The name Walter Murphy appears on the “no-fly list’ for scrutiny at airline check-in.

“On 1 March 07, I was scheduled to fly on American Airlines to Newark, NJ, to attend an academic conference at Princeton University, designed to focus on my latest scholarly book, Constitutional Democracy, published by Johns Hopkins University Press this past Thanksgiving."

"When I tried to use the curb-side check in at the Sunport, I was denied a boarding pass because I was on the Terrorist Watch list. I was instructed to go inside and talk to a clerk.”

The name Walter Murphy is on the list either for a reason or through a bureaucratic mistake. Let’s assume for the sake of discussion the name is on the list for a reason.

It could be there’s a suspected terrorist by the name of Walter Murphy (IRA for example) and that’s why the name is on the list. That would be the simplest explanation and similar to the problems Sen.Ted Kennedy encountered.

Professor Murphy, emeritus of Princeton University, believes he’s being “singled out for governmental harassment” because he made a speech critical of President Bush.

"I presented my credentials from the Marine Corps to a very polite clerk for American Airlines. One of the two people to whom I talked asked a question and offered a frightening comment: "Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that." I explained that I had not so marched but had, in September, 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the Web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution. "That'll do it," the man said."

For Prof. Murphy’s take to be plausible you have to believe:

• · The name on the list is unique to the professor.
  
  · Prof. Murphy’s speech actually came to the attention of the “no-fly” list makers, prompting his name to be added.
  
  · The exchange between the airline clerk and Prof. Murphy truly happened as quoted.
  
  · Airline clerks have it on good authority that participants in "peace" marches and those making speeches critical of President Bush are often placed on the “no-fly” list solely for these reasons.
  
  · The ”no-fly” list is not only loaded with these names for scrutiny at check-in, but “we ban a lot of people from flying because of that”.
  
  · Well known critics of President Bush and “peace” activists aren’t on the list or banned from flying because that would be too obvious. This form of harassment is reserved by the Bush administration for little known critics and “peace” marchers, with the prior exception of Sen. Kennedy.
  
  · Prof. Murphy isn’t jumping to predisposed conclusions and has no political agenda for publicizing this story.

We assume Prof. Murphy made his flight from Albuquerque, New Mexico to New Jersey without any further inconvenience. We hope he has a speedy trip back home, if he hasn’t already gone.

Blue Jersey’s “hunstu” has written two more blog posts about Chris Christie in a vain attempt to prove the U.S. Attorney’s corruption-busting record is being exaggerated and that he’s involved in some sort of conspiracy to damage Democrats. Posts here and here.

What better way for ‘huntsu” to prove his point than to provide links to sources contradicting his theory?

Such as this link to a September 14, 2006 post by Wally Edge on Politics NJ:

Christie is a Republican who served as a Morris County Freeholder and as a leader of George W. Bush's 2000 presidential campaign in New Jersey, but accusing the corruption-busting federal prosecutor of playing partisan politics is a tough sell.

Or to provide this link to a January 12, 2006 article in the Westfield Leader:

“After helping to put 86 elected officials in jail during his first term as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, Chris Christie last week vowed to continue his fight against public corruption.”

In his most recent post, “huntsu” has compiled a spreadsheet of so-called "investigations" by Chris Christie’s office since 2002. The list is an odd mix of indictments, convictions and other stuff in the news. It’s also loaded with errors and is useless for any meaningful analysis. Below are just a few random examples of the errors contained in their “investigations list”.

David Chang is listed for giving illegal campaign contributions to former Senator Robert Torricelli and Audrey Yu is listed for a related obstruction of justice charge. The spreadsheet indicates neither has been convicted. Of course both were convicted in 2000. However, the Chang and Yu cases predated Christie’s term as U.S. Attorney.

Former Camden mayor Milton Milan is listed for public corruption, but the list falsely indicates there was no conviction. Milan was convicted of various corruption charges in 2000, again predating Christie’s term as U.S. Attorney.

The Democratic State Committee and Jim McGreevey are both listed for “Machiavelli-gate”, but apparently “huntsu” is counting each line item as a separate “investigation” with no outcome. David D'Amiano, is listed as being convicted for arranging bribes, albeit without noting he was the middleman in Machiavelli-gate.

West Long Branch Mayor Paul Zambrano is listed as taking bribes, but not as convicted - Zambrano pled guilty as charged.

West Long Branch councilman Joseph DeLisa is twice listed for taking bribes. He’s shown as not convicted on page 2 and convicted on page 3. DeLisa pled guilty and was sentenced to15 months in federal prison.

Patsy Townsend, Monmouth County deputy fire marshal is listed for taking bribes, but not listed as convicted. Townsend pled guilty.

We could go on, but there’s little point in spending more time on Blue Jersey’s conspiracy theories, useless “investigations” spreadsheet, faulty analysis and baseless charges against U.S. Attorney Chris Christie.

