• 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!

Bob001 said:
The bridge closing occurred during final negotiations for next-stage financing of a billion-dollar project. The unproven speculation is that if investors believed/were led to believe that the lane closings could be permanent, the value of the property would plummet and investors would pull out, creating new opportunities for Christie and/or his cronies.
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ss..._billion_development_project_in_fort_lee.html
http://www.msnbc.com/steve-kornacki/the-bridgegate-theory-you-havent-heard
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...ll-be-examined-in-lawmakers-bridge-probe.html
Click to expand...

Or perhaps his brother?

http://www.northjersey.com/news/Gov...ar_new_PATH_station_in_Harrison.html?page=all

Todd Christie and his partners — one the owner of Ferreira Construction, a large firm that has done tens of millions of dollars of work for state agencies since Christie took office — created a company and began buying small residential lots in early 2011, about a year before the train station renovation was approved by the Port Authority.
Click to expand...
 
Bob001 said:
The bridge closing occurred during final negotiations for next-stage financing of a billion-dollar project. The unproven speculation is that if investors believed/were led to believe that the lane closings could be permanent, the value of the property would plummet and investors would pull out, creating new opportunities for Christie and/or his cronies.
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ss..._billion_development_project_in_fort_lee.html
http://www.msnbc.com/steve-kornacki/the-bridgegate-theory-you-havent-heard
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...ll-be-examined-in-lawmakers-bridge-probe.html
Click to expand...

Why would they think it's permanent? I know that's the "theory", but it doesn't make any sense. The government (federal, NJ, NY and PA) would announce that years in advance, hold public hearings and deal with the inevitable lawsuits for before making a change that big.

It sounds to me that the conspiracy theorists believe that the big-wigs in the financing groups would have heard about the traffic snarls and panicked. When in reality, the big wigs have hired consultants that look at the decades long planning schedules put out by various agencies and are predicting traffic impacts from after the project is constructed to decades later. The traffic part of the financing due diligence would have been done long before the "final negotiations". If anything, the big wigs would have heard about the traffic snarls, and then laughed about the plight of peasants that live in New Jersey. The traffic consultants would probably have done what I do, roll eyes and mutter "god damn traffic engineers need to think about what they do more" (at least until they found out it was politically motivated retribution).
 
Last edited:
Newtons Bit said:
Why would they think it's permanent?
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't they?

Newtons Bit said:
I know that's the "theory", but it doesn't make any sense. The government (federal, NJ, NY and PA) would announce that years in advance, hold public hearings and deal with the inevitable lawsuits for before making a change that big.
Click to expand...

Like they had heard about the lane closure that happened most recently? Where certain employees were requested NOT to inform the needed parties, and then the people who were at the scene blamed it on local government? You mean, like they should have done in this very instance if they were going to close off the lanes? Which have since resulted in public hearings, and are beginning to deal with the lawsuits that are coming about from making a change that big?

Newtons Bit said:
It sounds to me that the conspiracy theorists
Click to expand...

It's not a conspiracy if it's happened and evidence is coming to light proving it to be fact.

Newtons Bit said:
believe that the big-wigs in the financing groups would have heard about the traffic snarls and panicked. When in reality, the big wigs have hired consultants that look at the decades long planning schedules put out by various agencies and are predicting traffic impacts from after the project is constructed to decades later.
Click to expand...

Once again, the big wigs who hired those consultants didn't know about this specific closure due to the fact that it was purposefully kept under wraps until the moment it was closed.

Newtons Bit said:
The traffic part of the financing due diligence would have been done long before the "final negotiations".
Click to expand...

Speculation.

Newtons Bit said:
If anything, the big wigs would have heard about the traffic snarls, and then laughed about the plight of peasants that live in New Jersey.
Click to expand...

More speculation

Newtons Bit said:
The traffic consultants would probably have done what I do, roll eyes and mutter "god damn traffic engineers need to think about what they do more" (at least until they found out it was politically motivated retribution).
Click to expand...

I am sure they would have done just that....
 
The response of "things don't work that way" when people widely speculate is "that's just speculation". Wow.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Why would they think it's permanent? ...
Click to expand...
Because before the thing blew up and went viral, the Christie camp floated the idea the "study" was looking at the aspect of repurposing one or two of the three offramp lanes.

