WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2016
A fascinating journalistic event: Did Chris Christie know about the lane closings to the George Washington Bridge?
Did he approve the lane closings? Did he know the closings were intended as political retribution against the mayor of Fort Lee?
Because of the apparent overt stupidity of the plan, we've always found it hard to believe that Christie would have been involved. The plan created gigantic risk in pursuit of a very meager reward. Needless to say, the lane closings have deeply damaged Christie's career, or at least they had before the victory over our brilliant forces engineered by Candidate Trump.
In the wake of the recent convictions of Bridget Kelly and Bill Baroni for their conduct with respect to the lane closings, Christie has done a 42-minute interview with Charlie Rose on this subject.
The videotape is available here. We don't think there's a publicly available transcript.
We mention this because the coverage of the Bridgegate trial has been a fascinating journalistic event. From the New York Times to the Maddow Show, the trial has largely been treated as a way to advance the idea that Christie was involved.
He may have been involved, of course. But the journalism has been persistent, full-tilt thumbs-on-the-scales. At some point, liberals have to decide if this is what we want from our major newspapers and from our cable news corporate gong shows.
We plan to discuss this topic after we've had a chance to review the material more fully. In the meantime, Christie's interview is available at the Rose site.
In our view, a basic question went unasked. But then, what else is new?