Weight: —

/99 Comments/in /by

picture-129.pngOkay, this may appear to be really catty, but I’m doing it to make a point, so bear with me.

How does a guy who is large enough such that the cops stopping him for multiple traffic violations didn’t write his weight on the ticket fit into what appears to be a sedan with his wife, his four kids (one of whom–now 5–would have been in a car seat in 2005) and one of the AUSAs who works for him? 

Because that appears to be the story Chris Christie is now telling about his traffic stop in 2005.

The reason the cops now give for letting Christie drive away in an uninsured, unregistered vehicle is that he had his kids with him.

[Lambertville Police Director Bruce] Coccuzza says, "He indentified himself."

Why was Christie allowed to drive away despite having no proof of insurance and no valid registration card? Coccuzza says, "He said he had insurance and he’s a person that produced federal I.D. credentials so you could probably assume that what he was saying was the truth……..is it consistent with the policy? No, but you do have special circumstances."

Coccuzza says the "special circumstances" were Christie’s children in the car not his job title. He says the fact that Christie was U.S. Attorney probably didn’t even register with officer at the scene, "From what I recollect I think she (the officer) even said at the time, ‘If wasn’t for the fact that you had a car full of children this car would be towed.’"

Of course, they would presumably have already seen the kids when they called the tow truck, but set that aside for the moment.

I’m more interested in how seven people (presumably including at least one car seat) fit in in a 4-door car.

Now there are several possible explanations. Perhaps only some of Christie’s kids were with him. Perhaps they left the then-one-year old and the then-four-year old at home with a sitter and brought the then-eleven and then-nine year old. Perhaps the car was an SUV–a five door car that fits seven apparently described as a four door. 

Read more →

Share this entry

The Prosecutor with Whom Chris Christie Has an “Ongoing Financial Relationship” Resigns

/40 Comments/in /by

Remember how Chris Christie told a bunch of Republicans that he still had a bunch of AUSAs in NJ? Remember how he had an "ongoing financial relationship" with one of them, Michele Brown, to the tune of $46,000?

Well, he’s "got" one fewer AUSAs now.

The federal prosecutor at the center of the controversy over a loan made by New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie has resigned.

In her resignation letter dated today, Michele Brown, the acting first assistant U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, said it has been an "honor and privilege" to serve, but she does not want to be "a distraction" for the office.

I wonder if she really resigned, or got resigned, when it became clear that it’s not cool for federal prosecutors to accept loans from their boss. Or maybe she didn’t want to be a distraction from Christie’s campaign?

Though I suspect we haven’t heard the last of this scandal.

Update: Nope, we haven’t. It appears that Brown was getting some bonuses.

The office has not disclosed Brown’s salary or raises, but Christie said she was at the top of the pay scale, so she got no salary bumps along with her recent promotions. She and others in the office did receive undisclosed bonuses, however.

Can someone explain how this is different from Margaret Chiara, who was fired because she allegedly gave bonuses to her favorite AUSA?

Share this entry

Feinstein Issues Statement On IG; Misunderstands Army Field Manual

/24 Comments/in , , , /by

Senator Dianne Feinstein of California has issued an official statement "On Release of Documents Related to CIA Interrogation and Detention Program and Renewed Commitment to Army Field Manual Standard for Interrogations":

“The documents released today provide evidence that the CIA detention and interrogation program exceeded its authority as follows:

· Beating a detainee in Afghanistan, who later died in custody, with a heavy flashlight;
· Threatening a detainee with a handgun and a power drill;
· Staging a mock execution;
· Threatening to kill a detainee’s family;
· Choking a detainee to the point of unconsciousness;
· Applying waterboarding in ways that beyond what the Office of Legal Counsel had authorized, and not informing OLC of how waterboarding was being done in practice prior to the Inspector General’s report.

The IG report also noted a case in which the interrogators at a ‘black site’ recommended ending the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on a detainee, but were overruled by officials at CIA headquarters and told to resume waterboarding the detainee.

I first learned of this and other IG reports, starting in September of 2006. I expressed significant concern with the program and introduced legislation in 2007 to limit CIA interrogations to techniques authorized by the Army Field Manual. This provision was passed by Congress in 2008, but was vetoed by President Bush. I reintroduced this legislation in January.

