Dana Milbank based his Jan. 12 Sunday Opinion column on New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s extensive use of the first person during his George Washington Bridge news conference [“ The New Jersey narcissist ”]. It might have been useful if Milbank had mentioned that most of Christie’s comments were made in direct response to reporters’ questions regarding his personal knowledge, reaction and response to the September lane closures in Fort Lee, N.J. With more than 20 questions over more than 90 minutes related to the governor’s personal knowledge and accountability, it is not difficult to understand why the majority of those questions were answered in the first person.
The Jan. 11 front-page article “Documents detail N.J. coverup” was interesting, as is this case. But it’s confusing because there are a lot of hands in the pot, a lot of e-mails — and all the while The Post reports on the “coverup.”
I don’t know if it’s a coverup as much as corruption of power and people in power abusing that power. If it were really a coverup, wouldn’t there have been deleted e-mails, burned computer drives and no one being fired?
Coverup is a Nixonian term with lots of implications. This bridge event represents callous disregard for the public interest. It may have been a political vendetta.
There has been a lot of speculation about why lanes were shut down on the George Washington Bridge, but no one has offered an answer to that question. It seems that once it is answered, we’ll all be in a better position to understand whether a coverup occurred.
I was wondering, if former defense secretary Robert Gates found himself embroiled in a scandal, would The Post take the easy way out and label it “Gatesgate”?
Walter Lynch, Alexandria