S.E. Cupp: If Christie was directly involved in Bridgegate, he should resign

posted at 7:32 pm on January 8, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via the Daily Caller, are we at this point so soon? The story about his deputy’s e-mails broke this morning; he put out the requisite shock-and-disappointment statement a few hours ago; and now here’s a righty pundit already dropping the R-bomb on him, albeit conditionally. Half the Republicans I follow on Twitter are rolling their eyes that anyone in the media could be so exercised about petty hardball played by local politicians, especially when Bob Gates is busy accusing the president of the United States of sending men to die in a war he never believed in. Christie’s not in any imminent danger.

But look — at this point, given his emphatic denials that he had anything to do with the lane closings, what’s the alternative to resigning if a smoking gun emerges proving that he did? He’s not going to stand at the podium, cop to having lied baldfaced to the world about his role in punishing the public in order to retaliate against a political enemy, and then say, “Oh well, see you tomorrow.” His whole shtick is that he’s a straight talker who tells the truths that more polished politicians are too afraid to tell. He can’t admit to having lied to protect himself and then go back to business as usual. So what’s the alternative to resignation if he gets caught red-handed? Which, I guess, is another way of saying that the odds of him getting caught red-handed are verrry low or else his denials wouldn’t be so emphatic. If he was involved, the way this was done, I assume, is Christie telling a close aide to make it happen and then the aide telling Kelly to make it happen. That gives him plausible deniability. No paper trail, no muss, no fuss. At worst, if Kelly turns on him and claims that she’s confident the order came from Christie himself, he’ll dismiss it as fingerpointing by a bad employee who’s eager to rehabilitate her rep by telling the media what it wants to hear. He wouldn’t go all-in on denials if he had reason to believe he was exposed.

As for the rest of the clip, where Cupp teases out a scenario in which Christie resigns, becomes a martyr to his supporters for doing so(?), and then rebounds by running for president anyway, I don’t know what to tell you except that Tapper’s green room must include a mini-bar. Any pol who would abuse his power for such petty, egotistical reasons, lie about it repeatedly, and then actually step down in disgrace isn’t going to be considered for the most powerful job in the world. Especially when a big chunk of his own party’s base already disdains him.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Wow… Some of these comments directed towards S.E. Cupp are vile.

OliverB on January 8, 2014 at 8:56 PM

Christie – his office, at the very least – shut down the GWB out of spite. That’s gotta be a crime. Hell that’s a RICO case.

I know I’m a lefty and we don’t always agree. The only reason I still post/read here is because I used to be a republican, and I want to understand all sides of an issue. I don’t want to live in an echo chamber of MSNBC and reddit. I want to be challenged.

But you guys, as republicans, can’t claim to be the party of integrity, the party of self-responsibility, and then be like “Well democrats wouldn’t resign so neither should he.” That’s hypocrisy, and you know it.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 8:59 PM

But your solution to the double standard – whether it exists or not – is to say, that’s wrong, lets also be wrong. You recognize the right thing to do, and choose not to support it due to stubbornness.

Is that how you guys want to run a country?

triple on January 8, 2014 at 8:52 PM

Well, it works for the Dims. It’s worked for them the last 5 years, and will continue to work for them for the next 3.

It worked for Clintons all throughout his two terms.

Our side always takes the hit in numbers and in the media, and we always hang our side out to dry at the drop of a hat.

Do you think the Dims and their voters would be calling for one of their Governors to resign if something like this was uncovered? Not a chance in hell. They’d blow it of, ignore it and proceed with business as usual.

Move on.

Christie, even if he WAS directly involved, didn’t do anything even remotely close to the dirty politics the Dims have been employing out of Chicago as common place for decades.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:01 PM

The whole timing this comes out is not by accident. They knew he would win the election even if they toss a scandal before the election in an October surprise. So now they toss it at him a few weeks before he takes the oath of office for his second term so he has to resign before he takes it.

tjexcite on January 8, 2014 at 9:02 PM

We know that Mr. Obama is a lying sack, Mrs. Clinton is a lying sack and now likely Mr. Christie is a lying sack. I’m with Ms. Cupp. Plus she’s beautiful and Governor Christie is not.

Mason on January 8, 2014 at 9:03 PM

Well, it works for the Dims. It’s worked for them the last 5 years, and will continue to work for them for the next 3.

