ethics 
|
|
Fri Apr 03, 2009 at 10:36:33 AM EDT
|
|
The ethical problems and conflicts of interest just keep rolling in and coming back to haunt Chris Christie. The so-called squeaky clean crime fighter is looking more and more like the same corrupt Republican whose motives and hidden agenda are more for protecting himself, his friends and his family than it is for the people he was supposed to be fighting for as US Attorney and who he is supposed to fight for if he is Governor.
While it is noble of him to issue guidelines for ethics reform, it would be nicer if he were to live up to ethical standards that would make Christie-the-US Attorney salivate in terms of investigating and prosecuting.
He now has to answer two sets of questions regarding questionable (at best) practices he engaged in while US Attorney that certainly would make anyone truly interested in justice and "the rule of law" question his priorities and loyalties. First, Congressmen Pallone and Pascrell introduced a bill that would regulate the use of deferred prosecutions - a practice that not only delays justice from being served in the first place, but one that Christie used in highly questionable circumstances as well as actions that have the appearance of a quid pro quo involving millions of dollars and his own brother getting away with serious crimes in a stock fraud case.
Consider the following series of events:
- Christie's brother was a top executive at Spear, Leeds & Kellogg ("SLK"), and was accused of making improper stock trades between 1999 and 2003;
- SLK settled for millions of dollars and a number of high and mid level employees were indicted or pled guilty to crimes associated with the stock fraud. Christie was the highest level individual who escaped indictment by Kelly;
- In September 2007 (while Christie was still US Attorney), he gave a millions+ dollar monitoring contract to David Kelly, who was the US Attorney that investigated the stock fraud case against SLK and Christie's brother.
- In 2008, Christie's brother settled with the SEC and wasn't charged with any crimes.
And what was Chris Christie's response to this major red flag? Christie said yesterday that he had never had a conversation with Kelly about his brother's SEC problems. He said he gave Kelly the monitoring contract because "he was a great prosecutor who ran one of the biggest offices in the country and I needed a tough guy."
Yeah, sure. I'm sure "Christie the US Attorney" would have let that explanation go without any investigation.
If that wasn't enough, he also gave a $27 - $52 million no-bid deal to his former boss, John Ashcroft's firm to do monitoring over another entity that he was investigating. And just recently, it was discovered that Christie accepted close to $25,000 in contributions from a law firm that he gave another lucrative no-bid contract to.
It's time that "no-bid Christie" cleans up his act and answers questions as to whether he would have investigated and prosecuted someone who had the above facts and actions. My guess is that if he says he wouldn't, then he is a liar as well as someone with hidden motives.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Sat Mar 28, 2009 at 10:45:05 AM EDT
|
I wrote the other day about news that Chris Christie had taken nearly $24,000 from people tied to a law firm he awarded a $3million contract. But wait, there's more:Before leaving office as U.S. Attorney last year, Christopher Christie hired Samuel Stern, the son of former U.S. District Court Judge Herbert Stern, to work as a federal prosecutor. Samuel Stern started work last month in the Appeals Division of the U.S. Attorney's office in Newark. Hand out contract, check. Hand out job, check. Take money in return for your campaign, check. The US Attorney's office had no comment, but confirmed the hiring. This is what the American Spectator had to say before this latest news of family ties was added: But there's no law that says you can't take a STATE contribution from someone you gave a FEDERAL no bid contract to. And that's exactly what Chris Christie, the GOP favorite to get the nod to take on Jon Corzine in the Fall has done. As U.S. Attorney, Christie gave the firm of Stern and Kilcullen a 7 million dollar no-bid contract. Now that Christie's running for Governor, the partners and their wives contributed $23,800 to Christie's campaign. Since New Jersey has 2-1 matching funds, it's more like they gave him over $70,000.
