Chris Christie’s office refuses to release personal emails of aides involved in bridge scandal

[DonViejo]

Source: NJ.com via RawStory

TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie's office has declined to release emails from the personal accounts of two top aides to the governor involved in the George Washington Bridge scandal, according to a liberal super PAC based in Washington.

American Bridge, a pro-Democratic group that conducts opposition research on Republicans, said today that it filed a request under New Jersey's Open Public Records Act for the emails. Christie's office denied it in a letter dated Thursday, the group said.

The super PAC focused on two of Christie's top aides: chief spokesman Michael Drewniak and former deputy chief of staff Bridget Anne Kelly.

American Bridge sought emails between them and Christie, or his top deputies in Trenton and the Port Authority, going back to April 2013.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/24/chris-christies-office-refuses-to-release-personal-emails-of-aides-involved-in-bridge-scandal/

[flamingdem]

1. Well, we've located the smoking gun

and it's in those emails.

[gussmith]

18. Overwhelmed We Are

Try to be patient people. We can't begin to imagine how many requests have been made for information related to the Christy investigations. How do you expect his staff to answer the deluge? Let the legal process work.

[libdem4life]

2. and we've also found out what "appropriate" inquiries DON'T get full cooperation. Real quick-like.

[DeSwiss]

3. K&R

[center]
Emales!?!?! You wan da emales!?!?! FU!!!
dere's no fu!#@king way are youse gettin'
any emales outta me!!! You got that!?!?!
Now go fu!#@k off!!!! And vote Christie 16' -- asshole!!![/center]

[louis-t]

4. How can you expect him to release them to a "pro-Democratic group"?

Much less a "liberal super PAC". As long as the investigators get to see them, That's all that matters.

[Lebam in LA]

5. I have to agree with you

I sure as heck would not turn over emails to my opponents. good grief

[delrem]

9. this^^^^^^^

[Progressive dog]

15. ^^^yes^^^

[Ash_F]

20. Many states have open records laws. So it might be the law.

Ever received an email from an elected official or their staffer? They usually say something along the lines of "This content may subject to to open records laws" at the bottom.

[DonViejo]

26. What are the chances...

someone in the MSM notices this news and decides to ask the same question of the Christie administration? Wouldn't we want to say that "pro-Democratic group" had accomplished its goal?

[rocktivity]

6. More to the point, those emails SHOULDN'T be personal

They should be on the state's email servers.


rocktivity

[TexasTowelie]

8. Exactly!

They also need to implement laws that provide financial punishments to any government official that uses personal email accounts to discuss government business or the use of public resources.

[avebury]

19. Sometimes there is a valid reason for a state employee to

receive work related emails on a non-work related email account. A perfect example is someone who is in a training program that requires frequent changes in work assignments. The employee may not always be able to access his/her work email account but still needs to receive notifications of work assignments, travel documents, and other information necessary to know where they are supposed to be while in the training program.

[TexasTowelie]

24. I agree that there could be extenuating circumstances that could provide a valid reason for using a

personal email account such as what you stated and I shouldn't have made it such a black & white issue since some gray areas could occur. In the example you cited it appears that at least one end of the communication is being documented through the work-related server and the reply would also be stored on the work-related server (provided that the originator assigning the employee training isn't also out of the office).

For the most part though, most e-mail systems are accessible via remote terminals so exceptions to the policies could be granted with prior approval.

[avebury]

25. In the example I gave, there would always be

documentation on at least one (and generally more) work email account as other state employees would be copied on an email [the Division Head of the assignment location (so he/she would know that someone has been assigned to rotate through his/her division), I usually got a copy so that I would know if travel status was involved, out Division Head, and so on]. These types of communication would never occur in a vacuum. If documents were sent for signature they would usually be sent with instructions to print them off, sign and date then, scan them in and email them back (with original signatures sent back by mail).

[modrepub]

14. You're Right

But it happens all the time. I've done it and most people do it (use third-party email servers for work related items). In my case I had to exchange a file that was too large for my work email system to handle. In this case it seems it was done to circumvent and FOIA or similar apparatus so this by itself could be an illegal act regardless of what was in the emails themselves. Given their reluctance to share them makes me think that something scummy was done.

[MADem]

27. Damn right! THIS is the main point, not who is asking for the documents.

The answer in a tight shop is "There are no 'personal' emails on our government servers."

People should realize that at work, when they send that dumb-ass joke to their co-workers, they're creating an official record.

[SoapBox]

7. The devil is in the details!

And the truth.

[yourout]

10. Go talk to the NSA. I am sure they can find them.

[L0oniX]

11. See ...this is why we need the NSA.

[rocktivity]

12. I don't mind the NSA spying, and never have

Last edited Sat Jan 25, 2014, 10:29 AM - Edit history (1)

I DO mind the NSA, or any other US agency, doing warrantless domestic spying.


rocktivity

[blkmusclmachine]

13. MUST.

LOOK.

FORWARD.

[A Simple Game]

16. I don't understand why you would ask the governors office to release someone's personal emails?

Shouldn't that be the person themselves and or their email provider?

I understand the reason, I just can't see the path the pursuit is taking.

[George II]

22. If the emails were sent during their official working hours and pertained to official business....

....it's a matter of public record. Being in the governor's office it is the responsibility of that office to release them.

[freedom fighter jh]

23. From the wording I think it may mean

e-mails sent from the aides' personal accounts to official NJ state e-mails of Christie or people in his office.

[olegramps]

28. They are deliberately using personal accounts to hide them from scrutiny.

They really aren't that smart because those e-mails can retrieved and the fact that they attempted to shield them makes them look even more guilty.

[calimary]

17. "...well, if you haven't done anything wrong, then you should have nothing to hide!"

'Eh, governor? Isn't that what your side always tells us on the left?


,,/,

[George II]

21. “And, uh, for that reason, I am perfectly willing to—

—I don’t give a sh_t what happens, I want you all to stonewall it, let them plead the Fifth Amendment, cover-up or anything else.”

Richard Nixon, March 22 1973.

Too bad we don't have John Sirica in New Jersey these days...

Judge John Sirica, presiding over the Watergate trials, is appalled at later hearing this conversation. Sirica will later write, “A lifetime of dealing with the criminal law, of watching a parade of people who had robbed, stolen, killed, raped, and deceived others, had not hardened me enough to hear with equanimity the low political scheming that was played back to me...........

Welcome to the big time, Governor Christie!!