Fine. Just realize that by support this kind of politics, you lose ALL RIGHT to complain about chicago politics, the clintons, etc.

Your moral highground? You don’t have it anymore.

But hey, if that’s the level you want to be at, just remember it was your choice.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:04 PM

I agree with SE that he should resign but I disagree that he should then run for president in ’16. People like Christie and Obama are too dangerous to be given so much power.

FloatingRock on January 8, 2014 at 9:05 PM

But you guys, as republicans, can’t claim to be the party of integrity, the party of self-responsibility, and then be like “Well democrats wouldn’t resign so neither should he.” That’s hypocrisy, and you know it.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 8:59 PM

You must be new here, not too many claim to be Republicans before everything else.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:05 PM

Christie – his office, at the very least – shut down the GWB out of spite. That’s gotta be a crime. Hell that’s a RICO case.

I know I’m a lefty and we don’t always agree. The only reason I still post/read here is because I used to be a republican, and I want to understand all sides of an issue. I don’t want to live in an echo chamber of MSNBC and reddit. I want to be challenged.

But you guys, as republicans, can’t claim to be the party of integrity, the party of self-responsibility, and then be like “Well democrats wouldn’t resign so neither should he.” That’s hypocrisy, and you know it.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 8:59 PM

If Christie wasn’t involved, if they can’t prove he was directly connected, he shouldn’t resign. Period. Sure, if it was one of his staff, string ‘em up, do whatever.

When the Dims start playing on the same field by the same rules, great, then the Repubs should do the same. Until then, which will be when hell freezes over, the Republicans should start playing on the same field as the Dims.

And if the nation doesn’t like that, they need to start electing better people to govern and represent them.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:08 PM

If Christie wasn’t involved, if they can’t prove he was directly connected, he shouldn’t resign.

I agree with you there. Maybe his deputy chief of staff didn’t let him know that they were plotting to shut down half the GWB as political revenge.

But do you honestly believe that for a second?

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:11 PM

Looks like the Chamber of Crony Commerce may be losing another one of their favorite, corrupt good-old-boy politicians.

FloatingRock on January 8, 2014 at 9:12 PM

He’s not going to stand at the podium, cop to having lied baldfaced to the world about his role in punishing the public in order to retaliate against a political enemy, and then say, “Oh well, see you tomorrow.

Yeah, it’s not like he’s Obama, or Clinton.

Midas on January 8, 2014 at 9:13 PM

Is she a fruit Cupp….I couldn’t resist…

crosshugger on January 8, 2014 at 9:13 PM

But do you honestly believe that for a second?

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:11 PM

Do you believe Obama had no knowledge about the IRS?

sentinelrules on January 8, 2014 at 9:14 PM

Fine. Just realize that by support this kind of politics, you lose ALL RIGHT to complain about chicago politics, the clintons, etc.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:04 PM

Get bent. The holy, screamingly hypocritical Progressives should have lost all right even to govern after Clinton and they’re still in power. They attack Clarence Thomas and turn around and defend Bill Clinton?

It’s a fallen world, champ, and everybody is a hypocite to some extent. But if you’re going to compare a one-off of closing some bridge lanes (Christie’s role not even established yet) to the devastating decades-long siege of “Chicago politics” or the sustained and indescribable moral squalor of the Clintons and the damage these have done to America (not to mention the national vandalism of democrat social and economic policies) taken it somewhere else.

rrpjr on January 8, 2014 at 9:15 PM

Fine. Just realize that by support this kind of politics, you lose ALL RIGHT to complain about chicago politics, the clintons, etc.

Your moral highground? You don’t have it anymore.

But hey, if that’s the level you want to be at, just remember it was your choice.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:04 PM

Not really. Like I said, if he committed some crime, fine. Charge him, convict him and throw his sizable rearend out of office. Short of that, I say he should stay.

And even IF it was dirty politics at play. This doesn’t even come close to being in the same zip code as the dirty politics Democrat voters and supporters have been turning a blind eye to for decades.

The Dems and their voters have no ground to demand ANYONE resign, short of conviction of a major crime or four.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:16 PM

Christie can resign for this and Dog Eater can resign for Benghazi.

Liberals and conservatives can then walk off into the sunset, each with their pound of flesh.

