OK

I watched the live stream of the hearing before the judge in Trenton who will decide how and with what Stepian and Kelly will comply with the Legislature's subpoenas, or not.

I have two observations.  First:

From the beginning of "time for some traffic problems in Ft. Lee," it was clear to anyone with a brain that when the traffic problems materialized, there HAD to have been other communications.  Right, people, like there was a PLAN. Kelly's email meant "start the plan."

The key questions remain the same as ever:

Who was in on the conspiracy that developed the plan?

Why was this being done?

Who ordered the plan enacted and who else knew it had been?

Who hatched and enacted the cover up.

These are really simple questions.  The fact that Christie hasn't publicly asked any of these is quite telling.  It appears to me that Bridget Kelly can answer all or most of these questions.  It is unlikely that she was in this alone.

A second observation:

The hearing was full of legal citations, jockeying, hair-splitting and such.  However, both Kelly and Sepian were State employees at the time, being paid by the taxpayers of New Jersey to do work in the executive branch.  Their "job"-related communications should be part of the public record, with exceptions, perhaps, for national security.  These emails, texts, phone call records aren't private matters or private communications.  Or is this incorrect?

The notion that the 5th amendment covers communications related to and produced in the normal course of government business seems odd to me.  While I understand that public employees do not surrender all their rights, I don't see how the claim that documents (both paper and electronic) produced in the course of their supposedly public work can suddenly become their private property to define, destroy, or withhold. I'm not trained in anything legal, but hasn't the Supreme Court ruled on this in at least a few cases?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.