Why do you think they fabricated a traffic study as the reason for the lane closures? Why not fabricate emergency repairs?
 
Newtons Bit said:
The response of "things don't work that way" when people widely speculate is "that's just speculation". Wow.
Click to expand...

Care to clarify, maybe expand on your thought or do you find your one-liner to be sufficient? Just checking to see if this is something I should even engage or if you feel this "gotcha" moment is enough and you want to move on.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Why would they think it's permanent? I know that's the "theory", but it doesn't make any sense. The government (federal, NJ, NY and PA) would announce that years in advance, hold public hearings and deal with the inevitable lawsuits for before making a change that big.
....
Click to expand...

On what basis would you make that assumption? Christie's pals at the Port Authority closed two of three lanes without any notice to anybody. And as noted above, when questions were first raised, Christie said "The fact that one town has three lanes dedicated to it, that kind of gets me sauced." Some people might reasonably have inferred that he wanted and intended to shut down two traffic lanes forever, and might then have decided that they didn't need to get into a fight with the governor. You're also guessing that federal and New York authorities would get to decide what happens to feeder lanes in New Jersey. I suspect that Gov. Christie is pretty good at getting his way about what happens in his state.

Have you read any of the posted links? "That can't be true" isn't a very persuasive response.
http://www.politifact.com/new-jerse...christie-claims-3-lanes-george-washington-br/
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...ashington-bridge-fort-lee-mayor-sokolich.html
 
Bob001 said:
On what basis would you make that assumption? Christie's pals at the Port Authority closed two of three lanes without any notice to anybody. And as noted above, when questions were first raised, Christie said "The fact that one town has three lanes dedicated to it, that kind of gets me sauced." Some people might reasonably have inferred that he wanted and intended to shut down two traffic lanes forever, and might then have decided that they didn't need to get into a fight with the governor. You're also guessing that federal and New York authorities would get to decide what happens to feeder lanes in New Jersey. I suspect that Gov. Christie is pretty good at getting his way about what happens in his state.

Have you read any of the posted links? "That can't be true" isn't a very persuasive response.
http://www.politifact.com/new-jerse...christie-claims-3-lanes-george-washington-br/
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...ashington-bridge-fort-lee-mayor-sokolich.html
Click to expand...

You do know that the lane closures were ended at the order of Patrick Foye, an appointee of Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, right? The closures were not approved by the PA and they were against PA's policies. Christies Men did not have the authority to keep the lanes closed. They closed the lanes under the guise of a "traffic study" but were quickly found out. Permanently closing the lanes would have required a very formal process.

The PA is a joint operation between NY and NJ. Neither state's governor rules it. The bridge is also part of I-95, which the federal government partially funds. They will stick their nose into changes in infrastructure as well. The US Attorney's Office and the FBI are currently investigating the closures.
 
Newtons Bit said:
You do know that the lane closures were ended at the order of Patrick Foye, an appointee of Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, right? The closures were not approved by the PA and they were against PA's policies. Christies Men did not have the authority to keep the lanes closed. They closed the lanes under the guise of a "traffic study" but were quickly found out. Permanently closing the lanes would have required a very formal process.

The PA is a joint operation between NY and NJ. Neither state's governor rules it. The bridge is also part of I-95, which the federal government partially funds. They will stick their nose into changes in infrastructure as well. The US Attorney's Office and the FBI are currently investigating the closures.
Click to expand...

All true. The point is that any prospect or threat of delay could be enough to scare away investors, which would be enough torpedo the project. If you've got a billion bucks to invest, you don't want to engage in a long-term legal battle, even if you expect to win in the end. And there is no guarantee that New Jersey wouldn't ultimately prevail if they followed the legal process. There are plenty of other places where investors can take their money without the headaches.
 
Bob001 said:
All true. The point is that any prospect or threat of delay could be enough to scare away investors, which would be enough torpedo the project. If you've got a billion bucks to invest, you don't want to engage in a long-term legal battle, even if you expect to win in the end. And there is no guarantee that New Jersey wouldn't ultimately prevail if they followed the legal process. There are plenty of other places where investors can take their money without the headaches.
Click to expand...