I’d hate to think that lefties are pounding the podium over this while the bloody handprints of four Americans still adorn the blackened walls of our Libyan embassy.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:17 PM

ROFL the screeching progtard sodomite monkey triple overplayed his absolute moral authority…as predicted.

Murphy9 on January 8, 2014 at 9:18 PM

I am not surprised at all over the comments made regarding the death of the 91-year old woman during the lane closure debacle. It just proves to me how the makeup of many HotAir readers has digressed to a level of gutter dwellers.

I believe the unfortunate instance of the woman’s death could not only bring down Christie, but some people may have negligent homicide charges brought against them.

The publication of the emails and possible scandal is just now breaking. This may lead to a deeper investigation of why the woman died later at the hospital. We don’t have all the information to just discount her death as a result of old age. In cases of cardiac arrest, minutes make the difference between survival and certain death. If it can be determined that her arrival at the hospital was delayed by 2 or 3 minutes due to the lane closures, someone or some people could be in deep doodoo over this.

Regardless, some of the comments about her being old and needed to die or that her death, if caused by the lane closures, was just a corpse to stand on is outright disgusting.

metroryder on January 8, 2014 at 9:19 PM

And even IF it was dirty politics at play.

It was – the emails and texts left no doubt to that.

The only question is, did Christie know what his deputy chief of staff was up to?

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:21 PM

Fine. Just realize that by support this kind of politics, you lose ALL RIGHT to complain about chicago politics, the clintons, etc.
 
Your moral highground? You don’t have it anymore.
 
But hey, if that’s the level you want to be at, just remember it was your choice.
 
triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:04 PM

 
Great point.
 
Say, knowing what had been done regarding the NSA, IRS, Libya, debt, etc., did you vote to re-elect Obama in 2012?

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:22 PM

ROFL the screeching progtard sodomite monkey triple overplayed his absolute moral authority…as predicted.

Murphy9 on January 8, 2014 at 9:18 PM

She’s wringing her hands at HotGas commenters not taking Krisp fully to task over this.

I’d suggest the Fat Man screech at the press “What does it matter???!!!” and move on, the left will of course be accepting of such an excuse.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:22 PM

Fine. Just realize that by support this kind of politics, you lose ALL RIGHT to complain about chicago politics, the clintons, etc.

Your moral highground? You don’t have it anymore.

But hey, if that’s the level you want to be at, just remember it was your choice.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:04 PM

Funny how that always works, isn’t it? Democrats DO these things, then bleat about how it would be hypocritical for Republicans to do it, then Democrats continue doing it, and… that’s perfectly acceptable or something, right? So long as the republicans don’t do it, al is well in your world view.

Don’t sink to YOUR level, because that would be BAD, by your own admission, but you have no problem LIVING at that level as a matter of routine.

Wryly amusing.

Midas on January 8, 2014 at 9:22 PM

The picture of Cupp featured on the article makes her look like a man.

That being said, Christie was the “electable” one so Dems had to take him down obviously. It just goes to show you that you should NEVER think giving into Dems will give you a pass as a Repub. When you run against one; you become the right wing extremist.

melle1228 on January 8, 2014 at 9:23 PM

metroryder on January 8, 2014 at 9:19 PM

I guess if that woman died because of something Christie was proven to have done or someone on his staff did, and you’re calling for him to resign because of it.

Then I guess you’re also calling for Obama to resign because of either his or Hillary’s involvement in the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi, including the first ambassador to be killed in the line of duty in 30 years, right?

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:24 PM

It was – the emails and texts left no doubt to that.

The only question is, did Christie know what his deputy chief of staff was up to?

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:21 PM

Kind of like whether Obama knew what his appointee in the IRS was doing for years leading up to the 2012 elections. Or whether Obama knew about the decisions either HE or Hillary made that directly lead to 4 Americans being killed in Benghazi, right?

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:27 PM

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:21 PM

So I guess you’ve called for Obama’s resignation over Fast & Furious? Absolute moral authority, and all.

rrpjr on January 8, 2014 at 9:32 PM

Don’t sink to YOUR level

It’s always been my view that, as a member of the public at large, it’s the politicians who should have to worry about political parties and party loyalty. They don’t really mean anything to me.

