Darryl Isherwood, of NJ.com asks 5 Bridgegate questions that may never be answered. He worries that the court grants Bridget Kelly's and Bill Stepien's request for 5th Amendment protection against the NJ legislative investigative committee's subpoena we may never know the answers to.
Even if Kelly, Stepien, and Wildstein talk to U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman unless he charges them with crimes we will not know what they said. He is not interested in politics. I'm not even sure he is interested in state conflict of interest laws, but only federal law?
Isherwood's first question is why were the GWB lanes closed, was it to "retaliate" against Mayor Sokolich, or some other reason, such as to pressure the real estate development to go to Samson's law firm for a payoff?
2. Who actually came up with the misguided scheme?
But the one element of the timeline we don't know is, who came up with it? The nature of Kelly's email to Wildstein has always suggested that there was a plan in place before she sent it. Why else would Wildstein fail to ask for clarification, instead answering "got it." Democrats investigating the incident believe the emails suggest that Stepien was closer to the plan than first thought. Why else, they wonder, would he ask no questions when forwarded an email from Sokolich looking for answers on who the Democratic mayor angered enough to bury his town in cars?
Bill Baroni was in on the cover up, but was he in on the planning? The committee has not asked him to testify since his original false testimony in November. Why not? We also do not know if U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman has spoken with him.
3. What was Port Authority Chairman David Samson's role in the bridge debacle?
There is no doubt Samson, a former state attorney general, has taken a beating since Bridgegate was revealed. But Samson's woes have not stemmed from the diverting of the lanes, but rather from sunlight being shined for the first time on his business dealings - dealings that have profited him immensely since taking over as the chairman of the agency.
David Samson's conflicts of interest as Port Authority Chairmen are many and he needs to resign for these alone. These conflicts are so egregious many have forgotten the original question had to do with whether or not he was the master mind, with Christie of the lane closures. As I've noted many times, it is hard to imagine relatively low level, and "outside" appointees, in an organization as political and contentious as the Port Authority, having sufficient power to pull off such a conspicuous stunt without a high level internal backer such as Samson. What was Samson's role in the GWB lane closures?
Remember David Wildstein's memo indicated "Samson is helping us retaliate? Isherwood brings up the possibility that Wildwood could have been "posturing", although this seems doubtful to me, his lawyers will not doubt present this line.
4. What was the significance of an August meeting between Samson and Christie?
In documents released by Wildstein in response to a subpoena from the committee were references to a meeting planned between Christie and Samson during the week of August 4. The inclusion of the emails in Wildstein's response led committee members to believe the meeting must somehow be relevant to the lane diversions, or why would Wildstein have submitted them as part of the subpoena?
Unless either Christie, or Samson talk we may never know.
Finally, Isherwood wants to know if anyone else was involved. If you've been following the case closely, you will not learn anything new from this article. I would still recommend it for hard-core Christiegate addicts because it provides a good big picture overview to help keep our perspective simultaneously at a high level and focused on the most critical details.
Isherwood closes by noting that unless U.S. Attorney Fishman starts "cuffing people," or the investigative committee wins its subpoena battles with Kelly and Stepien, "we may never know," leaving his readers with a slightly ill feeling.