While this is not illegal, it sure looks terrible, especially when you consider that Christie has based his entire campaign on ethics and cleaning up New Jersey. Move along, nothing to see here. Aside from the actual issue of the job and contributions, that line does point to the glaring hypocrisy of the issue when you compare it to the rhetoric of his campaign language. I would love to see the Republican reaction to a story like this if it was a Democrat and these details came out. It must just be ok if you are a Republican.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 09:55:01 PM EST
|
|
The December 21, 2008 Star-Ledger quoted Governor Corzine vowing that his two concerns for his re-election bid will be finances and ethics. People in New Jersey who follow politics know why he said that. He is concerned about the public perception on finances because his toll hike plan was a bust. He is concerned about the public perception of ethics because former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie has put away 130 corrupt New Jersey politicians while his Attorney General has been wasting taxpayer money litigating to keep the public from reading his e-mails.
On behalf of the crime victims and their advocates, he has much to learn - about squandering government money and ethics.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 838 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 01:04:35 AM EDT
|
|
Assembly Minority Leader Alex DeCroce (R-Parsippany) recently stated that Senate President and former Acting Governor Richard Codey (D-West Orange) attempted to strong arm him into discontinuing his efforts to investigate a legislative slush fund that was responsible for the now-infamous "Christmas Tree" grants currently under federal investigation. He claimed that Senator Codey offered him state grant money and threatened him so that DeCroce's pursuit of information about the slush fund would be stalled. DeCroce agreed to a lie detector test to 'prove' his assertions; as of this writing, Codey has not. If DeCroce's allegations are true, they are not only damaging to Senator Codey and the Democratic Legislature politically, but they have serious legal implications, as well. DeCroce had a responsibility to alert the proper authorities to these allegations when they occurred, not two years after the fact; the public should have been informed in due time, as well.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 410 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 13, 2008 at 11:41:00 AM EDT
|
This came through last week and can probably be filed under better late than never:A bipartisan group of legislators in the Senate and Assembly wants to require lawmakers to list their income from public sources. Currently, they only have to report the sources of the income, not the actual dollar amounts earned.
The revised rules also would require lawmakers to report any financial stake they had in a no-bid contract, and impact their spouses and dependent children. PolitickerNJ had an interesting observation about the legislation:The announcement that an eclectic group of lawmakers have introduced a bill to require legislators to disclose their person income from public sources was a direct shot at Senate President Richard Codey. The proposed law would force legislators, their spouses and their dependent children to report direct and indirect financial stakes in no-bid public contracts -- something Codey has been strongly opposed to. The legislation is sponsored by Senators Fred Madden, Kevin O'Toole, Stephen Sweeney, Tom Kean Jr., Loretta Weinberg and Bill Baroni and Assembly members Paul Moriarty, Declan O'Scanlon, Linda Greenstein, Gordon Johnson, Sandi Love and Wayne DeAngelo. Here's more on what is being proposed from their press release:The measure would require legislators to disclose any financial interest a legislator, their spouse or relative - including a child, stepchild, parent, father- or mother-in-law, sibling, or brother- or sister-in-law - has in a no-bid public contract whether it is with a public school or any level of government. Legislators currently do not have to report the dollar amount of no-bid public contracts. The measure would also expand the number of categories legislators can choose from when reporting their level of income, their company's annual revenue and, for the first time, the dollar value of their company's no-bid public contracts. The release says the proposed rules are modeled after Washington state, which consistently has one of the most stringent financial disclosure requirements for public officials in the nation. The legislators are calling for fast passage, but something tells me this one might encounter a few bumps along the way.
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 02:03:00 PM EDT
|
The long-time senator from Alaska, Ted Stevens, is on trial in Washington. He's accused of "lying on financial disclosure forms to hide more than $250,000 in gifts and renovations to his house." Stevens not only didn't pay for the renovations, he was never billed for them. But was that due to corruption on his part? Look at the new evidence:
In court yesterday, Allen said Stevens -- who, at age 84, is running for reelection to a seventh Senate term -- never paid for the work.
Allen also said he never sent Stevens a bill for the renovations, which Veco documents valued at tens of thousands of dollars in labor and material. In 2002, Stevens sent Allen a handwritten letter asking for a bill for a new first-floor deck installed by Veco employees.
"You owe me a bill. Remember Torricelli, my friend," Stevens wrote, referring to a campaign finance scandal involving Robert Torricelli, the former senator from New Jersey. "Friendship is one thing. Compliance with the ethics rules, entirely different."