President Obama has committed to requiring that the CIA only use the proven and effective interrogation techniques authorized by the Army Field Manual, and I strongly agree with that position.

The Senate Intelligence Committee is conducting a comprehensive, bipartisan study of all aspects of CIA’s detention and interrogation program. This study includes how the program was created and operated, how it was briefed to the Congress and other parts of the Executive Branch, its compliance with guidance from the Department of Justice, and the information produced. The study is ongoing. We have reviewed thousands of documents on a number of high-value detainees, and will review the cases of all such detainees.

The Committee’s study will continue until we complete our work, regardless of any decision by Attorney General Holder on whether to proceed to a criminal investigation. I Read more →

Share this entry

IG Report: Working Thread

/116 Comments/in /by

Spencer and the Washington Independent have posted the documents.

There is significantly more in here. 

One thing to note: IG was complaining about water dousing in 2004. And then they wrote the 2005 memos to include water dousing, done on Hassan Ghul, sometime in 2004. Interesting timing.

The report started because of illegal techniques used with al-Nashiri, among others. Yet Durham hasn’t found any reason to show that the torture tapes were destroyed because of that?

It says CTC with Office of Technical Services came up with the techniques. I suspect Jeff Kaye will have a lot to say about that combination.

Note, it doesn’t say that OGC (John Rizzo) was also working with DOD’s GC (Jim Haynes) to come up with the torture techniques, thereby hiding SERE’s involvement.

"OGC briefed DO officers" at interrogation sites on what was legal. Doesn’t say whether OGC briefed the contractors. But in any case, Rizzo bears some responsibility here, right?

Okay, this is significant.

With respect to two detainees at those sites, the use and frequency of one EIT, the waterboard, went beyond the projected use of the technique as originally described to DoJ. The Agency, on 29 July 2003, secured oral DoJ concurrence that certain deviations are not significant for the purposes of DoJ’s legal opinions.

Remember, this is two days after they got the oral okay in the first place (based on the JPRA document), and two days before DOJ wrote the memo. Yet the memo still used restrictions that they had just orally okayed the torturers to exceed. 

This also suggests the techniques, as we suspected, preceded the authorization.

Page 7:

The DCI Guidelines … still leave substantial room for misinterpretation and do not cover all Agency detention and interrogation activities.

Also page 7:

Officers are concerned that public revelation of the CTC Program will seriously damage Agency officers’ personal reputations, as well as the reputation and effectiveness of the Agency itself.

No mention of international law or, more importantly, endangering Americans captured by others. That’s nice.

On page 11, they’ve kept two paragraphs describing the legal basis for the program redacted.

Page 12

OGC shared these "draft" papers [on techniques] with Agency officers responsible [for the interrogations?]

Page 13

…in late 2001, CIA had tasked an independent contractor psychologist, … to research and write a paper on Al-Qa’ida’s resistance to interrogation techniques.

Note this shifts the chronology SASC gives, suggesting CIA started it. It also doesn’t say who in CIA asked Read more →

Share this entry

The Republican Stimulus Package

/15 Comments/in /by

viagra.thumbnail.jpgThe AP FOIAed Mark Sanford’s calendars and discovered him traipsing about on some undisclosed trips using supporters’ planes. Make sure you read through to the second page, though, where the AP discloses that the Republican Governor’s Association paid for one of Sanford’s nookie runs.

Sanford arranged to meet with his mistress in one of the 2008 RGA trips that he did not disclose. He had been traveling to Ireland for RGA in November, and arranged a meeting with the woman when he returned, according to records he released after the affair became public.

So let’s see. The RGA paid for Mark Sanford’s nookie runs. The NRSC doubled the salary of John Ensign’s mistress and put her son on the payroll. The RNC paid to keep Palin in Prada (which may not have helped her sex life but it sure made for some starbursts in Rich Lowry’s living room).

And yet the NRCC is the Republican entity with the ethics and accounting problems?

(Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/loauc/ / CC BY-SA 2.0)

Share this entry

Christie’s AUSAs Still Won’t Respond to Corzine’s FOIA Requests

/33 Comments/in /by

Jon Corzine’s campaign wants some more information about just what Chris Christie was doing at the US Attorney’s office while he was handing out multi-million dollar deals to his friends. 

