CNN has gone through the emails, and thinks they’ve got proof that a study was done:

4:28 p.m. ET - Amid the controversy surrounding access lane closures near the George Washington Bridge scandal for apparent political reasons, documents released Friday show that a traffic study did in fact occur.

An “early assessment” of traffic patterns on the bridge was conducted. The assessment, which was released on September 12, the fourth day of the lane closures, produced findings that detailed the number of vehicles that used the Ft. Lee section of the bridge, peak traffic hours and what the impact would be if lanes were removed or added.

I wouldn’t say that was a traffic study so much as an attempt to CYA by those involved. A traffic study would have involved more people, including local PD at Fort Lee to alert them to the potential for traffic, etc. Because any kind of adjustment of lanes at the bridge would have fallout locally, and Fort Lee would have to adjust their traffic patterns accordingly. To simply claim they did this to find out what happens when they randomly shut lanes for no good reason is akin to simply causing chaos to see what happens and how everyone responds.

Here’s the answer - not well. Especially when you screw with people’s commutes on the first week of September with schools opening up and a full commute expected on roads/bridges due to the return to regular business hours for many businesses that stopped their summer hours (flex schedules).

4:02 p.m. ET - David Wildstein, New Jersey’s top official at the Port Authority who has since left his job, forwarded e-mails about the bridge lane closures in September from his official account to his personal G-mail.

On one occasion, Wildstein forwarded the e-mails after a member of his staff told him that a Wall Street Journal reporter was asking questions about the lane closures.

He did the same when Democratic Congressman Bill Pascrell sent a letter inquiring about the traffic getting onto the bridge.