Call for Letters to the Editor: Chris Christie's Lie

by: huntsu

Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 03:38:45 PM EDT

( - promoted by Juan Melli)

Last week we caught Chris Christie in a pretty blatant contradiction in stories he's told to reporters, so blatant that we feel comfortable calling it a lie. No one we've contacted -- reporters, editors, columnists, bloggers, my dog and hamster -- have been able to explain the completely different stories he told, and different reporters have verified that they repeated Christie's stories correctly.

Yet for some reason not one blog (besides BJ) or newspaper has reported this. So we're asking you, the great Blue Jersey activist crowd, to write to the newspapers that reported the different stories and note the contradiction.

Star Ledger: eletters@starledger.com
NY Times: letters@nytimes.com
Washington Post: letters@washpost.com
Daily Record: Web Form

The Star Ledger, Washington Post and New York Times all reported that Christie learned that he had been on the list to be fired but had been removed in March during a single phone call. Tom Moran in the Star Ledger included details that Christie was by a pool with his family on vacation in Florida when he was e-mailed to call in, and went inside the room to make the call. His reaction in March was "completely stunned" (NYT - 5/18), "completely shocked" (WaPo - 5/17), and "speechless" (SL - 5/18).

But in a recent Daily Record editorial board, and we have confirmed this with someone who was in the room, Chris Christie told a completely different story. According to this version, Christie was told on the phone in December 2006 that he was on the list and it wasn't until January 2007 he learned on another call that he was off the list.

This is not a case of someone being confused, or misremembering a few facts about something that happened a long time ago. Every specific of the story -- how he found out, when he found out, how many calls it took, what state he was in -- is different in the two versions.

This is a case of a US Attorney lying at least once, and maybe twice since we can't rule out that neither story is the truth. Given that the whole US Attorney firing scandal has been driven by lies and misdirection, having another player in the scandal lying to the public and media is a big deal.

So we're asking you to write just a couple paragraphs -- no more than 200 words -- noting that Christie lied and that he did so on the record. Send them to the papers that were told the different stories, and let's hope they get in.

Good luck!

huntsu :: Call for Letters to the Editor: Chris Christie's Lie

Tags: daily record, Tom Moran, scandal, US Attorney, lie, Chris Christie, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Call for Letters to the Editor: Chris Christie's Lie | 4 comments

Why is this a big deal? (0.00 / 0)

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just wondering what the broader significance is beyond the obvious inconsistency. All that immediately comes to mind is that he may have pretended that his job was in jeopardy to garner sympathy and attention and to distance himself from Bush & Gonzalez (a lot of that going around). Am I missing something?

by: lonemorriscodem @ Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 21:20:19 PM UTC

Because ... (4.00 / 1)

Christie portrays himself as a shining knight in pursuit of all the crooked pols at the same time he is telling fibs to the media.

This is not a small lie, but an outright fabrication. One of these stories is a patent falsehood he told to reporters in order to put himself in a heroic, maligned light as he sets himself up for a statewide run for office.

The media has portrayed him as a hero, and he is lying to them. That should, for the media, be an issue.

Further, it's not that he was pretending his job was in jeopardy -- his name was on the list and his job was then on the line.

Frankly, there appears to be no benefit to him for this lie. How does it help him to be notified earlier rather than later, over the holidays instead of on vacation, in one call instead of two, etc? It doesn't, and when someone lies for no benefit to themself they are just lying for lyings sake.

And that's not something you want in a US Attorney, a Senator or a Governor.

by: huntsu @ Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 21:27:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I see three other possible reasons. (0.00 / 0)

If the March story is true and he's lying now, perhaps he is trying to make the US Attorney scandal a little less scandalous. The argument being, they warned me that this might be coming and then let me know my job was safe. Therefore the firings weren't handled as shoddily as it seems.

If this most recent story is true, it makes one wonder what he did between December and January to get off the list. The earlier lie might have been to protect himself.

Third option: He heard a rumor or had some inside information in December and January. The orginal lie was a reflex to protect his "source" and this most recent story was closer to the truth.

by: ArgusRun @ Fri Aug 10, 2007 at 02:35:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]