i recall this site reporting that Rove testified that Christie solicited him for advice pertaining to who he (Christie) should reach out to about a possible run for governor. that is pretty specific, at least more specific than this spokesperson made it seem. regardless, why couldn't this conversation have waited until after he stepped down as US attorney? probably because everyone knows that Christie used the office to advance his own political goals. which, in my opinion, is just as wrong as any of "his" public corruption busts.

 Sharpe James, Wayne Bryant, John Lynch

 All right under Corzine's nose and he did NOTHING!

hudsonblue - so you never have sought employment advice while working at another job? this is ridiculous and will not be an issue.

i have never held a position that was a political appointment (US attorney) in which i was supposed to remain neutral and enforce the laws and constitution of the united states. as us attorney, even though you were appointed by a political entity, you are supposed to remain neutral, the same goes for judges. in addition to being neutral, you are supposed to not involve yourself in politics. a judge or us attorney is allowed a limited involvement in politics because of their circumstances.

i have never been a judge or us attorney, so no "the oc", the analogy does not work and you and everyone else should truly consider what Chris Christie has done and ask yourself if it was ethical; especially when ethics and corruption is the only thing he is running on.

Do you have any facts to indicate he was not neutral and did not do his job? I will offer proof to the contrary. So now you are saying it is not ethical for someone to specuate about running for office if they are in position as a political appointee? Ok - Bobby Kennedy as Attorney General. Don't you think he thought of another office? He is supposed to be impartial and neutral as the top cop in the US. Or Janet Reno who flirted with running for office in Florida. It was ok for her? You are grasping at straws and it is pathetic.

What a load of crap this story is. What is the problem??? Like Democrats don't talk politics??? Get real. No one cares about this. Go ahead and waste your money on TV ads.

Why isn't Corzine releasing his emails between him and Karla Katz? Loretta seems like the biggest dope yet. I think she is senile.

Karl Rove testified that Christie approached him about a run for governor while he (Christie) was in the US Attorney's office. while you point out instances when democrats may have been guilty of doing the same thing, you, unlike me, don't have any specific facts.

and this is a story because, if you understood the role of us attorney, you would know that it is COMPLETELY unethical to engage in a political strategy while at the helm of a government agency that is supposed to remain above politics (see e.g, the New Mexico US attorney who was fired for not giving into political pressure from the White House).

and it is even more of a story because Christie is running completely on ethics and corruption busting. if you're going to run on that platform you have you be 100% sure you do not have an ounce of dirt on you or a cloud of suspicion hovering over you. the fact that Christie was engaging in political discussions about his own political future is completely unethical and if its not, he should provide transparency into his tenure at the USAO. that would silence everyone, including me.

he's your candidate, urge/tell/convince him to provide evidence and documentation that he didn't pander to the political apparatus that appointed him. doing so will end this conversation and strengthen his candidacy. his failure to do so only leaves a cloud of suspicion hanging over him.

Sounds to me like hudsonblue may have lost a relative or two in the last sting operation. Either that, or he doesn't want Corzine's(D-Wall Street) gravy train to leave Hudson Station.

Corzine: Mr. Christie, why would you talk to Karl Rove about politics while acting as the Attorney General? That is just wrong!

Christie: Mr. Corzine, why would you schtoop the President of a Union you were negotiating with and pay her off $6,000,000 and another $500,000 to her brother-in-law, refuse to allow emails to be released relating to the affair and give the union a sweetheart deal that doesn't even exist in the private market? Now THAT is just wrong!

Winner: Christie!

like you don't have a rebuttal to my point. while you can make cracks about hudson county, you cant show how my argument is wrong or off track, neither can truthinadvertising. i have never said corzine's emails aren't fair game or shouldn't be explained, however, an independent court has already decided that issue. i can, however, understand how that would still bother you.

but if it does bother you, then why doesnt this issue bother you? why doesnt the fact that Christie may have abused the power of his office and used it to his political advantage bother you? it probably doesnt because you want him to win, which anyone can understand. however, if you believe in ethics and in not abusing the power of your office, then you too should have some questions and demand transparency from your candidate.

the office of the us attorney is not a stepping stone to the governor's mansion nor is it supposed to be a place for politics. i have a problem with the latter, as it is in direct conflict with the message that Christie is trying to sell to new jerseyans and a violation of the oath that mr. christie took when he was sworn in as the us attorney.

Why was the House Judiciary even asking Rove about Christie? The subject of the investigation was what role, if any, Rove played in getting several US Attorneys dismissed. Christie was not dismissed. The reason is simple - the House Democrats are using the official investigatory powers of the Judiciary Committee for partisan political purposes to help the Corzine campaign. Just like they abused their power to conduct show-trial hearings on deferred prosecution agreements.

It is ironic that NJ-Dems are accusing Christie of abuse of power when it is clear that they are abusing their official governmental power.

