Ultimately there is only one person responsible for the GW Bridge closure and that was Mr. Weinstein. He acted on an e-mail where he stated, "Got it."
If your supervisor told you to drink arsenic, would you do it?
Mr. Weinstein drank the arsenic and that is why he is declaring Fifth Amendment protections because there are laws in place that he may have broken. He is not in contempt of court because if he were charged with crimes after giving testimony without immunity the words he spoke in the hearing would be used against him. His use of Fifth Amendment protections was appropriate.
The rest is politics. It just is. Mr. Weinstein had the authority to stop the actions and he didn't. He could have approached anyone involved in the chain of command and stated, this is a public hazard and I won't be a part of it and if you want to cost me my job, I'll take it to the press. Just that simple.
Doug Stanglin
USA Today
January 16, 2014
A newly formed special state committee (click here) investigating the George Washington Bridge scandal issued 20 subpoenas Thursday, including several to key staff members of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.
The legislative committee sent subpoenas to 17 individuals and three institutions. None was immediately named.
Assemblyman John Wisinewski, who is leading the investigation, said no names would be revealed until the recipients were officially served. That could happen Friday.
A New Jersey Senate committee is also investigating whether Christie's top advisers orchestrated or covered up lane closures near the bridge for political purposes....
Anyone involved in this are basically spectators to his actions. Whether or not the conspiracy exists? Who knows? It could have been a scheme cooked up over cocktails at a victory party. But, the only person that can be charged with a crime is Mr. Weinstein. If further disclosure proves to embarrass other people then it their political reputations they have played with in a silly game of hubris.
Impeachment involves crimes or misdemeanors. I don't believe no matter how high the conspiracy goes there are any crimes in it.
The way I see this is simple. The subpoenas will provide information as to the 'intentions' of Mr. Weinstein to decide whether or not HIS ACTIONS were based in revenge or a true traffic study and the reasons there was a study at all. Other than that they are not going to serve the public's interests except in deciding who 'also' was involved.
The Port Authority employees should have and in one instance acted to end the project. They are responsible as well.
The State of New Jersey can expedite the entire mess by charging Mr. Weinstein with whatever crimes they believe he committed and then get on with the trial. There will probably be a plea bargain and then it is over. But, Bridgette has no liability here, except, she was involved in hubris and an agreement on when this should take place. But, she answered to Weinstein in this instance because she reminded him of the actions of the day. She basically is his secretary at this point.
A cc to the Governor doesn't mean he ever saw it and if he did I would imagine without someone coming forward to state as much, he would have to find out what the closing was all about and then act on the memo. He wasn't going to undermine his own appointee and he wasn't going to micromanage the Port Authority.
Conspiracy to commit? Considering there were basically only, and yes only, inconvenience to motorists there is nothing here to charge in a conspiracy.
Where the incident takes color is in civil lawsuits for any actual damages the decision to close the lanes caused. But, the inconvenience of motorists is not a crime. Even if New York believes they lost revenue, that is not a crime unless it was intended to cause fiscal damage to New York in a specific way.
I wish everyone the best of luck.
If your supervisor told you to drink arsenic, would you do it?
Mr. Weinstein drank the arsenic and that is why he is declaring Fifth Amendment protections because there are laws in place that he may have broken. He is not in contempt of court because if he were charged with crimes after giving testimony without immunity the words he spoke in the hearing would be used against him. His use of Fifth Amendment protections was appropriate.
The rest is politics. It just is. Mr. Weinstein had the authority to stop the actions and he didn't. He could have approached anyone involved in the chain of command and stated, this is a public hazard and I won't be a part of it and if you want to cost me my job, I'll take it to the press. Just that simple.
Doug Stanglin
USA Today
January 16, 2014
A newly formed special state committee (click here) investigating the George Washington Bridge scandal issued 20 subpoenas Thursday, including several to key staff members of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.
The legislative committee sent subpoenas to 17 individuals and three institutions. None was immediately named.
Assemblyman John Wisinewski, who is leading the investigation, said no names would be revealed until the recipients were officially served. That could happen Friday.
A New Jersey Senate committee is also investigating whether Christie's top advisers orchestrated or covered up lane closures near the bridge for political purposes....
Anyone involved in this are basically spectators to his actions. Whether or not the conspiracy exists? Who knows? It could have been a scheme cooked up over cocktails at a victory party. But, the only person that can be charged with a crime is Mr. Weinstein. If further disclosure proves to embarrass other people then it their political reputations they have played with in a silly game of hubris.
Impeachment involves crimes or misdemeanors. I don't believe no matter how high the conspiracy goes there are any crimes in it.
The way I see this is simple. The subpoenas will provide information as to the 'intentions' of Mr. Weinstein to decide whether or not HIS ACTIONS were based in revenge or a true traffic study and the reasons there was a study at all. Other than that they are not going to serve the public's interests except in deciding who 'also' was involved.
The Port Authority employees should have and in one instance acted to end the project. They are responsible as well.
The State of New Jersey can expedite the entire mess by charging Mr. Weinstein with whatever crimes they believe he committed and then get on with the trial. There will probably be a plea bargain and then it is over. But, Bridgette has no liability here, except, she was involved in hubris and an agreement on when this should take place. But, she answered to Weinstein in this instance because she reminded him of the actions of the day. She basically is his secretary at this point.
A cc to the Governor doesn't mean he ever saw it and if he did I would imagine without someone coming forward to state as much, he would have to find out what the closing was all about and then act on the memo. He wasn't going to undermine his own appointee and he wasn't going to micromanage the Port Authority.
Conspiracy to commit? Considering there were basically only, and yes only, inconvenience to motorists there is nothing here to charge in a conspiracy.
Where the incident takes color is in civil lawsuits for any actual damages the decision to close the lanes caused. But, the inconvenience of motorists is not a crime. Even if New York believes they lost revenue, that is not a crime unless it was intended to cause fiscal damage to New York in a specific way.
I wish everyone the best of luck.
