Coverup looms as worst part of bridge battle

If Richard Nixon taught politicians of the future anything, it should have been that the cover-up usually is worse than the crime itself.

The president got caught in covering up the Watergate burglary by using federal authorities to quash an investigation. It cost him his job in August 1974.

Is there another cover-up under way in New Jersey?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-nj-documents-show-extensive-coverup-in-fort-lee-traffic-shutdown/2014/01/10/09af4efc-7a1f-11e3-af7f-13bf0e9965f6_story.html

The Washington Post suggests there might be some serious trouble brewing for Gov. Chris Christie, who’s been investigated for the closure of lanes on the George Washington Bridge, allegedly as payback for a Democratic mayor’s refusal to endorse Christie’s re-election bid.

Did the governor order the lane closures on the world’s busiest bridge? I doubt it. But did he know about it when it occurred? Was his staff acting on orders given by those quite close to the governor?

Does all of this testify to Christie’s reputation as a vengeful bully?

What did the governor know and when did he know it? That question — a form of which was posed by Republican U.S. Sen. Howard Baker during the Senate Watergate Committee hearings — went to the president of the United States. It seems valid today to ask it of Gov. Christie.