It does not rise to the level of illegal or unethical. You refuse to acknowledge that Reno and Kennedy did anything improper - it was splattered all over the press regarding Reno and Kennedy left the Justice Department to run for the Senate. Are you kidding me? The discussion of "hey what do you think of me running for governor?" is not soliciting support or the initiation of a campaign. It is one person no matter what his or her position asking someone with a wealth of experience his or her thoughts about a campaign. The law is clear and Christie did not violate it. This story is as big of a joke as your argument.

So - to your last point - it is your belief that no US Attorney may particpate in the electoral process once they have left their position? Talk about "unAmerican."

is altering what one has said and then calling it unamerican. what i said, if you actually care, was that WHILE ACTING as the us attorney you are not suppose to involve yourself in politics, especially, asking the white house who to talk to about a run for governor. and you can bring up as many instances as you'd like, be it RFK or Reno, i am concerned about the state i live in and the man running to be governor of it. plus, this post and this politicker article is about christie, not a comparative study of other AGs, US attorneys, who may have done what Christie has done. If you'd like to admit that he did something unethical and want to post an article on how democrats have done it as well, I would be the first to read it.

as for politicaltruth, he or she brings up a valid and well-thought out argument. i would, however, submit that since the hearings were about political pressure put on us attorneys by the white house it was important to have someone who was not fired testify to hear what they had to say and if they were under any political pressures. in addition, christie (to his credit) voluntarily showed up, so if it was grandstanding or an abuse of power, christie could have chosen not to testify.

I'd bet 90% of voters don't even know who Karl Rove is, much less care about whatever advice he gave Christie.

With the media focused on professional wrestling at townhall forums, the average voter doesn't give a rats rear end about whether Christie thought about running for governor and when did he start thinking about it.

The "Gonif State" makes the "Soprano State" look like the "Brady Bunch"

http://christiegonewild.blogspot.com/

yes, i do
posted by hudsonblue

Karl Rove testified that Christie approached him about a run for governor while he (Christie) was in the US Attorney's office. while you point out instances when democrats may have been guilty of doing the same thing, you, unlike me, don't have any specific facts.

and this is a story because, if you understood the role of us attorney, you would know that it is COMPLETELY unethical to engage in a political strategy while at the helm of a government agency that is supposed to remain above politics (see e.g, the New Mexico US attorney who was fired for not giving into political pressure from the White House).

and it is even more of a story because Christie is running completely on ethics and corruption busting. if you're going to run on that platform you have you be 100% sure you do not have an ounce of dirt on you or a cloud of suspicion hovering over you. the fact that Christie was engaging in political discussions about his own political future is completely unethical and if its not, he should provide transparency into his tenure at the USAO. that would silence everyone, including me.

he's your candidate, urge/tell/convince him to provide evidence and documentation that he didn't pander to the political apparatus that appointed him. doing so will end this conversation and strengthen his candidacy. his failure to do so only leaves a cloud of suspicion hanging over him.
--------------------------------------------------------------

The only thing he's being accused of is asking for advise on how to start a run for governor. According to Karl Rove's OWN WORDS, he and Chris Christie only spoke twice and their conversation had nothing to do with the U.S. Attorney's Office. So you're assumption that he was politicizing his office is entirely baseless. You're accusing him of politicizing the U.S. Attorneys office even though they weren't talking about the U.S. Attorneys office! The only reason there's a supposed "cloud of suspicion" is because Corzine wants it there. There's no evidence that anything wrong was done, which means you have no reason to be suspicious.

You want to talk about a "cloud of suspicion" and making government transparent? How about pressing Governor Corzine to release those 745 pages of e-mail correspondences between himself and Carla Katz?

You are not the judge and jury. The law is clear. He did not violate it. Move one junior. You are out of your league.

from the DOJ's website regarding a memo from 2000 re: non-career officials (Christie) and politics:

"The purpose of this memorandum is to remind all non-career appointees about Department policy regarding the propriety of engaging in certain political activities, and to set forth the policy and statutory/regulatory rules applicable to non-career appointees. As a matter of Department policy, I previously determined that non-career appointees would be held to the restrictions of the pre-1994 Hatch Act, which prohibits employees from active participation in political management or partisan political campaigns."

Try cutting and pasting the whole thing. It is clear from the DOJ website and that memo, it IS NOT a violation to ask for advise. I cited that memo on another story. Your last point is meaningless.

here is the link for those that dont want to listen to me or the oc and judge for themselves. (http://www.usdoj.gov/jmd/ethics/docs/agpolactpol.html)

also, remember the story from earlier on in the year when an assistant us attorney to christie was at an event that was thought to be a campaign strategy meeting (Christie had stepped down, the assistant had not and I used the word "thought")? well, it just shows that any us attorney's involvement in politics is questionable, even an assistant us attorney.

Questionable in your mind is not the same as violating the law. The "story" from earlier went nowhere as will this one. So much for your promise. Typical

thank you

حلول 

برامج سوفت 

عرب بزنس 

KFUPM Software