Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Intense vetting of Chris Christie will make him a stronger candidate, if he survives it (Update: Vetting or Vendetta?)

Intense vetting of Chris Christie will make him a stronger candidate, if he survives it (Update: Vetting or Vendetta?)

Mother Jones: Sure does look like NY Times gunning for Christie

Kevin Drum at Mother Jones has noticed the obvious — The NY Times is devoting enormous resources to going after Chris Christie.

The Times has found its mark, and now just needs actual news and actual wrongdoing to take him out. As Drum describes it, No Smoking Guns Yet, But the Noose Is Tightening Around Chris Christie:

The New York Times is pretty clearly expending a lot of resources on the various Chris Christie scandals. So far they haven’t produced any smoking guns, but they’re sure digging up some stuff that doesn’t look good for Team Christie.

First up is a look at the Christie political team, which was apparently obsessed with winning votes in Democratic-leaning towns. This wasn’t because the votes themselves were all that critical to Christie’s 2012 reelection campaign, but because winning in these places “would validate the governor’s argument that he would be the most broadly appealing Republican choice for president in 2016” ….

After describing a couple of Times pieces that show no direct evidence of wrongdoing, just a tough politician, Drum concludes:

It’s pretty obvious that stories like these are going to keep dripping out. The Times has several reporters assigned to bird dog this story, and once the New Jersey legislature starts subpoenaing people, there’s going to be continuing grist for an endless succession of lurid headlines. By themselves, neither of these stories moves the bar much. But as a harbinger of things to come, they’re pretty ominous for Christie. Buckle up.

For all the claims that the influence of The Times, WaPo and other legacy media has waned, that may be true at a macro level. But when The Times or WaPo want to get a politician, almost always a Republican, they have the resources and talent to get the job done.

It’s the sort of vetting that normally takes place during a campaign, but Bridgegate made it just too irresistable to wait.

I wouldn’t take this as a bad thing. If Christie, or any other Republican, has campaign killing problems, better to find out now. This vetting may make Christie a stronger candidate (putting aside his policy positions and campaign embrace of Obama) because there will be a level of confidence that no scandals are left in the closet.

I wonder if Chris Chrisie ever owned a rock….

Update: There’s vetting, and then there’s a vendetta. It appears the NY Times may have the latter, as an article released this afternoon really stretches to find a Christie inconsistency:

In a letter released by his lawyer, the official, David Wildstein, a high school friend of Mr. Christie’s who was appointed with the governor’s blessing at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which controls the bridge, described the order to close the lanes as “the Christie administration’s order” and said “evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference” three weeks ago.

I’ve noticed this fromt the Times before — they confuse knowing about the lane closures as opposed to knowing that his office ordered the closure as a vendetta. The letter the time cites says nothing about Christie knowing his office ordered the closure.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

TrooperJohnSmith | January 31, 2014 at 11:14 am

Naw…

In the Alinsky-centric world of Left Wing “truth” seekers, the Chicago Rules prevail: “If ya can’t find no dirt, invent some.”

Before we’re through 2016, Chris Christie or whoever else is running against the Democratic nominee will be a media-created pariah.

The vetting may make him stronger but, this conservative will never vote for him.

    Not A Member of Any Organized Political in reply to etjr. | January 31, 2014 at 12:12 pm

    He has never impressed me.

    He just seems to be an economy sized McCain,
    or a rougher spoken Romney.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to etjr. | January 31, 2014 at 8:36 pm

    You got that right. Sharia-compliant Christie get my vote? Never in this life.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | January 31, 2014 at 11:55 am

Has Paul Krugman condemned the phrase “the Noose Is Tightening Around Chris Christie” as eliminationist rhetoric? I must have missed The Invincible Krugtron’s column excoriating Drum for using such coarse language.

I didn’t read the article, so feel free to point out if he mentioned that it was Mother Jones that demanded Sarah Palin’s Alaska e-mails.

    Not A Member of Any Organized Political in reply to cbenoistd. | January 31, 2014 at 12:14 pm

    Mother Jones is nothing but a Democrat organ – just an un-profesisonal HACK organization.

    So how can the claim to be a Non-Profit?

    They should be sued over that since they are clearly a political organization.

    “Mother Jones is published by the Foundation for National Progress, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization. Mother Jones and the FNP are based in San Francisco, with other offices in Washington, D.C., and New York.” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Jones_(magazine)

    hrh40 in reply to cbenoistd. | January 31, 2014 at 2:36 pm

    And found NOTHING to condemn her with.