Yes, I’m a progressive, and that’s a dirty word around here naturally, but I’ll vote for a good republican any day over a bad democrat. And if a democrat (or a republican) has been proven to have committed wrongdoing against my interests (my interests being the public interest) – it’s my view he should do the right thing and resign and take responsibility.

I can see how from your perspective – that of a partisan – it seems weird that someone who is against christie’s corruption would be naturally FOR democrat corruption, because they’re opposites and democrats and republicans are opposite parties – but I honestly just wish for honest politicians. If you’re an honest republican, I disagree with you, but I don’t think you should resign. If you’re a dishonest democrat, I agree with you, but I don’t have to make excuses for your misdeeds. That’s not my job as a voter.

It’s not your job either.

I wish more people would realize that.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:32 PM

republicans, can’t claim to be the party of self-responsibility
triple on January 8, 2014 at 8:59 PM

This issue is one of the reasons why we believe in the individual and self-responsibility instead of increasing the power of the government and statist politicians.

Next argument?

HellCat on January 8, 2014 at 9:34 PM

So I guess you’ve called for Obama’s resignation over Fast & Furious? Absolute moral authority, and all.

rrpjr on January 8, 2014 at 9:32 PM

Not F&F specifically, but the NSA revelations absolutely yes I have. While he’s at it he can pardon Snowden on the way out.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:35 PM

Only a partisan would fail to seek the resignation of a pol from either party who is actively breaking the law.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:35 PM

But do you honestly believe that for a second?

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:11 PM

Let’s see lefty, do You honestly believe that obama didn’t know anything about Fast & Furious, Benghazi or….Like your plan, keep your plan?????

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 9:37 PM

…but I’ll vote for a good republican any day over a bad democrat.
 
triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:32 PM

 

Will voters punish Democrats for government snooping?

 
Yeah, but I won’t be voting republican, that’s the wrong direction.
 
Green, I guess?
 
triple on June 10, 2013 at 6:32 AM

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:38 PM

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:32 PM

And yet you voted for Obama in 2012, didn’t you?

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Midas on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

Kind of like whether Obama knew what his appointee in the IRS was doing for years leading up to the 2012 elections.

The IRS scandal never amounted to anything because the republican investigation only asked for republican organizations. So when they got a list of republican organizations, they were outraged.

It turns out left wing organizations, including some occupy people, were on that list too. The story pretty much went away after that.

Or whether Obama knew about the decisions either HE or Hillary made that directly lead to 4 Americans being killed in Benghazi, right?

Don’t tell me about Benghazi. I was on the jabber server w/ sean that night; yes, former EVE player here. Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:38 PM

ROFL

That actually made me hurt a little too.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:41 PM

Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

Oh my, rogerb, this is a keeper on so many levels I don’t even know where to start.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:42 PM

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:38 PM

voted mccain 08, bush 04. While it’s extremely unlikely I’ll vote for a republican that aligns with me politically, it’s possible and I see no reason to let a silly thing like party affiliation get in my way. It’s just a letter. There are left wing Rs and right wing Ds.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:43 PM

Only a partisan would fail to seek the resignation of a pol from either party who is actively breaking the law.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:35 PM

Yeah, I think he should definitely go if he’s proven to have been at the center of it.

Not F&F specifically, but the NSA revelations absolutely yes I have. While he’s at it he can pardon Snowden on the way out.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:35 PM

I think Snowden should put everything he has out there. If our government is acting against the Constitution and is breaking the public trust with the people, I want to know about it. And the people that did it need to be in prison or worse.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:44 PM

It seems a little premature to be calling for a resignation based on typical Jersey politics… particularly since there’s no smoking gun. Hopefully, it will convince him to bow out on trying to secure the ’16 nomination.

Wendya on January 8, 2014 at 9:44 PM

Unbelievable, this triple commie thinks that Benghazi was about the video…yah, okay.

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 9:44 PM

No, Christie shouldn’t resign, that’s like using a buffalo gun to kill a mosquito.

But if this does go to the top, it’s just disappointing, that’s all.

Is this what we’re will to accept from our politicians, behavior we’d send our children to bed for? Vindictiveness? Doesn’t anyone see how this can bleed over into policy?

This seems to me to be the final step into oblivion, where winning also means punishing our enemies (a la. Obarry). It’s nasty and sophomoric at its base and churlish.

