Former NJ transit official: Chris Christie knew about bridge lane closures

Uh oh…it’s starting to look like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s goose might just be cooked.

The attorney representing David Wildstein, a former official at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, said today that Gov. Chris Christie knew of the closure of lanes from Fort Lee on to the George Washington Bridge when they occurred in September.

The attorney, Alan Zegas, who is representing Wildstein in the scandal, said in a letter to the Port Authority that “evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference” last month.

Zegas also said Wildstein “contests the accuracy of various statements that the governor made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some.”


Related Articles

8 thoughts on “Former NJ transit official: Chris Christie knew about bridge lane closures

    1. Nice video of Gov. Christie lying and going on the attack against Dems who were trying to hold him accountable. It’s from 2013.

      “I worked the cones, actually,” Christie joked. “Unbeknownst to everybody, I was actually the guy out there. I was in overalls and hat, but I was actually the guy working the cones out there. You really are not serious with that question?”

  1. Yes, more popcorn please.
    Even if Christie threw the switch for lane closures it is a 1. Benghazi is a 10.

    1. Unfortunately for Gov. Christie, Big Oil, the military-industrial-complex and the national-security-complex are not heavily invested in the Port Authority and the George Washington Bridge.

      That’s why he’s “dead-man-waddling,” and President Obama and former Sec. of State Clinton will skate.

      We should be closing the vast majority of foreign military bases and bringing our forces home.

      1. I’m certainly not defending dirty or hard knuckles politics in NJ, Chicago, Washington or where ever. The point is this particular “scandal” is hardly worthy of the term scandal. In recent years Clinton, Bush and Obama have defined scandal and the bridge deal pales in comparison.

Comments are closed.