    NOTHING even remotely to condemn her with.

If Christie is the GOP candidate, the Dems will win again. Personally, I’ll move to Detroit to get a feel for the future.

    hrh40 in reply to Yujin. | January 31, 2014 at 2:39 pm

    Or you could move to New Jersey.

    And watch your property taxes skyrocket, as they have under Christie.

    See elsewhere in this section, the link to how NJ is one of the top three worst fiscal states after 4 years of Christie management.

    He’s fixing Jon Corzine’s mess about as fast as Obama is fixing Bush’s mess.

    No wonder they’re best buds.

Bitterlyclinging | January 31, 2014 at 12:45 pm

Its been “Deemed and passed at ‘Pinch’s’ digs out in the the Hamptons that its Hillary all the way. Remember husband ‘Slick’s’ rumored remark that “Hillary has munched more carpet than he could ever hope to in his lifetime” so the many members of her ilk employed over at the “Newspaper of Record” have set themselves to the task of ensuring her election. Torpedoing the propsects of Hillary’s strongest, most likely opponent early on in the election season certainly seems like a viable tactic. The Washington Post likewise achieved a similar feat by highlighting Virginia Senatorial candidate George Allen’s ‘Macaca Moment’ in James Webb’s favor, and who can forget Barack Obama’s unsealing of not one but two separate opponents supposedly sealed messy divorce proceedings allowing the Great Deceiver to coast to victory twice running nearly unopposed.

Governor Christie: If the NYT’s fails, the Krispy Kremes will finish the job.

Henry Hawkins | January 31, 2014 at 1:13 pm

The NYT wants to strike while the scandal iron is hot, but mostly because Bridgegate is too weak a scandal to draw out into 2016. It’s milk it now or let it go. The NYT staff likely sees the current anti-Christie blitzkrieg as a sort of preseason game for the 2016 primary season.

From now until Nov 2016 the lib media will play whack-a-mole on the heads of whomever’s on the projected short lists for the GOP nomination. They’ll even falsely claim an identified GOP up-and-comer is on the list just so they have a reason to whack him or her (head’s up, Cathy McM Rogers, Kristi Noem, Sean Duffy, Tim Scott, etc.).

Gosh I don’t like Christie but if what you say is true I hope he makes it, I can’t stand the thought of Jeb Bush getting the nomination – so anyone who can push Bush to the sidelines has my support.

    hrh40 in reply to betty. | January 31, 2014 at 2:41 pm

    But how is Christie different from Jeb Bush?

    It seems to me their priorities and ideologies are just about the same.

      betty in reply to hrh40. | January 31, 2014 at 4:42 pm

      That is true, of all God’s creatures I love Jeb Bush a little less.
      But neither here nor there now as the high school friend tossed Christie to the wolfs. Says Christie knew and he has proof.

His RECORD makes him a weak candidate.

NJ is one of the top three worst fiscal states in the country: https://twitter.com/mercatus/status/428924570628669441/photo/1

After four years of Chris Christie.

And this doesn’t even get into his flip flopping, his support of the Ground Zero Mosque, his appointment of Muslim judges, etc.

Look. at. his. record.

Chris Christie’s career had better be as over as Charlie Crist’s.

It’s up to us not to allow him to be the candidate. Never trust these crooks.

Henry Hawkins | January 31, 2014 at 3:19 pm

2010 and 2012 proved what happens when you do and then don’t include conservatives. The GOP leadership has not learned the lesson, thinks they can bag enough soured Dems and Indies to make up for lost conservatives. Principles just make politics too hard, you see.

Chris Christie would be a strong candidate if he ran as a Democrat. If the Republicans nominate him there is no chance that they could win.

Chris Christie makes John Huntsman look like Barry Goldwater.

We won’t get fooled again.

Wm, what’s this love affair you’ve got going with Christie. Or is it just a defending the home front thing?

I really can’t entertain any serious thoughts about either “vetting” or “narrative”. How could any of this matter? Clinton was a serial rapist (maybe serial killer), and that didn’t matter. Obama has so many holes it’s hard to pick one, but having a patently fraudulent document on his web site that he says validates him would be the most in your face one. In short, no “vetting” is done. The press will ruin a reputation if they want to do that. They don’t need any evidence or facts.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend