GEORGE_WASHINGTON__BRIDGE

The Star-Ledger is reporting New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's deputy chief of staff knew of a plan to close local access lanes of the George Washington Bridge and that it would cause significant traffic problems in Fort Lee, N.J.

(AP File Photo)

'Bridgegate' was cast in a whole new light today when emails came to light showing a high-level official in the Chris Christie administration knew about lane diversions at the George Washington Bridge before they were implemented. The revelations move the controversy out of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and into the statehouse, where Democrats, smelling blood in the water, are circling like sharks.

What's next as the largest scandal of Christie's tenure in Trenton unfolds? Here are four questions that as yet remain unanswered.

1. Who in the Christie administration knew of the lane diversions before they happened?

Emails that came to light today show it's clear that at least some in the Christie administration were aware of the local lane diversion before it happened and the trouble it would cause in Fort Lee as it unfolded. At least one email shows Deputy Chief of Staff Bridget Anne Kelly telling a Port Authority of New York and New Jersey official "time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee," one month before the lanes were diverted.

But is Kelly the only administration staffer who knew? Later emails revealed today show Bill Stepien, who was Christie's campaign manager during his bid for reelection and served as the governor's in-house political guru, was brought into the loop after reporters began to ask questions, but Kelly is the only staffer who appears to have engaged with Port Authority officials prior to the lane closures.

During his four years in office, Christie has shown a penchant for micro-management. The mantra is, nothing goes on without the big man's knowledge. But the governor has denied having any knowledge of the controversy before reading about it. Can those denials stand up in light of the new revelations?

2. Who is next to resign?

Clearly Bridget Anne Kelly has some employment issues today and it would be shocking if she wasn't looking for work by day's end. But who else in the administration will take a fall? In one particularly telling email, Director of Interstate Capital Projects David Wildstein informs Kelly that Port Authority Executive Director Pat Foye pulled the plug on the lane diversions.

"The New York side gave Fort Lee back all three lanes this morning," Wildstein wrote. "We are appropriately going nuts. Samson helping us to retaliate."

Christie confidant David Samson is the chairman of the Port Authority board of commissioners. Samson has so far been mum on the controversy, refusing to answer questions about it, even as two top officials at the agency resigned. Can he weather the coming storm?

The flap has already claimed the job's of Wildstein and Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni. Will there be others?

3. What's next for David Wildstein?

Wildstein has been subpoenaed to testify before the Assembly Transportation Committee and his appearance will no doubt set off a media circus. Based on the emails released today, Wildstein seems to hold the answer to the question on everyone's mind: Who ordered the study?

During his initial emails over the lane diversions and in later testimony before the Transportation Committee, Foye claimed that the diversions may have violated the law. Is the email chain enough to make a case against Wildstein? Baroni? Kelly? It's unlikely that given the opening, Democrats are going to let the flap go without looking for more scalps. If there is indication that the governor knew more than he said, will Democrats make a move on Christie? This one is far from answered.

4. How does this affect the Christie "brand"?

Polls show that Christie is the (very) early front-runner for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination and some polls even show him in a dead heat with potential Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Christie has to date been shown to sport a Teflon exterior when faced with any of the minor flaps that have enveloped him during the past four years.

But this one plays directly into the narrative Democrats have been trying to build of Christie as a bully, unafraid to use power to punish opponents. His early glibness over the issue and assurances that nobody in his administration knew anything about the lane diversion are likely to be revisited, while Democrats and the media alike will hammer at the issue for as long as it draws eyes.

Can the carefully cultivated Christie mystique survive the onslaught? We may not know the answer to this one for some time.