Are clouds gathering for Christie?
February 2, 2014 -- Updated 0445 GMT (1245 HKT)
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is
embroiled in unfolding controversies over alleged political payback. The
primary scandal involves suggestions key aides and supporters
orchestrated traffic gridlock around the George Washington Bridge in
Fort Lee last year to punish that town's mayor for not endorsing
Christie's reelection. A separate controversy involves a federal
watchdog's review of whether Christie improperly used Superstorm Sandy
funds to produce tourism ads starring him and his family.
HIDE CAPTION
Who's who in Christie bridge scandal
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Bridgegate has hit New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's national prospects hard
- His response to the scandal seem credible in the short term, says Errol Louis
- Louis: The strategy was never quite plausible; Christie has a hands-on reputation
- Louis: Pushback from a former aide and fired education commissioner is damaging
Editor's note: Errol Louis is the host of "Inside City Hall," a nightly political show on NY1, a New York all-news channel.
(CNN) -- Less than three months after New Jersey
Gov. Chris Christie cruised to an overwhelming reelection win, the main
political question he faces isn't whether he can make a transition to
the national stage and run for president -- it's whether he can continue
to govern the state at all.
Negative press about the
so-called Bridgegate scandal -- an apparent decision by top Christie
aides to close lanes on the George Washington Bridge and snarl traffic
for days on end, allegedly out of petty political spite toward local
officials -- has taken a severe toll on Christie's national prospects: A
recent poll confirms that he has tumbled from first to third place as a
potential 2016 presidential candidate.
Errol Louis
But that could prove to be the least of Christie's headaches. A more pressing matter is raised by a short, devastating letter
penned by Alan Zegas, the lawyer for a former top aide to Christie,
David Wildstein, and published on the New York Times website.
The immediate point of
the letter was to press the Port Authority, the agency that operates the
George Washington Bridge, to pay Wildstein's legal expenses. But it's
not just a financial dispute.
If Wildstein, who
personally oversaw the lane closures, was following orders requested or
approved from on high, he can demand legal protection by the agency. But
by refusing to cover his costs, the Port Authority is saying, in
effect, that Wildstein was acting on his own.
The letter by Wildstein's
attorney bluntly suggests otherwise: "It has also come to light that a
person within the Christie administration communicated the Christie
administration's order that certain lanes on the George Washington
Bridge were to be closed, and evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie
to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the
lanes were closed, contrary to what the Governor stated publicly in a
two-hour press conference."
Ouch.
Gov. Christie faces new allegations
Was Christie really 'blindsided' by scandal?
Christie's political future at stake?
The Christie
administration hastily responded with a statement that the governor "had
absolutely no prior knowledge of the lane closures before they happened
and whatever Mr. Wildstein's motivations were for closing them to begin
with."
But the damage was done:
The scandal now has the potential to be carried directly into the inner
circle of the Governor's office, and undermine his credibility.
Until now, Christie has
employed a blunt but effective two-step strategy for containing the
scandal. Step One: Summarily fire and publicly condemn deputies who were
linked to the scandal. Step Two: Plead utter ignorance as to how or why
these top aides would engage in unethical or illegal behavior.
The strategy was never
quite plausible -- Christie, a former prosecutor, has a reputation as a
hands-on manager whose aides don't stray far without permission -- and
it's a risky gambit: By publicly denigrating fired members of his inner
circle, Christie opens himself to the possibility of disgruntled
ex-employees going public with information that is embarrassing, or even
incriminating.
One can only imagine what Wildstein was thinking during Christie's two-hour press conference, in which he blasted Wilstein and another fired ex-aide, Bridget Ann Kelly, for "abject stupidity."
"What did I do wrong to have these folks think it was OK to lie to me?" he said during the press conference.
Adding insult to injury,
Christie went so far as to say that Wildstein, often described in the
press as a high school friend, wasn't really a Christie pal.
"David and I were not
friends in high school. We were not even acquaintances in high school,"
Christie said. "We didn't travel in the same circles in high school. You
know, I was the class president and athlete. I don't know what David
was doing during that period of time."
At least one commentator, Michael Tomasky, thinks
that personal snub might make Wildstein more inclined to turn on
Christie. "What if Wildstein is sitting on some goods? Is he going to be
happy being dismissed as too geeky for Christie to waste his time on
back in high school?" Tomasky asks, concluding: "The nerd is striking
back."
As a matter of political
technique, Christie's swift firings and forceful denials seem credible
in the short term -- but they also echo at least one time when the
denounce-and-fire tactic backfired. In 2010, after New Jersey's request
for millions in federal education funds was rejected -- in part because
the final request lacked key budget estimates -- Christie publicly castigated and fired his education commissioner, Brett Schundler, allegedly for lying to him about what went wrong with the application.
But Schundler swiftly struck back, producing e-mails and other documents that showed he had, indeed, told Christie up front about the application's shortcomings.
"I will not accept being
defamed by the Governor for something he knows I did not do," wrote
Schundler. "The Governor called me a liar this week. That was the last
straw."
The Schundler episode is
important. Will Christie's strenuous denials of knowledge of Bridgegate
-- and his suggestion that his top aides lied to him -- hold up under
scrutiny?
Indeed, the state's most
powerful newspaper, the Star-Ledger, is already warning Christie that
the end may be near. Within hours of the publication of Wildstein letter
suggesting Christie knew about Bridgegate, the paper published a hard-hitting editorial.
"If this charge proves
true, then the governor must resign or be impeached. Because that would
leave him so drained of credibility that he could not possibly govern
effectively," the editorial says. "He would owe it to the people of New
Jersey to stop the bleeding and quit."
For Christie, it's been a long, bumpy road. He began November with a spectacular reelection and a coveted spot on the cover of Time Magazine. He enters February with troubling hints that his governorship may be damaged beyond repair.
0 التعليقات:
إرسال تعليق