I don't know whether Stevens should be convicted or not, but at least we now know that politicians notice when another is caught.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 07:56:27 PM EDT
|
Governor Corzine unveiled today what he called "the final pieces of his commitment to a more open, honest and accountable government." From the Governor's Press Release, which includes his proposals:Governor Corzine signed two executive orders designed to close loopholes in the pay-to-play ban and impose a new and impose a new ban on pay-to-play for all state redevelopment contracts. The Governor also signed a third executive order to create a task force to recommend ways to strengthen local government ethics and improve enforcement, compliance and training.
Many of the proposed reforms require legislative action and the Governor will seek comprehensive legislation to enact those reforms. The Governor?s ethics reform package would close loopholes in the pay-to-play law that applies to county and local governments and also ban wheeling. Speaker Roberts, who joined Corzine at the press conference had this to say:"New Jerseyans want and deserve a government that is responsible only to them and which represents the public's interest, not the special interests.
"With this reform package, we can make that ideal a reality sooner rather than later." On the subject of wheeling, Senator Codey wants more:"I would go further; I would make the anti-wheeling measure stronger," said Codey, who said he did not attend today's press conference with the governor because of a scheduling conflict.
Not only does Codey support a ban on wheeling across county lines - but across state lines."I would say 'you can't wheel money in, and you can't wheel out," the former governor said. Many Republicans praised the move offering to work with the Governor, but Junior predictably gave a smart ass remark:"We welcome the governor to the dance, albeit in the third year of his term," said Senate Minority Leader Tom Kean Jr. (R-Union). Steve Lonegan on the other hand said Republicans should attack:"Republicans should get their act together and go after this with a vengeance, because this is an assault on liberty," he said. "I think it's an all-out assault on freedom of speech, freedom of association and the whole American system and tradition of open and competitive elections." On the political side of things, I wonder what the reaction will be as a result of this:The proposal was put together without input from Democratic County Chairs, and a scheduled briefing for the party leaders for this morning was canceled. We'll see what actually comes out of all this talk and whether the reforms do what is intended. What are your initial reactions to the proposals?
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:36:50 AM EDT
|
|
The conventional wisdom is that the recently announced federal probe into the dealings of former Corzine friend, Carla Katz, with the local CWA which she had led, will score United States Attorney Chris Christie political points with Republicans, Independents, and some anti-Corzine Democrats. Governor Corzine has been battling to keep emails between Katz and himself from becoming public and Katz is already under investigation by the national CWA for alleged improper conduct. Christie's federal investigation promises more negative Katz headlines, more unfavorable publicity for the Governor, and positive publicity for Mr. Christie. However, Mr. Christie's possible gubernatorial ambitions may actually be undermined by this probe.
|
|
There's More...
:: (10
Comments, 290 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 11:16:42 PM EDT
|
|
This past week, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey issued a decision in In the Matter of the Appeal by Earle Asphalt Company, a case involving the owner of a road construction business and his political contribution to the Monmouth County Republican Committee in June 2007. Walter Earle III, owner of Earle Asphalt Company, made the contribution at the behest of former State Senate President John Bennett, failing to realize that the contribution could bar him from obtaining business from the State. After obtaining counsel and being advised that his contribution might violate "pay-to-play" laws, Mr. Earle requested that the contribution be returned. Meanwhile, Earle Asphalt Company submitted a bid to the New Jersey Department of Transportation for a roadwork contract involving Interstate 195. It was the low bid and therefore Earle Asphalt would have been awarded the State contract. However, the Department of Treasury informed the company that it was disqualified from award of the contract because of Mr. Earle's June 2007 political contribution. Mr. Earle appealed this decision and took the matter to court.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 576 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Mon Jun 09, 2008 at 12:47:46 AM EDT
|
In a recent politiker.nj story (with the phrase "zimmer-comes-out-swinging-" in the web page address...but not the headline) the following two paragraphs are especially significant....
"Zimmer also categorically denied that he ever used controversial ?angry black man' robocalls during his 2000 congressional campaign against Rush Holt, a charge outlined in the book How to Rig an Election by former political operative Alan Raymond.
