Don't know if you guys are following the Christie bridge story. For the really out-of-the-loop folks, Chris Christie, governor of New Jersey and contender for the GOP nomination in 2016, is in political trouble because it is suspected he is behind a fake traffic study in which 2 of Fort Lee's 3 access lanes to the George Washington Bridge to NYC were closed for four days this past September (the week of 9/11), causing serious traffic congestion, and now emails have been released showing that Christie's deputy chief of staff (Bridget Kelly) ordered it, that it had been discussed by all involved before she ordered it, and that several Christie appointees thought the whole thing was hilarious.
I am following the story mostly because the details don't really make a lot of sense, and I love mysteries. Clearly, from the documents released so far, the lane closures were ordered from Christie's office for political reasons rather than the reasons stated in public, which makes a bona fide scandal. It's the why that doesn't make sense. Heavy traffic seems to be a weird way to punish someone you don't like, whether it's the mayor of Fort Lee or Loretta Weinberg (state rep for that district) as Maddow plausibly theorized earlier this week.
I think that Steve Kornacki is
sniffing in the right place. The short version: there is a billion-dollar redevelopment project in the works in Fort Lee, basically right at the foot of Fort Lee's GWB access lanes, which includes luxury apartments and parking for carpoolers and the like. The access lanes were a major part of what made that property sought-after, and there is some history to the property that Kornacki goes into in his segment. At the time the lane closures happened, financing for the project had not yet been secured, and was not until after the lanes were repoened. Since the access lanes are a major selling point for the project, it's probably safe to assume that the investors were nervous during the "traffic study", especially considering the rumors that it might be permanent. Uncertainty is the bane of fundraising for projects like this.
Bridget Kelly gave the order for "traffic problems in Fort Lee" about a month before the lane closures actually happened, and according to the documents provided by David Wildstein (the Port Authority guy who was ordered to orchestrate the closures), Christie had a meeting with PA chairman David Samson just before Kelly gave Wildstein that order. Since Wildstein is pleading the 5th, we don't know why he provided that particular document, but as the subpoena only called for documents related to the lane closures, it's probably safe to assume that the Christie/Samson meeting was germane. Everything that was not germane was redacted by Wildstein or his lawyers.
In December, before anything incriminating had been released, Christie tried to blow off the questions about the incident in press conferences, but he couldn't help mentioning that he couldn't understand why Fort Lee had three "dedicated lanes" to the GWB. It's a ridiculous thing to say because those lanes are used by over 50 communities in the commute to NYC, but he said it, and he said that he was considering making it permanent, and that he had discussed exactly that with chairman Samson. In fact, the "traffic study" was ostensibly a test to see if closing the lanes would ease traffic on the bridge itself by taking pressure off the other feed lanes, and if it did, then perhaps making the closures permanent would be a good idea. For residents of the area, the idea seems ridiculous, and considering what we know now, it probably is ridiculous. But Christie was quite serious about it, and another PA appointee, Bill Baroni, made comments along the same lines when he was questioned about the incident. When the NY side of the Port Authority moved to end the lane closures, Wildstein wrote that Samson was helping them to "retaliate". It was rumored that Christie made a personal call to NY governor Andrew Cuomo, but Cuomo denied it in public.
Since it makes little sense to punish your enemies with traffic problems, I think it's a fairly safe bet at this point that this redevelopment project was the main target of Christie's game. One could argue he had nothing to do with it, that his staff acted independently, but it's looking very unlikely at this point. Steve Kornacki, who worked for Wildstein at one point and knows Bridget Kelly fairly well, doesn't think she would have hatched this little plan on her own; it isn't her style. And of course, Wildstein's lawyer basically told the committee questioning them that Wildstein would sing a pretty tune if he were to be granted immunity from prosecution by the relevant authorities. It's only a matter of time before the truth comes out, but at this point I think it's a question of what Christie's stake was in seeing this project suffer. It's a better way than traffic to punish the mayor and the aforementioned state rep Loretta Weinberg, if that was the goal, but you would think that Christie would want any billion-dollar project in his state to succeed. But he deliberately threw a wrench in it—whether he ordered the lane closures or not—since he seemed to get a kick out of threatening to make it permanent.
Help