Forgive me, I’d expect more from a guy who wants to sit in big chair.

itsspideyman on January 8, 2014 at 9:46 PM

Nobody did this for four days without the bosses ok.

tim c on January 8, 2014 at 9:46 PM

Progressive != commie.

President Roosevelt was a progressive. And also a republican.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:47 PM

Don’t tell me about Benghazi. I was on the jabber server w/ sean that night; yes, former EVE player here. Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

LOLOLOlolololoollolollOLOLoll… Omg I’m out of breath here… That was bloody hysterical!!!

Midas on January 8, 2014 at 9:47 PM

I guess if that woman died because of something Christie was proven to have done or someone on his staff did, and you’re calling for him to resign because of it.

Then I guess you’re also calling for Obama to resign because of either his or Hillary’s involvement in the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi, including the first ambassador to be killed in the line of duty in 30 years, right?

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:24 PM

Of course I call for Obama to resign, not just for Benghazi, but for all the scandals that have plagued his administration. And for many other reasons as well. Obama is totally incompetent to run our country or anything else for that matter. Well, he could do a good job as head of OFA.

But I don’t exist in a tit-for-tat world. If the woman died as a result of being delayed on the way to the hospital, heads should roll and people placed in jail.

metroryder on January 8, 2014 at 9:48 PM

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:38 PM

voted mccain 08, bush 04. While it’s extremely unlikely I’ll vote for a republican that aligns with me politically, it’s possible and I see no reason to let a silly thing like party affiliation get in my way. It’s just a letter. There are left wing Rs and right wing Ds.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:43 PM

And yet, the right wing D’s always vote with the democrats. Funny that.

AllahsNippleHair on January 8, 2014 at 9:48 PM

Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

You’ve got to get out more. You’re believing your own lies.

itsspideyman on January 8, 2014 at 9:48 PM

Yes, I’m a progressive, and that’s a dirty word around here naturally, but I’ll vote for a good republican any day over a bad democrat. And if a democrat (or a republican) has been proven to have committed wrongdoing against my interests (my interests being the public interest) – it’s my view he should do the right thing and resign and take responsibility.

I can see how from your perspective – that of a partisan – it seems weird that someone who is against christie’s corruption would be naturally FOR democrat corruption, because they’re opposites and democrats and republicans are opposite parties – but I honestly just wish for honest politicians. If you’re an honest republican, I disagree with you, but I don’t think you should resign. If you’re a dishonest democrat, I agree with you, but I don’t have to make excuses for your misdeeds. That’s not my job as a voter.

It’s not your job either.

I wish more people would realize that.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:32 PM

So you would vote for Sarah if given the chance?

Knowing she had enemies on both sides of the political aisle, the MSM gleefully expended untold $$ and manhours to get into 25 thousand of Palin’s emails in the vain hopes of getting dirt.

Nada.

Like I said above earlier, the staff takes their cue from the boss. They don’t need to be told how to do their job. So this bridge-gate sure makes Krispy out to be a questionable leader and a punk.

Sarah 2016!!!

AH_C on January 8, 2014 at 9:49 PM

Unbelievable, this triple commie thinks that Benghazi was about the video…yah, okay.

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 9:44 PM

Coordinated attack from multiple directions against an American embassy by terrorists armed with heavy machine guns and light artillery, yeah, spontaneous incitement from a badly-done, 12 minute YT movie.

You know what caused the Viet Minh to surround and attack Dien Bien Phu? Charles DeGaulle making slanty-eye faces with his fingers; true fact.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:49 PM

Progressive != commie.

President Roosevelt was a progressive. And also a republican.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:47 PM

There are left wing Rs and right wing Ds.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:43 PM

Asked and Answered.

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 9:49 PM

Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

Good grief.

It had nothing to do with the Youtube video.

sentinelrules on January 8, 2014 at 9:49 PM

Kind of like whether Obama knew what his appointee in the IRS was doing for years leading up to the 2012 elections.

The IRS scandal never amounted to anything because the republican investigation only asked for republican organizations. So when they got a list of republican organizations, they were outraged.

It turns out left wing organizations, including some occupy people, were on that list too. The story pretty much went away after that.

Well, seeing as the ratio of right to left organizations was about 300 to 1, and how it was one of Obama’s two political appointees that was involved in it, I think its very safe to say the White House was directly involved and YES it was political intimidation.