"That is an untrue statement made by a convicted felon. It didn't happen," he said."
The "convicted felon" Zimmer refers to is a former Republican National Commitete operative named Allen Raymond who has written a tell all book (about his legal and illegal exploits as a Republican political gun for hire) entitled How to Rig An election (worth borrowing from your local library).
What's intriguing to me is that Zimmer takes a stance of flat out denial that this incident ever occurred. He's not saying that this might have happened behind his back without his direct knowledge; but, point blank, "it never happened".
I wonder if that's true?
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1119 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:30:33 PM EDT
|
|
Yes, you read that right: Why Is Rob Andrews Ducking Debates???
Let us not forget that in the fall of 2007 the whole NJ congressional delegation held a meeting that was intended to specifically air out and deal with the questions around who would be the Democratic nominee for Senate in 2008.
Obviously, it would have been in the best interests of the party and of the people of NJ (if you believe that electing a Democrat to the Senate is a good outcome) that a bloody and divisive primary battle be avoided if possible.
Clearly, the incumbent, Senator Lautenberg wasn't/isn't ready/willing to retire.
He, obviously, was able to convince all the participants present at that table that evening that he was sufficiently competent to run again and to continue to do a good job as a Senator.
Then all agreed to "back off" and to allow him to run unopposed by anyone present.
OK, so now that we've set the scene a wee bit....where does my question Why Is Rob Andrews Ducking Debates??? come into the picture?
For some answers see below...
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 1035 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:06:00 AM EDT
|
|
During the recent trial of David Delle Donna, the Mayor of Guttenberg, New Jersey, one of Governor Corzine's deputy chiefs of staff, Javier Inclan, testified that he passed envelopes from a bar owner to the Mayor, which he believed to be filled with illegal cash campaign contributions. The Mayor and his wife were convicted on extortion and tax-related charges after being charged with accepting $40,000 worth of illegal gifts from that bar owner.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 264 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 06:00:00 AM EDT
|
This special mid-week version of the world-renoun stick figures is brought to you courtesy of Jon Corzine's sickening fawning display of unmanly affection for Javier Inclan. Superman is a hero, Jonny. The guys over in Iraq getting shot and killed are heroes. Javier Inclan isn't worhty of licking the dirt from their shoes.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 14 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:21:46 AM EDT
|
There was a clear message heard last fall: we must change how our government does business, and we must remember, it is the people for whom we work.
To do that we will need real reform. And my highest priority will be ethics reform. I know there are legislators of both parties - men and women of conscience, who will stand with me, even push me.
Together, we will earn back the people's confidence and our own self-governance. Old orders and old ways may not pass easily, but the moment has come, the cause is urgent, and the will to act is at hand.
I wonder: Where did the man who spoke these words on January 17, 2006 go? It seems reasonable that, if ethics was his "highest priority"; then there should be some sort of tangible evidence of reform or at least a hard personal line against the tired "business as usual" Jersey poiltics.
I can't find it. First, Javier Inclan still has his job - and, no, I'm not going to get over the Deputy Chief of Staff swearing to God that he is corrupt and having absolutely no consequences to face. Now, we have the tale of the NYU Child Study Center. If anyone ever doubted that Jon Corzine was a Jersey politician - and that is about the gravest insult I can hurl in his direction - this move should make it clear.
|
|
There's More...
:: (3
Comments, 690 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:37:37 AM EDT
|
|
There isn't a single detail of the story coming out of Guttenberg that wouldn't turn the stomach of a decent person. In return for a fairly paltry list that includes a fistful of Viagra, a hatful of Macy's cards, a stupid dog, and enough cold cash to fix a bad boob-job, Mayor David Della Donna found a way to make nightclub owner Luisa Medrano's troubles disappear. Those troubles included receiving the underage "merchandise" of a human trafficking ring and forcing the underage girls to work as prostitutes in her bar.
As sick as that is, it gets worse. Make the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (13
Comments, 625 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:10:11 PM EDT
|
Again. Greg Forester notices that Democrats blocked several reform measures this week:Senate Democrats this week tabled a group of four Republican bills that would have represented a major step forward in fighting pay-to-play and the corrupt culture of government contributions that plagues every level of New Jersey's government today.
