Regarding "Bridge Gate," the intentional, premeditated actions that disrupted traffic on the GW Bridge, I have trouble believing this was an isolated incident. Why do I suspect this was not the first time? Chris Christie's aid sent this email to Port Authority employee, David Wildstein:
“Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee.” He responded, "Got it." How did Wildstein know what the request was? How did he know that "traffic problems in Fort Lee" meant blocking lanes on the GW Bridge for 4 concurrent days? It sounds like "code" for something that was quickly understood by the recipient.
But in spite of the possibility that this may not have been the first time for politicially motivated traffic jams, any attempt to compare Bridge Gate to Benghazi is truly a case of comparing apples to oranges -- based on the issue of INTENT TO DO HARM TO OUR OWN CITIZENS (among many other factors.)
I think one thing even Republicans and Democrats can agree upon is that none of our citizens or officials wanted 'bad things' to happen in Benghazi.
Those who want us to compare Bridge Gate to Benghazi appear desperate.
**
Meanwhile, the New York Times has provided an update on the Benghazi invesigation:
The New York Times recently published David Kirkpatrick's summary of the NYT's investigation of the Benghazi incident. Click HERE to read "Deadly Mix in Benghazi"the full summary, conclusions and editorial. Click HERE to see a PBS interview with Kirkpatrick. Here is an excerpt:
"Fifteen months after Mr. Stevens’s death, the question of responsibility remains a searing issue in Washington, framed by two contradictory story lines.
"One has it that the video, which was posted on YouTube, inspired spontaneous street protests that got out of hand. This version, based on early intelligence reports, was initially offered publicly by Susan E. Rice, who is now Mr. Obama’s national security adviser.
"The other, favored by Republicans, holds that Mr. Stevens died in a carefully planned assault by Al Qaeda to mark the anniversary of its strike on the United States 11 years before. Republicans have accused the Obama administration of covering up evidence of Al Qaeda’s role to avoid undermining the president’s claim that the group has been decimated, in part because of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.
The investigation by The Times shows that the reality in Benghazi was different, and murkier, than either of those story lines suggests. Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.
"...More broadly, Mr. Stevens, like his bosses in Washington, believed that the United States could turn a critical mass of the fighters it helped oust Colonel Qaddafi into reliable friends. He died trying."