Blue Jersey blogger, “huntsu”, is still on a quest to prove U.S. Attorney, Christ Christie, is a partisan hack. This time he’s taking on The Trentonian's Jeff Edelstein for writing that Christie’s office has charged and convicted 105 people for public corruption.

Sorry, Jeff. But Christie only claims 125 cases including investigations, indictments and convictions as of yesterday, and not the 105 convictions Edelstein claims. If this weren't a column in the Trentonian a retraction would be in order for such a wild exaggeration of fact.

Sorry “huntsu”, but Christie didn’t “claim 125 cases including investigations, indictments and convictions as of yesterday”. A reporter, not Christie, cited a number in the link you provided. There is no mention in the article about the number of public corruption investigations undertaken. Here’s the quote from the linked piece:

Critics have charged that Christie has pursued Democrats to help his party. But his 125 public corruption cases have targeted officials from both parties.

“Hunstu” continues conflating investigations, indictments and convictions. The number of indictments can be determined, but the total number of investigations are not a matter of public record and therefore are unknown. Not every investigation ultimately leads to a person being indicted and of course not everyone indicted will plead guilty or be found guilty at trial. But, so far Christie office has won every case that has reached the courts.

“Huntsu” hasn’t provided the number of people indicted for public corruption, but has arrived at a total of those convicted. We’ll assume his conviction total includes all public corruption cases brought to a conclusion while Christie has been in office. But who knows, “huntsu” hasn’t provided a list. Here’s what he’s come up with:

A review of the NJ US Attorney's Office press releases provides just 59 convictions, 21 of Republicans, 37 of Democrats and one we could not determine a party affiliation for. That leaves another 46 for Edelstein to find. Or retract.

But Edelstein's number was about investigations, so let's see if that proves the point.

Edelstein's number did not include “investigations”, just indictments and convictions as is quite clear from his column.

“Huntsu” also lays this on his readers:

Of the 150 people we found who have been investigated, indicted or convicted only 33 are Republicans and 112 are Democrats. Five are unknown.

We'll do a more in-depth analysis in a later post, but the preliminary review shows that Democrats are 300 percent more likely to be investigated than Republicans, a number far out of whack with the true ratio of party identification or elected officials. Dems are only 175 percent as likely to be convicted.

First. There is no way to know the number of Democrats and the number of Republicans who have been investigated by the U.S. Attorney’s office. The vast majority of investigations only come to light when someone is indicted or the media reports that subpoenas have been issued.

The number of subpoenas issued does not equal the number of criminal investigations underway. Hundreds of subpoenas can be issued in the investigation of just one person’s possible wrongdoing. And one subpoena may be all that’s necessary to prosecute hundreds of people.

Second. Investigations are launched on the basis of information and evidence of possible wrongdoing, not on a party affiliation quota system. The same holds true for indictments.

Third. Public corruption cases include those involving public employees of every stripe, not just elected officials.

Fourth. This is speculation on our part, but we’ll go out on a limb and say the number of public employees who are Democrats far outweighs the number who are Republicans. If we’re correct, it stands to reason a far greater number of people in position to commit corruption offenses are Democrats and therefore, more likely to get caught committing an offense.

Fifth. Certainly there are people who have been indicted, but yet to be found guilty or not guilty. That would be because their case has yet to come before the court. However, every person charged with political corruption, whose case has come before the court, has been convicted. That would be 100% of Republicans and 100% of Democrats.

Blue Smoke On U.S. Attorney Chris Christie

Blue Jersey blogger “huntsu” has written two new posts about our state’s U.S. Attorney, Chris Christie. From the second most recent:

One of the main themes of our recent coverage of Chris Christie is his largely undeserved reputation for bipartisan investigations. For one, his biggest Republican cases -- Treffinger and Monmouth County -- both predate his taking office.

“Bipartisan investigations”? Undoubtedly, a sizable number of the employees, 127 attorneys and 118 support staff, working for U.S. Attorney Chris Christie, are Democrats. Ralph J. Marra, Jr, is a career professional in the U.S. Attorney’s Office District of New Jersey. He’s Christie’s First Assistant U.S. Attorney and a Democrat.

Marra has been in charge of political corruption cases since Christie arrived, and he's a lifelong Democrat who says he tells his children to vote a straight Democratic ticket while "skipping the ones who are crooks."

How many political corruption cases involving Democrats and how many involving Republicans has Christie’s office investigated? How many are being investigated now? It wouldn’t surprise us if investigations of Democrats far out numbered Republicans, they don’t call our state Blue Jersey for nothing. But we have no idea what the breakdown might be. “Huntsu” wouldn’t know either, unless he’s working in the U.S. Attorney’s office and keeping score. Investigations are not a matter of public record.

Chris Christie has an excellent reputation for prosecuting crimes regardless of the party affiliation of the perpetrator. That includes political corruption cases, for which there is a public record. The Star-Ledger had this to say on March 11, 2007:

Christie's office has brought about 115 official corruption cases over the past five years. His office, rightly so, has not made an official tally of the party affiliations of those indicted, but, given the numerous Monmouth County officials snagged, Republicans have probably far outnumbered Democrats in the dock.

