosecuting other people for the same crimes, but that the FBI will not recommend prosecution in this case.

But by all means, you go ahead and put your faith in the FBI as a non-partisan agent of justice for all Americans.

Or are you perhaps depending on the FBI to be partisan in this matter?
 
Last edited:
eeyore1954 said:
The question would be when did Christie know about it.
From the start- very bad
After but kept quiet - very bad
Around the same time I heard it on Curtis and Kuby - maybe not bad. He will be like our current president who seems to find things out on the news.

I will be disappointed if it can be shown he knew. I was hoping he was above that.
Click to expand...

You jest, I am quite sure!!!!!
 
theprestige said:
I for one look forward to the head of the FBI telling us that a political figure has betrayed the trust of their office, that they have lied about it, that the FBI is currently prosecuting other people for the same crimes, but that the FBI will not recommend prosecution in this case.

But by all means, you go ahead and put your faith in the FBI as a non-partisan agent of justice for all Americans.

Or are you perhaps depending on the FBI to be partisan in this matter?
Click to expand...
So you think using your office to get even with a political enemy is analogous to not wanting your emails cherry picked?
 
theprestige said:
I for one look forward to the head of the FBI telling us that a political figure has betrayed the trust of their office, that they have lied about it, that the FBI is currently prosecuting other people for the same crimes, but that the FBI will not recommend prosecution in this case.

But by all means, you go ahead and put your faith in the FBI as a non-partisan agent of justice for all Americans.

Or are you perhaps depending on the FBI to be partisan in this matter?
Click to expand...

I remember when conservatives were assuring everyone how non-partisan the FBI, and in particular the Republican head of the FBI was. I wonder what changed?
 
wareyin said:
I remember when conservatives were assuring everyone how non-partisan the FBI, and in particular the Republican head of the FBI was. I wonder what changed?
Click to expand...

I think that's the older FBI - the new LGBTQ-friendly Trump GOP could get behind an organization with a prominent cross-dresser heading it up. Now, all they do is like investigate stuff.
 
I have been told the red dress thing was not true - but no one mentioned blue/green/yellow/orange...........
 
theprestige said:
I for one look forward to the head of the FBI telling us that a political figure has betrayed the trust of their office, that they have lied about it, that the FBI is currently prosecuting other people for the same crimes, but that the FBI will not recommend prosecution in this case.
Click to expand...

Are there other people being prosecuted for things Hillary did? I don't see any other SoS facing a trial. Also, the FBI thoroughly tore apart Hillary's server, and gathered every single piece of evidence that they could. To put it in my words, They "tore it apart". If you don't like the outcome, then don't.

theprestige said:
But by all means, you go ahead and put your faith in the FBI as a non-partisan agent of justice for all Americans.
Click to expand...

Ok, I will. I never said they were a partisan group when they investigated Clinton, and I've never claimed they were partisan now that they've been digging into Chris Christie. I want an investigation into illegal behavior that caused massive issues in a community for no other reason than political spite. Not sure why that bothers you, but whatever.

theprestige said:
Or are you perhaps depending on the FBI to be partisan in this matter?
Click to expand...

Nope, and I've never even implied that they should be. I'm not sure how you pulled such a large strawman out of my post, but good work!
 
plague311 said:
Are there other people being prosecuted for things Hillary did? I don't see any other SoS facing a trial. Also, the FBI thoroughly tore apart Hillary's server, and gathered every single piece of evidence that they could. To put it in my words, They "tore it apart". If you don't like the outcome, then don't.



Ok, I will. I never said they were a partisan group when they investigated Clinton, and I've never claimed they were partisan now that they've been digging into Chris Christie. I want an investigation into illegal behavior that caused massive issues in a community for no other reason than political spite. Not sure why that bothers you, but whatever.



Nope, and I've never even implied that they should be. I'm not sure how you pulled such a large strawman out of my post, but good work!
Click to expand...

I am quite sure he pulled it from his nether regions (see I can be real *********** polite when I put my mind to it)!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom