baroni had said i'm giving you no reason at all, or suppose mr. baroni had said we're going to do a traffic study, but it's going to be a sham traffic study. would you still have had authority? >> certainly the first one. he certainly had at any point that discretion to say, as somebody had done very early on in creating these three traffic lanes, there were not required but anything, at any point in time couldn't said i think they should have a fourth or think they should have only two or only one here that was fully within his authority. as the government argued and proved his case below, that was their summation, was he abused e the authority was entrusted with. >> and the second, recorded a sham traffic study? >> i think he can do that. i think as a functional of the matter, who knows what actually results from that but just he has the authority to say were going to do a traffic study because i want to do this thing, and for public reasons, it's easier to do a traffic study. >> you said this is not a sufficiency question. but what is it if it'

baroni had said, i'm giving you no reason at all. or suppose mr. baroni had said we're going to do a traffic study but it's going to be a sham traffic study. would he still have had authority. >> certainly the first one. he certainly had at any point the discretion to say, as somebody had done very early on in creating these three traffic lanes, they weren't required by anything, at any point in time could have said, i think they should have a fourth or i think they should have only two or only one and that was fully within his authority and as the government argued and proved this case below, that was their point. that was their summation was he abused the authority he was entrusted. >> and the second? we're going to do a sham traffic study. >> i think he can do that. i think as a functional matter. who knows what actually results from that. but, yes, he has the authority to say we're going to do a traffic study because i want to do this thing and for public reasons, it's easier to do a traffic study. >> you said this was not a sufficiency questio

baroni had preliminary authority over the operations of the port authority. and mr. wildstein asked, when he was asked why did you come up with the traffic study his first answer was for purposes of the media and for purposes of explaining it to local officials, when pressed by the government, he said, also to give a rope -- a reason for the officials but the fact he -- that he chooses to tale lie to career officials to make this go over more smoothly in the same way that a public official wouldn't tell the world that they're doing something for a political reason. >> but would you spent a moment on the traffic study. >> certainly, your honor. the government has conceded that if mr. -- again, this is new in this court. all of these concessions. that if mr. baroni has authority to order a terrific study he could do so even with the intention of causing traffic in fort lee, and they concede he had the authority order a traffic study. all of that is conceded. what they say is he lied but the existence of a terrific study and there was no lie about the existence of a tra

they called mr. baroni's successor who testified that that was the arrangement. justice: this is a bistate agency. why would new jersey agree to an arrangement like that where there are always in the second seat, at least nominally? is that the brick brother across the river, -- the big brother across the river, is that it? >> i don't know the answer to that except that the structure within the port authority, that was the case. it was understood that within the port authority the deputy executive director had equal authority. the vice-chairman testified but about these parallel chains of command, particularly for decisions made within new jersey . it was understood that would fall within the deputy executive director's scope of authority. justice: i think one of the government's main arguments on the efficiency of -- on the sufficiency of the evidence which was clearly pro-government, was that mr. whils wildsteen had to lie to te port authority employees about the executive director knowing about the lane change. if in fact the reality of the situation was that