Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Christie Crime Digest-Vol. I [View all]Laxman
(2,419 posts)292. I Guess They Didn't Wait Until Monday To Release...
the non-exoneration exoneration. I'll post a link to the actual report as soon as it becomes available. Until then, don't just read the headlines-which appear to be deliberately misleading- delve instead into the substance (what there is) of the report and you'll see this is far from a report clearing Christie. And for about the 1,000th time-the legislative committee is a sideshow and the bridge fiasco is just a diversion from the criminal investigation by the U.S. Attorney and the 100 or so corrupt and criminal practices of Christie and his crew that are listed in this thread. And that's just what I (and Rocktivity and a few others here on DU) have been able to find. Anyway, read away:
Christie bridge scandal: Excerpts of legislative committee's new report
NO TRAFFIC STUDY
For months, Port Authority officials blamed the lane closings on a traffic study to measure the effect of closing two of Fort Lee's three access lanes to the bridge. That's what Port Authority Deputy Director Bill Baroni a Christie ally told the state Assembly Transportation Committee last November.
But the new report says there "is no evidence of a bona fide, professional managed traffic study."
"The record demonstrates that the purported study was, in fact, an excuse to cover up lane closures that were implemented for other reasons," the report says.
MOTIVE UNCLEAR
Though critics have speculated that the lanes were closed as political payback because Sokolich declined to endorse Christie for re-election last year, the report says Kelly and Wildstein's motive "remains unclear."
"Taken altogether, the evidence clearly suggests that the lane closures were intended as a punitive measure directed against Mayor Sokolich," the report says. "What the Committee cannot say for certain is whether the closures were intended as retribution for the Mayor's failure to endorse Governor Christie or for some other, unknown reason. Without current access to Kelly and Wildstein, and certain other witnesses and documents, the Committee remains unable to reach a definite conclusion as to what (and who) may have motivated them."
BARONI'S TESTIMONY QUESTIONED
The report says evidence indicates that Baroni, a former member of the state Senate, was aware of the lane closes before that happened, but it "remains unclear" what role he played. It also says there is evidence that Bill Stepien, Christie's campaign manager knew of the closures in advance, "but what exactly he was told and what involvement he may have had are unclear."
Still, the report says Baroni tried to get instruction from Kelly on Sept. 17 four days after the closings ended on to how to handle questions from Sokolich.
"These interactions reveal that Baroni was aware by this point, if not earlier, that a high-ranking individual within Governor Christie's administration, Kelly, was involved in the lane closure issues and was providing direction on how to manage the growing controversy," the report says. "The interactions also suggest Baroni did not truly believe the lane closures were a bona fide traffic study."
The report then notes that Baroni testified before the state Assembly Transportation Committee that a traffic study was to blame for the closings.
"Given what is now known, there are serious questions as to whether Baroni testified truthfully when he claimed that the lane closures had been part of a traffic study and that Fort Lee had remained in the dark simply because of communications failures between the Port Authority and Fort Lee," the report says.
CHRISTIE'S INVOLVEMENT?
Christie has denied any personal involvement in the matter. He also fired Kelly and cut ties with Stepien in January. At the same time, a report conducted by a law firm hired by Christie's office cleared the governor of wrongdoing.
But the new legislative report doesn't draw any conclusion. It notes, according to testimony from Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak, that Wildstein claimed he told the governor of the closures while they were occurring at a Sept. 11 memorial event in New York City.
"There is no conclusive evidence as to whether Governor Chris Christie was or was not aware of the lane closures either in advance of their implementation or contemporaneously as they were occurring. Nor is there conclusive evidence as to whether Governor Christie did or did not have involvement in implementing or directing the lane closures," the report says. "Nevertheless, according to Michael Drewniak's testimony, Wildstein has claimed that he informed the Governor of the lane closures at a 9/11 Memorial observance that the two attended. While the Committee currently has no means to independently evaluate Wildstein's reported statement, the statement, as well as the current lack of information from Wildstein, Kelly, Stepien, and others, leaves open the question of when the Governor first learned of the closures and what he was told."
