NJ-GOV: Keep the Money, Chris


Christopher Christie did nothing wrong in accepting campaign donations.

New Jersey and Virginia elect governors this year, and Republicans stand a good chance of taking both. In the Garden State, the GOP likely has a very strong challenger in former U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie, if he makes it through the primary against former Mayor of Bogota (Bergen County), Steve Lonegan. Christie made his name putting corrupt Democratic politicians in jail, so the primary should be little more than a formality and a tune-up for the eventual fall campaign against a very well-funded and powerful Democratic machine in the state. Christie has an excellent chance of unseating Governor John Corzine (D) if he can prove himself competent on issues other than public corruption.

It is on that issue, however, Christie’s strength, that some Democrats are trying to attack him. They would love to paint Christie as one of a kind with their corrupt crowd. Democrats know that for Republicans, hypocrisy is a campaign-killer, even as it seems to be a resume enhancement for them. But their first venture down this line of attack will fall flat, if Christie continues to follow his instincts.

Democrats and their allies in the media are alleging that while at the U.S. Attorney’s office, Christie was feathering his own future campaign nest by forcing firms under investigation to hire monitoring contractors who would repay Christie in campaign contributions. If it sound far-fetched, it’s because it is. Nonetheless, the allegations have made it into the press, and naturally, Christie’s campaign has been asked to respond.

“A former federal prosecutor running for New Jersey governor accepted campaign contributions from a lawyer he awarded a no-bid, multimillion-dollar contract to while serving as U.S. Attorney, according to state election records.

Former U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie took $23,800 in donations this year from principles in Stern & Kilcullen of Roseland and their spouses, according to Election Law Enforcement Commission records. [...]

As U.S. Attorney, Christie named Herbert Stern to oversee operations at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ) in 2005 rather than prosecute the school on Medicare fraud charges. Stern and his wife Martha each contributed the maximum allowable_$3,400.

Stern, a former federal judge, was paid about $3 million for two year’s work as a federal monitor.”

The story is completely bogus and transparent attempt to dirty up Christie in advance of the general election. And sure enough, Newsday quotes Democrat Representative Frank Pallone, who (surprise!) has introduced a bill in Congress to tighten oversight of just this kind of monitoring contracts between U.S. Attorneys and outside firms. State Senator Loretta Weinberg (D), has called on Christie to return the money.

So far, Christie is sticking to his guns and keeping the contributions. This is exactly the right course to take. Even the Newsday story has to admit, in paragraph 12 of 16, that the contributions do not violate state anti-pay-to-play rules, since the monitoing contracts were handed out by the federal government.

This desparate line of attack will not stick to Christie, unless he gives the public some reason to doubt his impeccable reputation. The surest way he can do that is to return the money, and give voters pause to wonder whether he did something wrong in taking it. This is exactly what Democrats want him to do, of course. But the bottom line is that nobody will believe Christie was for seven years choosing monitors with the intent of shaking them down for campaign donations at some later date. Not even in corrupt New Jersey. Anybody who would buy what the Democrats are peddling on this issue would not have voted for Christie anyhow.

Christopher Christie has a chance to wear the white hat in a state government filled with far too many black ones. He alone has the moral authority to clean up the capital and help to restore trust in state government in an electorate yearning for someone to look up to in Trenton. The phony smear attacks on his character by Democrats, eager to see conditions in New Jersey politics stay exactly as they are, will not work; unless Christie legitimizes them. Democrats will almost certainly continue to try, however. Christie should remain focused on the twin goals of beating Corzine in November and cleaning up state government. He should not let cynical Democrats and their minor distractions stand in the way.

Category: , , , ,

RSS feed | Trackback URI

9 Comments Leave a comment

Can I be a monitor?

Yil Tuesday, March 31st at 3:01PM EDT (link)

Wow 3 million for 2 years of overseeing? Using the “Judges don’t have executive experience” theme the guy probably was just overseeing what was going on and he gets 3 million for that? I can see why he’d want to contribute! Christie’s position here isn’t unique so I would be interested to see if other AG’s refused contributions from people they appointed to such positions. The fact that state laws bans such contributions for everyone else does make it look bad.

Of course if you do have executive experience in running a large department you make more money as a monitor… “Pallone raised concerns about Christie’s use of the deferred persecution agreements after discovering that the federal prosecutor picked his old boss, former U.S. Attorney John Ashcroft, as a federal monitor in a no-bid deal worth $28 million to $52 million.” I really want to be a monitor!

