Most people who are paying attention to ‘Bridgegate’ now realize that the letter from David Wildstein’s attorney, Alan Zegas, released to the press yesterday afternoon is not the smoking gun that many in the media have been hoping for that would put an end to Governor Chris Christie’s presidential ambitions or possibly lead to his resignation or impeachment.
The letter, part of a negotiation with Port Authority over Wildstein’s legal fees, is not evidence that Christie lied in his January 9, 2013 press conference. The letter raises many questions and answers few if any. Some of those questions could complicate Wildstein’s legal problems. Assemblyman John Wisniewski, the co-chair of the state legislative committee investigating Bridgegate, wants to know why Wildstein did not include the evidence referred to in the letter with all the other documents he provided to the Assembly Transportation Committee, including the now infamous email exchange between Wildstein and Bridget Ann Kelly that blew the Bridgegate story open on January 8.
If any of the news outlets that reported on the letter revealed who released it, I missed it.
The release of the letter reignited the media frenzy over Bridgegate just as Christie was generating non-scandal related publicity associated with the Super Bowl and Howard Stern’s birthday. That was obviously the intent of releasing the letter. By protecting the identity of the leaker, the media is complicit with that agenda.
But how does that benefit Wildstein or Zegas? It seems to me that the release of the letter makes negotiating with Port Authority for legal fees more difficult, as the matter will now take on greater public scrutiny. Port Authority is now in a ‘damned if they do, damned if they don’t’ situation regarding Zegas’s fees.
Will the release of the letter that hints of evidence against Christie help Wildstein get immunity from prosecution for his role in the GWB lane closures? I don’t know, but if more publicity is what it will take to get immunity, Zegas’s negotiations with prosecutors must not be going too well.
Perhaps I’m missing something, but I don’t see what Wildstein and Zegas gain by the release of that letter or by the media frenzy it caused.
I asked Zegas via email if he or Wildstein were the source of the letter. He did not respond.
I also asked a reporter who wrote about the letter who released it. The answer was non-responsive.
The media gained a lot by the release. The whole Bridgegate controversy has been great for business. MMM had record breaking traffic in January. My young friend Matt Rooney at Saves Jersey tells me his traffic is similarly off the charts. Every political and news outlet must be experiencing increased results. As last weeks polls suggested, the over 80% of public is paying attention to this story, if not riveted by it.
As Matt points out today, the
mainstream leftstream media is freely distorting the facts of the Bridgegate story. They have a business agenda to sensationalize the story. Many have a political agenda as well.
The result of the leaked letter is more political than probative. So who could have leaked the letter and gain politically from its release? One of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Democratic appointees at Port Authority NY/NJ, with or without Cuomo’s knowledge or consent.
Wouldn’t that make for a different story?Posted: February 1st, 2014 | Author: Art Gallagher | Filed under: Bridgegate, Chris Christie, Media | Tags: Alan Zegas, Andrew Cuomo, Bridgegate, Bridget Ann Kelly, Chris Christie, David Wildstein, John Wisniewski | 3 Comments »