Senate Majority Leader Stephen Sweeney led the way with the motion to table the bills, which passed by a 22 to 16 vote. The four bills were:S-287, Kean, T., Limits contributions by certain public contractors; limits contributions by county and municipal political party committees.
S-600, Baroni, Prohibits campaign contributions by certain individuals, businesses or other organizations that purchase or acquire property involved in eminent domain proceedings.
S-684, Beck Prohibits county committee of a political party from contributing to or accepting contributions from another such county committee
S-760, O'Toole, Establishes stricter limits on contributions to county committees of political parties and by county committees to candidates; prohibits contributions between county committees. Forester continues:This continues the peculiar way that New Jersey's allegedly progressive Democratic Party continues its insistence on not, or at least slowly dealing with these important issues. The lack of complete, comprehensive ethics reform is one of the most disappointing aspects of the Democratic caucus. They sometimes pass progressive legislation, but I wouldn't call this a progressive Democratic party. Progressives don't actively and consistently oppose good government principles.
|
|
Discuss
:: (7
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 10:49:54 PM EDT
|
|
You may have read elsewhere how newly elected Representative Bill Foster cast the deciding vote on ethics reform today. The measure establishes an independent Office of Congressional Ethics. But, if you read the papers tomorrow, you'll see articles like this AP story at nj.com saying it passed 229-182. How could Foster (joining our NJ Democrats) provide the crucial vote? Well, it turns out the papers only reported Vote 122, the final vote which agreed to the new ethics panel. The crucial moment was Vote 121, where the motion was "ordered" by 207-206. Those who voted "nay" on Vote 121 hoped to kill the measure without actually having to vote against it.
It might not surprise you that Representative Frank LoBiondo (NJ2), one of the few "moderate" Repulicans voting yea on Vote 122, actually tried to defeat the measure in Vote 121. At least Reps. Frelinghuysen, Garrett, and Smith, and lame ducks Saxton and Ferguson, were open about their votes to kill it both times. It'll be interesting to see if local papers notice LoBiondo's trick... Anyone willing to bet that they will?
|
|
Discuss
:: (4
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Thu Dec 27, 2007 at 08:53:04 AM EST
|
|
It’s the time of the year when we reflect on the past year and make our resolutions for the new one. Because we can never be sure that our elected officials do reflect on the past and vow to make changes in the New Year, here are some resolutions that our representatives in Garden State government would do well to make and keep.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 338 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 22, 2007 at 10:16:54 AM EDT
|
|
By Stephen Yellin
"Rep. Scott Garrett, R-Wantage, hates poor people. Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan hates immigrants. And state Sen. Gerry Cardinale, R-Demarest, loves bankers."
Alfred Doblin began his Friday political column in the Bergen Record with those words. Doblin is an equal-opportunity critic of politics, who calls out politicians on both sides of the New Jersey aisle for corruption. As you may know, Garrett was one of just three Congressional Republicans in New Jersey to vote against the S-CHIP override. Lonegan is an anti-immigrant crusader who was recently caught employing illegal immigrants. So it's good to see that Doblin is "playing fair" and telling the truth about Gerry Cardinale and his Republican cohorts - that they are hypocritical ideologues.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 522 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 18, 2007 at 01:04:56 PM EDT
|
|
By Stephen Yellin
From the way Republican State Senator Gerald "Gerry" Cardinale (the leading obstructionist in New Jersey's legislature) talks about ethics, you'd think he was a spotless, blameless white knight of New Jersey politics. After all, he chaired the Ethics Committee in Trenton when the Republicans ruled the roost, and is on record as saying "I can't be bought with a trip". Furthermore, Cardinale has ceaselessly railed against New Jersey's Democratic Party, blaming Governor Corzine, State Senate President Codey, Speaker Roberts and numerous government officials for New Jersey's problems. The real "problem", though is with hypocrites like Gerry Cardinale, who will say and do anything for a vote - or a free vacation. As the old saying goes, "People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones", and this axiom is true for Cardinale.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 838 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
| Featured Stories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.gif)