Jokes aside Christie has done a good job, but his most memorable statewide role was the splashy ethics inquiry into Senator Menendez right before the 2006 election. If your going to go public right before a big election with an ethics “investigation” which bends the DOJ quiet time rules you’d best make sure it sticks. The fact that it didn’t stick makes it look political especially since it wasn’t against someone in his own party. Compare this with Fitzgerald who didn’t “investigate” but got an actual indictment and then went public.

Yep ... Christie wasn't as smart as those Democrat DOJ staffers that went after Stevens.

Martin Knight Tuesday, March 31st at 6:17PM EDT (link)

Those guys not only prosecuted Stevens in DC, where a Republican is about as likely to escape conviction as a snowball escaping hell in solid form, they leaked slanted info to the AK Press, they also hid exculpatory evidence at trial, and managed to win a conviction right on time for November.

Those guys were pros.



 To me, “consensus” seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects … There are still people in my party who believe in “consensus” politics. I regard them as Quislings, as traitors … I mean it.
      - Margaret Thatcher
NOTE: “consensus” = “Bipartisanship™”/”Centrism™”

 
 

Any Interest in Lonegan?

zarathustra57 Tuesday, March 31st at 3:28PM EDT (link)

Lonegan seems to have stronger, small-government conservative credentials, but would nominating him be handing the governor’s mansion back to a vulnerable Democrat?

Any NJers have any insight?

Yes.

Mark Impomeni Tuesday, March 31st at 4:07PM EDT (link)

I like Lonegan, too. But he is too conservative for the NJ electorate and doesn’t know it. Nominating him against a weakened Corzine would be Brett Schundler all over again: a disappointing close loss in a race we could have won.

———————–
Damn the Obama! Full speed ahead!

Hmmm.

stevman17 Tuesday, March 31st at 5:49PM EDT (link)

I am not so sure Lonegan has no chance. I have no numbers to back this up, obviously, but it seems like more and more Jerseyans I talk to are realizing that the Democrat’s ultimate goal is a statist socialist government. I am pretty sure that if Lonegan runs he could put the fear of big government in many loyal Democrat’s hearts. I know for a fact that most people here just want to work hard, and be left alone. The Conservative message might be able to catch on even in Jersey.

 
 
 

Republicans: Never ever capitulate to Democrat demands.

Martin Knight Tuesday, March 31st at 6:13PM EDT (link)

Especially during a campaign and just as well, when you’re in office.

Never try to go past an allegation i.e. plead to go “back to the real issues” a la George Allen - remember that you’re a Republican and if a subject or incident will harm your campaign, the Press will focus endlessly on it to ensure that it’s the torpedo that hits you below the waterline.

A Democrat can simply issue a short statement to that effect i.e. “move on … nothing to see here” and make a few phone calls to friendly editors and after a day or two, the story is off the headlines.

For a Republican, on the other hand, the only way to get past these things, these contrived “scandals” and “controversies” is through. Get mad. Get in front of cameras, call a Press Conference and make the hacks pushing the story look like idiots.

“Moderates” would wring their hands, but most of the electorate would understand the righteous anger of a man defending his honor.



 To me, “consensus” seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects … There are still people in my party who believe in “consensus” politics. I regard them as Quislings, as traitors … I mean it.
      - Margaret Thatcher
NOTE: “consensus” = “Bipartisanship™”/”Centrism™”

5555555555555555-nt

Mike gamecock DeVine Tuesday, March 31st at 6:25PM EDT (link)

Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson

I will back up GC's incredible line of 5's!...nt

JadedByPolitics Tuesday, March 31st at 6:28PM EDT (link)

….

Whoever has his enemy at his mercy &
does not destroy him is his own enemy

 
 
 

Response from Jersey

daveleroy Wednesday, April 1st at 9:21AM EDT (link)

I have had several discussions with people within NJ GOP and they truly believe that winning the governorship lies solely with Christie and they fear a knock down drag it out fight between Lonegan and Christie for the GOP nomination. It is true that Christie, according to state polls, is the the more formidible challenger to Corzine, but Lonegan is gaining ground. As far as conservative credentials go, Christie cannot hold a candle to Lonegan. Lonegan has twice sued Corzine in court (and lost twice, but he tried) to overturn spending bills that increased state debt against voter wishes via referendums. He also sued McDonald’s for Spanish-language billboards saying they encouraged people not to speak English. Christie, on the other hand, likes to split legal hairs over the definition of “illegal alien.” Example: they only become “illegal” if they are deported and later re-enter the country. If Lonegan, it would be closer than most predict, but Corzine might prevail. If Christie, then he would win according to polling data, but he is more to the center. Corzine is to New Jersey what Bush was to the US in terms of popularity. Hoping the GOP does not shoot itself in its foot in Jersey.

 

Leave a Comment

 

Be respectful, or be banned. No Profanity.