Randy Mastro, the attorney whom Christie's office hired to conduct the internal review earlier this year, said in a statement: "The Committee has finally acknowledged what we reported nine months ago namely, that there is not a shred of evidence Governor Christie knew anything about the GWB lane realignment beforehand or that any current member of his staff was involved in that decision. Thus, the Committee's work has simply corroborated our comprehensive investigation. And with this inquiry behind it, the Governor and his office can now focus on doing what they do best serving the public interest."
RESPONSE OF CHRISTIE'S OFFICE
Though the report says the investigating has not been able to determine whether others in Christie's office were involved, it notes that the office "responded very slowly and passively to mounting indications that serious harms had been inflicted on thousands of New Jersey motorists for political rather than legitimate policy reasons."
It also says "the sequence of events, coupled with (the offices') evident lack of curiosity regarding the actual origin and purpose of the lane closures, at least raises questions (as yet unanswerable by the Committee) about whether key people in (the office), as events unfolded, took increasingly implausible explanations at face value because they knew or suspected a more damaging true story and preferred that it not come to light."
WITNESS TAMPERING?
The report notes that on Dec. 12 of last year, Kelly instructed Christina Renna, another Christie staffer, to delete an exchange in her personal Gmail account in which Renna had reported on a frustrated phone call from Sokolich regarding the lane closings and Kelly responded, "Good."
That, the report says, the state Assembly Transportation Committee had taken sworn testimony three three days earlier about the lane closings and "evidence indicates Kelly had asked to see a copy of Baroni's prepared remarks beforehand."
"Thus, there is ample evidence that Kelly was well aware of the
ongoing legislative investigation," the report says, and "as a result, her request that Renna delete a relevant email message may have violated New Jersey's witness tampering statute."
NO TRAFFIC STUDY
For months, Port Authority officials blamed the lane closings on a traffic study to measure the effect of closing two of Fort Lee's three access lanes to the bridge. That's what Port Authority Deputy Director Bill Baroni a Christie ally told the state Assembly Transportation Committee last November.
But the new report says there "is no evidence of a bona fide, professional managed traffic study."
"The record demonstrates that the purported study was, in fact, an excuse to cover up lane closures that were implemented for other reasons," the report says.
MOTIVE UNCLEAR
Though critics have speculated that the lanes were closed as political payback because Sokolich declined to endorse Christie for re-election last year, the report says Kelly and Wildstein's motive "remains unclear."
"Taken altogether, the evidence clearly suggests that the lane closures were intended as a punitive measure directed against Mayor Sokolich," the report says. "What the Committee cannot say for certain is whether the closures were intended as retribution for the Mayor's failure to endorse Governor Christie or for some other, unknown reason. Without current access to Kelly and Wildstein, and certain other witnesses and documents, the Committee remains unable to reach a definite conclusion as to what (and who) may have motivated them."
BARONI'S TESTIMONY QUESTIONED
The report says evidence indicates that Baroni, a former member of the state Senate, was aware of the lane closes before that happened, but it "remains unclear" what role he played. It also says there is evidence that Bill Stepien, Christie's campaign manager knew of the closures in advance, "but what exactly he was told and what involvement he may have had are unclear."
Still, the report says Baroni tried to get instruction from Kelly on Sept. 17 four days after the closings ended on to how to handle questions from Sokolich.
"These interactions reveal that Baroni was aware by this point, if not earlier, that a high-ranking individual within Governor Christie's administration, Kelly, was involved in the lane closure issues and was providing direction on how to manage the growing controversy," the report says. "The interactions also suggest Baroni did not truly believe the lane closures were a bona fide traffic study."
The report then notes that Baroni testified before the state Assembly Transportation Committee that a traffic study was to blame for the closings.
"Given what is now known, there are serious questions as to whether Baroni testified truthfully when he claimed that the lane closures had been part of a traffic study and that Fort Lee had remained in the dark simply because of communications failures between the Port Authority and Fort Lee," the report says.
CHRISTIE'S INVOLVEMENT?
Christie has denied any personal involvement in the matter. He also fired Kelly and cut ties with Stepien in January. At the same time, a report conducted by a law firm hired by Christie's office cleared the governor of wrongdoing.
But the new legislative report doesn't draw any conclusion. It notes, according to testimony from Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak, that Wildstein claimed he told the governor of the closures while they were occurring at a Sept. 11 memorial event in New York City.