So the Corzine campaign has submitted 18 FOIA requests for information on Christie’s tenure as US Attorney. They have submitted them, each time, to the Executive Office of US Attorneys, which keeps kicking the FOIAs down to the NJ US Attorney’s office, where they appear to be routinely ignored. So today, the Corzine took the next step in its attempts to figure out just what Christie was doing at the US Attorney office.

The campaign filed eight administrative challenges – representing 18 separate requests – with the United States Department of Justice’s Office of Information and Privacy. Despite repeated efforts by the campaign to obtain the information, beginning in March 2009, it has repeatedly been told that the failures to fulfill its requests lie with the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey. The records the campaign is seeking from Christie’s tenure as U.S. Attorney include: budgets, travel expenses and schedules – even public ones.

"The United States Attorney’s office has many fine, dedicated, professional lawyers," said Corzine ’09 campaign strategist, Tom Shea. "But, in light of recent reports that Acting U.S. Attorney Ralph Marra is under investigation to determine if he has used the office to help further the Christie campaign, Second Assistant U.S. Attorney Michele Brown has an ongoing financial relationship with Christie and Christie was communicating with Karl Rove about his run for governor from that office, we feel it is even more important we receive the information requested."

The campaign is also seeking details of no-bid contracts Christie awarded while U.S. Attorney, including a $52 million contract to his former boss, ex-Attorney General John Ashcroft. In addition it has demanded Mr. Christie’s communications with former Bush political advisor Karl Rove, and communications between Mr. Christie and current officials in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey since Mr. Christie resigned as U.S. Attorney.

I’m actually somewhat agnostic on this. Perhaps DOJ is not turning over the requested materials for the same reasons DOJ is protecting Dick Cheney’s PatFitz interview–because they’re trying to avoid any appearance of political taint by letting Republicans avoid any scrutiny after the fact. Or it could just be that the Read more →

Share this entry

700,000 Cars in One Month

/88 Comments/in /by

picture-125.thumbnail.pngCash for Clunkers will, on Monday at 8 PM, have silica liquid injected in its engine and stopped. Or rather, the program will offer rebates for no more new deals after that time.

The U.S. government will shut down its cash-for-clunkers program at 8 p.m. Monday, in a bid to avoid car dealers and shoppers from claiming more than the $3 billion set aside for the program.

The decision means that the program originally expected to generate 250,000 vehicle sales over three months will have likely triggered more than 700,000 in less than one month. While it accomplished its goal of destroying gas guzzlers and spurring the U.S. auto industry to boost production, it’s larger effects on the economy and environment will be debated for years to come.

I’ve been measuring the effects of the program more anecdotally. We know that GM brought back workers in Orion Township, MI, and Lordstown, OH, to make more Malibus and Cobalts for the program–and most other manufacturers had already brought back workers. We know the program cleaned out inventory that had been stuck at the dealers. And I saw a bunch of brand new (!) small cars on the way home from Pittsburgh–particularly a bunch of Saturn Auras (which, with the Malibu, is the biggest car that qualifies across the board for the full benefit). Oh, and I saw a pretty cool Saturn Aura ad last night, too–I think the C4C program allowed manufacturers to free up some money for advertising that has gotten people in dealers.

Who knows whether all this excitement will tail off after Monday. Who knows whether seeing the interest in efficient, smaller cars, will shift the emphasis on these cars going forward? But for now, it has given one of our key industries–and small businesses all over the country–a quick shot in the arm.

Share this entry

Red Alert! Bush Was Going to Lose!

/38 Comments/in /by

Tom Ridge will apparently confirm everything we suspected: he was ordered (by whom?!) to raise the terror alert going into the 2004 election so Bush could fear-monger his way to a second term. But it’s the (yet more) evidence of Bush’s sheer incompetence sounds more interesting.

Ridge was never invited to sit in on National Security Council meetings; was "blindsided" by the FBI in morning Oval Office meetings because the agency withheld critical information from him; found his urgings to block Michael Brown from being named head of the emergency agency blamed for the Hurricane Katrina disaster ignored; and was pushed to raise the security alert on the eve of President Bush’s re-election, something he saw as politically motivated and worth resigning over.

