So Christie Wasn't Fired and Other Conspiracies

Tom Moran’s column today is about New Jersey’s “left-wing noise machine” and the “conspiracy theorists who consider U.S. Attorney Chris Christie a partisan hack” because he’s investigating the possibility Democrats might be involved in political corruption. This is a truly shocking development considering New Jersey’s place in “the unholy trinity of politically corrupt states”.

With every major city and all three branches of state government controlled by Democrats, not to mention the majority of congressional seats, checking up on Democrats holding New Jersey’s purse strings might be a smart move.

Still, the lefty conspiracy theory holds that without political pressure from the Bush administration Christie’s investigations of Senator Bob Menendez and more recently, a boatload of Democrats seated in Trenton wouldn’t be happening. After all, the New Jersey State Attorney hasn’t noticed any problems, just Christie.

But in that case, we would surely have heard from one or two of the career prosecutors in his [Christie's] office by now, at least anonymously. Why would a guy like Ralph Marra, Christie's first assistant and a Democrat, go along with a partisan scam?

Why indeed?

Democrats and lefty bloggers began their attack on Christie long before the Bush administration replaced eight U.S. Attorneys - right about the time Christie’s office started investigating high-profile New Jersey politicians with a “D” next to their name.

One senior Democrat who asked not to be named said a group of "high-end" Democrats met to discuss this recently, and all felt the firings strengthened their case that Christie is using his office to sabotage Democrats.

That view is gaining some ground. The lefty blog BlueJersey.com suggested Christie has kept his job because he is doing the White House's bidding by going after Democrats on corruption charges. And New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote that the firings make the bias charges against Christie "quite plausible.".

Gee, it’s almost sounds like a coordinated attack on Christie from the left. And funny, the New York Times and Blue Jersey bloggers were a bit more skeptical about Bob Menendez when Jon Corzine appointed him as his replacement in the U.S. Senate.

There have been 75 corruption indictments in New Jersey over the last four years. The public has a right to yearn for a break from the past, and Mr. Menendez does not represent a clean slate. – NYT:December 9, 2005

Wasn’t it the Star-Ledger that uncovered the questionable rental deal involving Menendez that led to Christie’s investigation?

Sorry, but Menendez asked for that one. He chose to rent his home to a group that received his help in Washington. Should a federal prosecutor look the other way when faced with such a clear conflict?

Apparently, the answer from the left is yes, if the politician is a “progressive” Democrat.

And didn’t Senator Menendez “reach out” to the U.S. Attorney's Office about the subpoenas Christie served on the non-profit receiving Menendez's “help”? Yes he did. Does that “yes” by Menendez count on Blue Jersey’s list of politicians contacting the U.S. Attorney?

More recently, Democrats have been grumbling about the subpoenas in Trenton aimed at finding criminal abuses in the state's budget process. But, please -- anyone who has watched the way Democrats grab money for pet causes in the final days would agree that it's an excellent place to sniff around for corruption.

Christie has prosecuted more than 115 public corruption cases in New Jersey since becoming U.S. attorney in 2002, and he hasn't lost a single one. That’s the real problem Democrats have with Christie, he’s just too darn good at his job. Can’t stop the corrupt gravy train that’s helping to bankrupt the state - that would be an abuse of political power.