In the world of transportation, maintenance is common, closing down operational infrastructure is almost unheard of. You're making an assumption that the investors would have rushed to assume that the lane closures were something incredibly uncommon and not something mundane and typical.

Now if someone was telling the development group, either privately or to the public at large, that the lane closures were going to be permanent, that would be a different matter. But that didn't happen. The PA wasn't saying anything at all and Fort Lee was screaming "it's not us!"
 
Newtons Bit said:
In the world of transportation, maintenance is common, closing down operational infrastructure is almost unheard of. You're making an assumption that the investors would have rushed to assume that the lane closures were something incredibly uncommon and not something mundane and typical.
....
Click to expand...

Notably, a Bergen Record report from last September 16 announced that financing had – after an unexpected delay – been finalized for the Hudson Lights portion of the redevelopment. That date – September 16 – came three days after New York officials at the Port Authority intervened to put an end to the lane closures.
Click to expand...
http://www.msnbc.com/steve-kornacki/the-bridgegate-theory-you-havent-heard

Pure coincidence, move along, nothing to see, right? Why is it so hard to imagine that people with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line might say "Hold on, let's see what's happening here?"
 
Newtons Bit said:
Oh sure, it's easy to imagine. But imagination isn't reality.
Click to expand...

Yet you offer nothing to back up your position other than speculation and what you "think" those involved were thinking. I wouldn't apply for James Randi's million, as someone once said, I wouldn't imagine your mind reading powers would pull through.

All of the available information points to the investors holding off until the issue on the bridge was cleared up.

In the world of transportation, maintenance is common, closing down operational infrastructure is almost unheard of. You're making an assumption that the investors would have rushed to assume that the lane closures were something incredibly uncommon and not something mundane and typical.
Click to expand...

The fact was there didn't need to be any maintenance, so your point is invalid. If there was nothing that needed to be done to maintain the bridge (as you said their cronies would know everything about the transportation, that's what they pay for right?) and it was shut down, seemingly out of no where, then it would cause concern. Here you have a team of investors that have paid to acquire solid information about the traffic situation, they think they're in the know, and all of a sudden a 2/3 lane closure over absolutely nothing. It blocked kids from getting to school, emergency services, and people going to work. You don't believe that would cause some concern for big ticket investors?
 
Last edited:
Looks like Christie needs some help gathering cash to pay the legal bills. Maybe a bake sale?

Gov. Chris Christie's re-election campaign is seeking permission to use the remaining funds -- as well as raise additional money -- to pay the legal bills arising from its cooperation with the state and federal investigations into the controversial George Washington Bridge lane closures in Fort Lee.
Click to expand...
 
plague311 said:
Yet you offer nothing to back up your position other than speculation and what you "think" those involved were thinking. I wouldn't apply for James Randi's million, as someone once said, I wouldn't imagine your mind reading powers would pull through.

All of the available information points to the investors holding off until the issue on the bridge was cleared up.



The fact was there didn't need to be any maintenance, so your point is invalid. If there was nothing that needed to be done to maintain the bridge (as you said their cronies would know everything about the transportation, that's what they pay for right?) and it was shut down, seemingly out of no where, then it would cause concern. Here you have a team of investors that have paid to acquire solid information about the traffic situation, they think they're in the know, and all of a sudden a 2/3 lane closure over absolutely nothing. It blocked kids from getting to school, emergency services, and people going to work. You don't believe that would cause some concern for big ticket investors?
Click to expand...

I believe a big ticket investor would not be concerned about an all of a sudden temporary lane closure.
I don't believe if a transportation or traffic study was part of an overall deal for financing the study would concern itself with when there was going to be temporary maintenance on the road. If a road is frequently being closed for repairs or maintenance it might be mentioned.
 
Last edited:
At this point any of the possible motivations would be stupid, childish, poorly thought out, and have little chance of success. It is already unreasonable. Therefore a plan not actually being reasonable isn't cause to dismiss it as a possible motivation/plan.

That doesn't mean it isn't still speculation or that it doesn't lack evidence, but we can't go far in the other direction either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom