Panel Investigating Chris Christie Bridge Scandal Votes To Compel Insiders To Produce Records

[Purveyor]

Source: NJ.com

TRENTON — The state legislative committee investigating the George Washington Bridge scandal today voted to compel Bridget Anne Kelly and Bill Stepien to produce the documents they have refused to provide by citing their Fifth Amendment rights against incrimination and other objections.

The committee voted 8-0 with all four Republicans abstaining to reject the objections raised by the two, to set a new due date for documents and to authorize its special counsel, Reid Schar, to "take all necessary steps" to enforce the subpoenas.

A co-chairman of the committee, Assemblyman John Wisniewski (D-Middlesex), said after the meeting that new subpoenas would be issued tonight or Tuesday morning. He declined to specify how many were issued or to whom, but said it was more than a dozen.

The developments came after the panel met for more than 90 minutes behind closed doors to receive advice from Schar. Republicans on the panel said they were abstaining because they were only provided information about the actions taken when they arrived today for the hearing.

Read more: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/02/panel_investigating_chris_christie_bridge_scandal_issues_xx_new_subpoenas.html

[grasswire]

1. willing to face contempt?

What is the penalty from a state legislature?

[Bandit]

2. Contempt usually means jail until they comply.

I hope that is what happens anyway...

[Gothmog]

3. I think that Kelly and Septien will be forced to produce the documents

Here is a thread by a couple of DU lawyers on this issue http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024427107#post28 I think that the Act of Production and the Testimony by Productions concepts will not protect these documents

[DallasNE]

4. Democrats Are Making A Mistake

By excluding Republicans in the deliberations. Yes, that would slow things down as they would attempt to slow-walk things but that is just a speed-bump that needs to be dealt with. Open up the deliberations.

[cui bono]

5. It said the R's abstained from the vote. Can't force them to participate I guess.

Doesn't seem that they're being excluded though.

[DallasNE]

6. That's Not How I Read It

The Republicans are saying they abstained because things were presented as take it or leave it. What they wanted was input on the document being voted on. Note that they did not vote "no" because that could blow up in their face should a smoking gun be found. Not sure exactly what changed this time because all previous votes were unanimous but some feathers got ruffled somewhere.

[cui bono]

7. Ah, yes, I can see that. Yeah, I think they heard from the party heads and perhaps the Kochs

that they needed to circle their wagons and get back to politics as team sport.

I think he's going down and they'd do themselves a favor to help him get him out and use that to run on.