Or whether Obama knew about the decisions either HE or Hillary made that directly lead to 4 Americans being killed in Benghazi, right?

Don’t tell me about Benghazi. I was on the jabber server w/ sean that night; yes, former EVE player here. Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

The video?!?! Seriously?!?! You’re going to use the video? C’mon man, EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE knows now that the video had nothing to do with the attack. Please try to keep up here. It was a coordinated terror attack, and was orchestrated by elements of Al Qaeda. This is common knowledge at this point.

Wow, the video….unreal.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:51 PM

The IRS scandal never amounted to anything because the republican investigation only asked for republican organizations. So when they got a list of republican organizations, they were outraged.

Lerner plead the 5th how many times?

sentinelrules on January 8, 2014 at 9:51 PM

Coordinated attack from multiple directions against an American embassy by terrorists armed with heavy machine guns and light artillery, yeah, spontaneous incitement from a badly-done, 12 minute YT movie.

You know what caused the Viet Minh to surround and attack Dien Bien Phu? Charles DeGaulle making slanty-eye faces with his fingers; true fact.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:49 PM

Just as an aside, that youtube video had 316 views as of sept 12. Not accounting for it being streamed on other sites, just an interesting bit of info.

can_con on January 8, 2014 at 9:52 PM

Don’t tell me about Benghazi. I was on the jabber server w/ sean that night; yes, former EVE player here. Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM


The DELUSION is strong in this one.

It’s as if a million Hillary voters all screamed out “What difference, at this point, does it make?” all at the same time.

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 9:53 PM

Gates book bombshell!!
Look, squirrel! (Christie scandal)

glennbo on January 8, 2014 at 9:53 PM

…but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.
 
triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

 
Her skirt was too short, wasn’t it? And did you see the heels she was wearing?

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:53 PM

So you would vote for Sarah if given the chance?

Already did, but I can’t say I would again.

I just really disliked kerry, and mccain is alright, not to mention a war hero. Back then I don’t think I knew the extent of palin’s ignorance. Would never happen today, but hey that was 5 years ago, and I’ve changed.

The video?!?! Seriously?!?! You’re going to use the video? C’mon man, EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE knows now that the video had nothing to do with the attack.

You should read this.

You really shouldn’t say “EVERYONE” when your only news source is fox.

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/#/?chapt=0

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:55 PM

President Roosevelt was a progressive. And also a republican.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:47 PM

Too bad their Eugenics beliefs never got traction, look at all the excess people we have today.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:56 PM

President Roosevelt was a progressive. And also a republican.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:47 PM


Nope!!!

It’s just teh STUPID

Trick question: How many Republican conventions nominated Roosevelt as their Presidential candidate?

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 9:57 PM

BTW, we discussed the video already. It frees them up from difficulties when it comes time to vote for Hillary.
 
It’s sort of like casting an I’m-furious-and-I-demand-you-resign-over-the-NSA-expansion re-election vote in 2012, I suppose.

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:57 PM

Just as an aside, that youtube video had 316 views as of sept 12. Not accounting for it being streamed on other sites, just an interesting bit of info.

That’s a youtube bug on new videos. Gangnam style had 316 views for a while. Google it.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:58 PM

Nope!!!

It’s just teh STUPID

Trick question: How many Republican conventions nominated Roosevelt as their Presidential candidate?

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 9:57 PM

What? It’s common knowledge. How can you deny a known fact?

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:58 PM

Then of course was the Progressives view on immigration which stressed “Americanization”.

And who could forget the other Progressive program known as “Prohibition” which was so hugely popular that it is still with us today.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:59 PM

You should read this.

You really shouldn’t say “EVERYONE” when your only news source is fox.

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/#/?chapt=0

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Oh, the NY Slimes? Well, see I did better than that, I watched the testimony in Congress on CSPAN, every second of it. I heard those that were closest to what what going down that night and the days following say it had nothing to do with the video, and that it was a terror attack.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:59 PM

You really shouldn’t say “EVERYONE” when your only news source is fox.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:55 PM

The first crack appears.

It always happens eventually.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 10:00 PM

BTW, we discussed the video already. It frees them up from difficulties when it comes time to vote for Hillary.
 
rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 9:57 PM

 

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/#/?chapt=0
 
triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:55 PM

 
Ha. That’s the same link. Thanks, triple.

