Well that was fast.
The NY Times reports that David Wildstein, in a letter released by his lawyer, "contests the accuracy of various statements that [Gov. Christie] made about him and he can prove the inaccuracy of some," and asserts that "evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures ... contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference."
To me, it's also anticlimactic. Exciting, but anticlimactic nonetheless.
Christie's been a dead-wannabe-walking since Bridget Kelly's mysterious instructions and Wildstein's seemingly miraculous comprehension of them came to light. I have since followed major pundits' deep and profound speculations about Christie's political future with no little amusement, in that the number of believable outcomes had already been narrowed to one. His future was toast.
The man was swimming in a veritable ocean of seaminess, corruption and petty spite. To entertain anything but his direct participation in it seemed the folly of the decade, akin to wondering if Nixon was perhaps innocent. Indeed I ceased writing or even thinking about Christie, his guilt being so impressively obvious.
As noted, to me he was but a dead-wannabe-walking. Such political corpses don't hold my interest.