In particular, I look forward to knowing precisely what kind of warning Ridge gave against hiring Heckova Job Brownie. And I’m sure those in New Orleans are sort of curious, too.

Share this entry

Chris Christie, Former US Attorney, Claims He’s Still “Got” Federal Prosecutors, Talked with Them about State Jobs

/74 Comments/in /by

Chris Christie’s ongoing ties with his old friends at the US Attorney’s office just got much worse.

First we learned that Chris Christie gave a highly inappropriate loan to one of his Assistant US Attorneys, Michele Brown, when he was her boss. Given his seeming magical coordination of campaign events with high profile busts by his former office, that "ongoing financial relationship" is highly suspect. Then we learned that DOJ’s Office of Public Responsibility is already investigating whether acting US Attorney Ralph Marra made inappropriate politicized comments when he announced the politicos, rabbis, and kidney busts last month.

In other words, there’s already growing evidence that Chris Christie is mobilizing ongoing relationships with friends at the US Attorney’s office to help his campaign against Governor Corzine.

But that was before we learned that Christie was filmed on February 28 at the Breakfast Bagels with Baroni event in West Windsor, promising to give his former AUSAs jobs throughout state government, speaking of them as if they were still "his" AUSAs, and admitting that he had already had a conversation about this with them about those jobs.

You know, we’re going to ferret out waste and fraud and abuse in the government. I think you know I’ll do that better than anybody. I’ve got a group of assistant U.S. attorneys sitting down in Newark still doing their job. But let me tell you, they are watching the newspapers. And after we win this election, I’m going to take a whole group of them to Trenton with me and put them in every one of the departments because they saw a lot of waste and abuse being investigated while we were in the U.S. Attorney’s office that didn’t rise to the level of a crime. So I told them, the good news is, when we get to Trenton we don’t have to worry about beyond a reasonable doubt anymore.

So here’s a poll. Which of the following Christie statements do you find the most damning?

  1. I’ve got AUSAs in Newark
  2. I’m going to take a whole group of them to Trenton
  3. I told them I was going to take them to Trenton
  4. We’ve agreed to do away with “beyond a reasonable doubt” when we get there 

Enter your pick for most damning in the comments.

Share this entry

Chris “Nervous Wreck” Christie

/33 Comments/in /by

The reporter that broke the story of Chris Christie’s unusual loan to his subordinate, Michele Brown, raises some interesting questions in a blog post, mostly about why the US Attorney’s office is at the same time refusing to comment, but also claiming that "everyone" knew of this unusual loan. (h/t mb)

There is also this lingering question about who in the office knew what and when. Christie says Ralph Marra, the Acting US Attorney knew about it, as did the “whole front office.” Well didn’t someone question the wisdom of this? I mean aren’t these people supposed to be the cleanest and most ethical people in NJ???? We have now determined that Christie was thinking about a run for Governor as early as 2006 when he spoke to Karl Rove on the phone. Christie also says the question came up so many times during his tenure that he once needed to issue a press release denying that he was planning to run.

A spokesman for the US Attorney’s Office said they won’t have any further comment since they like to keep the office separate from the “political season.” Well, that seems like a wise idea…but then why does everyone in the front office know about this financial arrangement between the now Republican Gubernatorial Candidate and Michele Brown? If this loan was made purely as an act of friendship ( as Christie claims ) it shouldn’t be anyone else’s business. And if all these people in the office knew about it, why wasn’t it properly disclosed?

Finally, Christie promoted Brown twice…once before the loan and once afterwards. We have heard some grumbling complaints about favorable treatment toward Brown in the office, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for anyone to go public.

Someone very close to Christie told me that last night that Christie was a “nervous wreck.” I wonder why. [my emphasis]

I will repeat a comment I’ve made in threads: Christie’s financial relationship with Michele Brown closely resembles the alleged relationship between Margaret Chiara (the US Attorney from Western Michigan) and her subordinate, Leslie Hagen. (The two were also accused of a lesbian relationship.) Chiara and Hagen both got fired (though Hagen has been rehired); Christie and Brown did not, and Brown has been promoted since and remains at the US Attorney’s office in spite of taking an inappropriate loan.

So what explains the disparate treatment?

Share this entry