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 10:00 PM

You really shouldn’t say “EVERYONE” when your only news source is fox.

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/#/?chapt=0

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Does the WaPo count?

Former Gitmo detainee and AQ operative took part in Benghazi attack

sentinelrules on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

Did you read it yes or no? Or did you dismiss it out of hand because “NY Slimes”?

That, my conservative friend, is called confirmation bias.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

The direction of this thread is deteriorating to the point of absurdity. So many trolls are off topic and I am sure this is intentional. What does Obama, Benghazi, and a video have to do with this breaking story about GWB lane closures? Are there any adults in the room?

metroryder on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

Did triple just cite the New York Times?
Oh, let me grab some more popcorn.

AllahsNippleHair on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/#/?chapt=0

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:55 PM


Sure sign of a Shrillary voter
, quoting the NYT piece written in direct contradiction of previous NYT’s articles … and lampooned by other liberal outlets.

I especially liked the part about the mystery reporter who was “on site”.

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 9:59 PM

LOL…I think this one should hook up with nonp, they might get a whole brain together.

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 10:02 PM

Just to clarify….I’m referring to triple as the hookup with nonp, not Bishop.

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 10:03 PM

LOL…I think this one should hook up with nonp, they might get a whole brain together.

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 10:02 PM

.
No … two right halves of a brain do NOT a whole brain make.

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 10:03 PM

You really shouldn’t say “EVERYONE” when your only news source is fox.

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/benghazi/#/?chapt=0

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Says the guy referencing NYT as a news source.

Man, this is some QUALITY farce you’re throwing down.

Midas on January 8, 2014 at 10:04 PM

The Progressives also gave us the Income Tax.

YAY! I guess.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 10:04 PM

Did you read it yes or no? Or did you dismiss it out of hand because “NY Slimes”?
 
That, my conservative friend, is called confirmation bias.
 
triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

 

That’s your argument, after all this Benghazi crap?
 
triple on March 20, 2013 at 6:06 PM

 
Confirmation bias indeed.

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 10:04 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is the tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.

Is it okay to weigh this report with everything else and judge it on it’s merits? Sure!

Is it okay to dismiss it out of hand because it’s conclusions don’t match up with your politics? Only if you’re an idiot.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:05 PM

Good timing.

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 10:05 PM

The direction of this thread is deteriorating to the point of absurdity. So many trolls are off topic and I am sure this is intentional. What does Obama, Benghazi, and a video have to do with this breaking story about GWB lane closures? Are there any adults in the room?

metroryder on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

Why would a leftist troll try to intentionally remove focus from the supposed missteps of a Republican, usually it’s when the focus is on a demorat.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Oh, the NY Slimes? Well, see I did better than that, I watched the testimony in Congress on CSPAN, every second of it. I heard those that were closest to what what going down that night and the days following say it had nothing to do with the video, and that it was a terror attack.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 9:59 PM


What?!?!

You are goiing to listen to those LIARS instead of the Paper of How You Are Supposed to Think????

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Don’t tell me about Benghazi. I was on the jabber server w/ sean that night; yes, former EVE player here. Why is it the right always forgets it was a right-wing video that started that attack in the first place? I’m all for more security should have been given, but where is the responsibility for inciting that attack on your part? Nowhere to be seen, that’s where.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM

I’m sympathetic to your reaction to the Crooked Christie scandal but you just lost all your credibility and the debate.

FloatingRock on January 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Says the guy referencing NYT as a news source.

Man, this is some QUALITY farce you’re throwing down.

Midas on January 8, 2014 at 10:04 PM

I think it’s kind of embarrassing if what’s printed in the NYT – the most respected paper in the world, by a longshot – is so damaging to your thoughts and ideals, that you need to deny its very credibility as a news source.

That just means you’re not interested in facts. You’re interested in news that confirms what you already believe.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Did you read it yes or no? Or did you dismiss it out of hand because “NY Slimes”?

That, my conservative friend, is called confirmation bias.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

I don’t need to take time to read it. I have better things to do tonight, plus I watched the testimony live. So I know what those involved said.