Has Christie’s office overlooked political corruption on the part of New Jersey Republicans? Has he investigated, indicted, arrested and prosecuted state Democrats without evidence of possible wrong doing? We can’t find any examples and “huntsu” doesn’t provide any. As a matter of public record, Christie hasn’t lost a single political corruption case.

“Huntsu’s” latest Christie post takes on a second Tom Moran column defending Christie:

The factual error is the assertion that Christie has been under attack for "more than five years." Assuming Moran spiked this column on Wednesday for publication Friday, Christie had been in office exactly four years and two months that day.

As with his previous post, “huntsu” continues to have a problem with dates. Christie has been U.S. Attorney for five years, as he was sworn into office on January 17, 2002. Unlike “huntsu”, most people wouldn’t consider crimes committed after that date to “predate his taking office”.

Check out the dates in the Monmouth County “Bid Rig” cases (see below) and not the dates of indictment, but the dates the crimes were allegedly committed. The “predating his taking office” accusation is obviously false.

If Treffinger’s successful indictment on October. 24, 2002, arrest on October 28, 2002 and guilty plea on May 20, 2003 shouldn’t count towards Christie’s political corruption case record, then subtract one from his total.

Anyone who wants to spend the time totaling political corruption indictments during Christie’s tenure, tallying convictions the U.S. Attorney won at trial vs. the pretrial guilty pleas he obtained, it’s all there waiting to be counted. Here’s the link. A bit more work would be required to figure out the party affiliation of the corrupt politicians caught in the act since Christie became been the U.S. Attorney. Perhaps “huntsu” can enlighten us with a list.

Here’s the rundown on the Monmouth County prosecutions by Christie’s office:

Keyport Mayor John J. Merla took $9,000 in cash on Sept. 11, 2003 and between December 2003 and February 2004, accepted another $2,500.

Keyport Councilman Robert L. Hyer took a $5,000 payment on June 18, 2003.

West Long Branch Mayor Paul Zambrano accepted $5,000 in cash on Sept. 30, 2003. On Nov. 18, 2003 he accepted two envelopes of cash - one with $1,500 for him and the other with $1,000 to be given to another unidentified official. On Jan. 29, 2004 he accepted a cash payment of $4,000 and another for $1,500 on Nov. 17, 2004.

West Long Branch Councilman Joseph DeLisa accepted an envelope with $1,500 in cash on Nov. 18, 2003.

Hazlet Mayor Paul Coughlin took $3,000 on May 19, 2004.

Councilman and police commissioner Thomas A. Greenwald collected a $2,500 "fee" for laundering $25,000, on Nov. 5, 2004. On Nov. 11, 2004 he took a money laundering fee of $2,000. He kept a total of $24,500 in "fees" for additional money laundering transactions in 2005 on Jan. 17, Jan. 20 and Feb. 4.

Middletown Committeeman Raymond O'Grady took one payment for $1,000 on Oct. 21, 2004, and another for $5,000 on Feb. 17, 2005.

Assistant supervisor at the Monmouth County Division of Highways, Thomas Broderick, accepted a payment of $5,000 on May 4, 2004.

Deputy Monmouth County fire marshal, and code enforcement and emergency management official in Neptune Township, Patsy Townsend took $1,000 in cash in November 2004.

Deputy Mayor of Neptune, Richard Iadanza, accepted a cash payment of $1,500 on June 25, 2004 and another $1,500 on Nov. 17, 2004.

Asbury Park Councilman John J. Hamilton, Jr. had a paved driveway valued at about $5,000 or $6,000 for installed for free at Hamilton's home in August 2001, in exchange for the promise of steering municipal contracts to the cooperating witness.

Former Monmouth County Freeholder Harry Larrison, Jr., was charged with accepting cash bribes and corrupt payments totaling at least $8,500. Larrison accepted $5,000 in cash in 2001 or 2002 from a Monmouth County official who received the money from a developer on Larrison's behalf. Larrison received another cash payment of $3,500 from a second developer in 2002 or 2003.

Marlboro Township Mayor Matthew Scannapieco, received bribes of approximately $135,000 between 2001 and 2003 in conjunction with three development deals.

Commissioner of the Marlboro Township Municipal Utilities Authority and its chairman from February 2002 through January 2004, admitted that in December 2002, he attempted to bribe a member of the Marlboro Township Council, on behalf of a builder. He admitted that in 2001, he paid bribes totaling $6,200 from another builder to two Marlboro officials. He admitted that in 2001, he offered a $25,000 bribe, on behalf of a builder, to a member of the Manalapan Planning Board. He admitted that in 2004, he extorted $15,000 from a builder.

Superintendent of the Monmouth County Division of Bridges, Anthony Palughi, admitted that during 2004 he accepted payments totaling $12,500 dollars, from a confidential FBI informant and an undercover FBI agent, to reward him for arranging corrupt payments to be made to other Monmouth County officials.