1hundredsixty8

The Great Bridge Scandal of 2013 has temporarily flattened the trajectory of Chris Christie’s political ambition. The line between a blunt-speaking, get-it-done political leader and a vindictive bully appears to be thin indeed. While the Governor pleads ignorance of the scheme, clinging to his claim he believed that the disruptive lane closures on the George Washington Bridge last September were a legitimate traffic study, and that, if it was an act of political retribution, it was the action of staff carried out without his knowledge.

All this begs the question of what, if any, culpability a leader has for the conduct of the people in his organization. It seems to be a settled principle in law and ethics that the person at the top ultimately bears the burden of consequences for the conduct of those persons when they are seemingly acting in the name of the organization. So, is what are witnessing today a politician taking a courageous stand, or another equivocating hack squirming to protect his ambitions?

If Governor Christie is indeed ignorant about how the crude attempt to punish the mayor of Ft. Lee came about, then the question must be asked about the judgment of a leader who would have such people working for him.