"There is no conclusive evidence as to whether Governor Chris Christie was or was not aware of the lane closures either in advance of their implementation or contemporaneously as they were occurring. Nor is there conclusive evidence as to whether Governor Christie did or did not have involvement in implementing or directing the lane closures," the report says. "Nevertheless, according to Michael Drewniak's testimony, Wildstein has claimed that he informed the Governor of the lane closures at a 9/11 Memorial observance that the two attended. While the Committee currently has no means to independently evaluate Wildstein's reported statement, the statement, as well as the current lack of information from Wildstein, Kelly, Stepien, and others, leaves open the question of when the Governor first learned of the closures and what he was told."
Randy Mastro, the attorney whom Christie's office hired to conduct the internal review earlier this year, said in a statement: "The Committee has finally acknowledged what we reported nine months ago namely, that there is not a shred of evidence Governor Christie knew anything about the GWB lane realignment beforehand or that any current member of his staff was involved in that decision. Thus, the Committee's work has simply corroborated our comprehensive investigation. And with this inquiry behind it, the Governor and his office can now focus on doing what they do best serving the public interest."
RESPONSE OF CHRISTIE'S OFFICE
Though the report says the investigating has not been able to determine whether others in Christie's office were involved, it notes that the office "responded very slowly and passively to mounting indications that serious harms had been inflicted on thousands of New Jersey motorists for political rather than legitimate policy reasons."
It also says "the sequence of events, coupled with (the offices') evident lack of curiosity regarding the actual origin and purpose of the lane closures, at least raises questions (as yet unanswerable by the Committee) about whether key people in (the office), as events unfolded, took increasingly implausible explanations at face value because they knew or suspected a more damaging true story and preferred that it not come to light."
WITNESS TAMPERING?
The report notes that on Dec. 12 of last year, Kelly instructed Christina Renna, another Christie staffer, to delete an exchange in her personal Gmail account in which Renna had reported on a frustrated phone call from Sokolich regarding the lane closings and Kelly responded, "Good."
That, the report says, the state Assembly Transportation Committee had taken sworn testimony three three days earlier about the lane closings and "evidence indicates Kelly had asked to see a copy of Baroni's prepared remarks beforehand."
"Thus, there is ample evidence that Kelly was well aware of the
ongoing legislative investigation," the report says, and "as a result, her request that Renna delete a relevant email message may have violated New Jersey's witness tampering statute."
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/12/christie_bridge_scandal_excerpts_of_legislative_committees_new_report.html#incart_river
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
306 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Let us not forget the DMV in Elizabeth. I'm still "sauced" over that one..LOL...n/t
monmouth3
Jan 2014
#7
Is it your prediction that Christie will be charged with a crime or crimes?
Exciting Trip
Jan 2014
#48
Since I believe that it's DOING something criminal that makes you a criminal
rocktivity
Jan 2014
#50
For the record, I think he should be charged and am cautiously optimistic that he will be
rocktivity
Jan 2014
#54
The New Brunswick apartment tower that got $4.8 million in Sandy relief funds
LiberalEsto
Jan 2014
#65
Next time you write a post like this, put it in its own OP, please , so more people can see it.
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#89
Christie begins an "internal investigation" though he's his own prime suspect
rocktivity
Feb 2014
#94
Christie's problem being, of course, is that Samson reports to him directly
rocktivity
Mar 2014
#130
Christie administration broke law in ignoring greenhouse gas rules, court says
rocktivity
Mar 2014
#162
New York Prosecutors Open Another Front of Scrutiny for Port Authority!
yortsed snacilbuper
Apr 2014
#203
"kicked $10,000 of it right back to the Republican Governor's Association?"
yortsed snacilbuper
Apr 2014
#213
GWB inquiry expands scope, subpoenas files from Christie political strategist!
yortsed snacilbuper
May 2014
#223
Christie and Wrestler "The Rock" Star in Online Pension Reform Video (For Seven Hours)
rocktivity
Jul 2014
#235
U.S. Attorney Fishman: Reports about Bridgegate investigation 'Almost entirely incorrect'
rocktivity
Jul 2014
#238
Gov. Christie Shifted Pension Cash to Wall Street, Costing New Jersey Taxpayers $3.8 Billion
rocktivity
Aug 2014
#241
...After Illinois declared the first privately run U.S. state lottery a failure
rocktivity
Dec 2014
#298