And I don’t automatically dismiss the NY Slimes, that’s just the name I like to use for them. I use the same one for the LA Slimes. I particularly like the Washington Compost one too. And the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation also.

I don’t take credit for any of those, but I do get a good chuckle when I’m able to shamelessly pirate them. :)

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 10:08 PM

I’m sympathetic to your reaction to the Crooked Christie scandal but you just lost all your credibility and the debate.

FloatingRock on January 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM

I can not win a debate here, that much is sure.

Just like I can’t win a debate with a brick wall.

You can only win debates if people are open-minded enough to challenge their own beliefs in the first place.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:09 PM

What?!?!

You are goiing to listen to those LIARS instead of the Paper of How You Are Supposed to Think????

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM

I know, I know, I’m opening myself up to forming my own opinion by listening to the sources. I’m willing to take that chance this one time though.

Meople on January 8, 2014 at 10:09 PM

The (looped) recording of today’s Levin show is apparently getting to the part where he starts to talk about Christie, according to Mark.

http://www.MarkLevinShow.com

FloatingRock on January 8, 2014 at 10:09 PM

BOINK THE VIDEO: AQ Admitts it:

http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/us-consulate-attacked-in-libya/

Libya
1y
Al Qaeda says attack on US consulate in Libya ‘revenge’ for the death of its 2nd man – @AFP
read more on dailytelegraph.com.au

http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/us-consulate-attacked-in-libya/

canopfor on December 30, 2013 at 11:31 PM
=========================================

Bengazi, بني غازي, LY
11d
No evidence that al-Qaida or other terrorist groups had any role in Benghazi attack, @nytimes investigation finds
read more on nytimes.com
==========================

canopfor on January 8, 2014 at 10:09 PM

I don’t need to take time to read it.

But why not? At the very least, you read it, disagree, and move on.

You seem scared you might be wrong.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:10 PM

You can only win debates if people are open-minded enough to challenge their own beliefs in the first place.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:09 PM

The narcissism is strong in this one.

sentinelrules on January 8, 2014 at 10:11 PM

It’s like Copernicus or something.

rogerb on January 8, 2014 at 10:12 PM

Yeah, I stood a chance arguing with people who think the most respected paper on earth isn’t a good enough source. But rush limbaugh tells it like it is, yo!

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:12 PM

I can not win a debate here, that much is sure.

Just like I can’t win a debate with a brick wall.

You can only win debates if people are open-minded enough to challenge their own beliefs in the first place.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:09 PM

The second crack appears.

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 10:13 PM

Did you read it yes or no? Or did you dismiss it out of hand because “NY Slimes”?

That, my conservative friend, is called confirmation bias.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:01 PM

Says the guy who is flatly dismissive of Fox News.

Priceless.

Midas on January 8, 2014 at 10:13 PM

I think it’s kind of embarrassing if what’s printed in the NYT – the most respected paper in the world, by a longshot – is so damaging to your thoughts and ideals, that you need to deny its very credibility as a news source.

That just means you’re not interested in facts. You’re interested in news that confirms what you already believe.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

So you ARE farcing us!!!

” … the most respected paper in the world, by a longshot …”

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Unless you really ARE that provincial and uninformed ….

PolAgnostic on January 8, 2014 at 10:14 PM

Yeah, I stood a chance arguing with people who think the most respected paper on earth isn’t a good enough source. But rush limbaugh tells it like it is, yo!

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:12 PM

The difference is that Rush is less partisan than the NY Times.

sentinelrules on January 8, 2014 at 10:14 PM

You can only win debates if people are open-minded enough to challenge their own beliefs in the first place.

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:09 PM

Hmmm…nonp has used this argument a few times…sock puppet? Oh and triple…Bishop is right, you progressives are alot of fun and I also especially like your whole embrace of that eugenics stuff.

BeachBum on January 8, 2014 at 10:15 PM

Yeah, I stood a chance arguing with people who think the most respected paper on earth isn’t a good enough source. But rush limbaugh tells it like it is, yo!

triple on January 8, 2014 at 10:12 PM

The third crack.

Just for edification’s sake:

Crack #1 – “All you watch is Fox news!”

Crack #2 – “You people aren’t open minded enough to understand anything.”

Crack #3 – “Rush Limbaugh!”

Crack #4 – *under construction*

Bishop on January 8, 2014 at 10:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3