Did a top prosecutorial deputy to Chris Christie improperly use her position earlier this year to boost his run for governor -- despite the candidate's recent claim that she had done nothing to help his campaign?
The New York Times has assembled some pretty good evidence.
• Law enforcement officials in Newark and Washington have told the paper that in March, Michele Brown, Christie's top deputy when he served as U.S. attorney, took over responsibility from another staffer for responding to a FOIA request from Jon Corzine's campaign relating to Christie's tenure leading the office. Among other things, Corzine's team had asked for information about both Christie's and Brown's travel records, and about Christie's expenses.
This summer, DOJ officials told Christie's interim replacement to stop Brown from coordinating the FOIA response, because of the obvious conflict of interest, said a Times law enforcement source. That same day, said the source, Brown quit the U.S. attorney's office.
• In addition, in June, she urged FBI agents and prosecutors to conduct the high-profile corruption arrests of more than 40 New Jersey lawmakers, officials, and rabbis before July 1. Brown's colleagues told the Times that she had told them she did so to ensure the arrests were made before Christie's permanent successor as US attorney took over -- presumably to ensure that Christie got the credit. The arrests were ultimately made in late July, but they nonetheless appeared to benefit Christie, in part because his permanent replacement wasn't installed until this month, and in part because much of the investigation that led to the arrests took place during his tenure.
In August, it was reported that Christie had made a $46,000 loan to Brown -- a close ally and good friend -- and had failed to report it on his tax returns and ethics filings. He described it as a loan to a friend in financial need, and said she had done nothing to help his campaign.
Prosecutors are prohibited, by law and DOJ policy, from using their "official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election."

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

San Fernando Curt
October 20, 2009 10:38 AM
A few points that soak through this story: The Corzine team knows how to play hardball, shaking up the opposition and forcing them to make suspicious-looking fumbles. But up to now, the skeletons in Christie's closet don't have much rattle - not that I expect Corzine's people to stop trying. Other note: There must be some chilly discontent in New Jersey for this key race to be this close. Or has the Garden State's very own God-and-guns crowd remembered their way to the polls?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
October 20, 2009 11:37 AM in reply to San Fernando Curt
It's this close because Corzine has been a very bad and unpopular governor. If New Jersey were a more moderate state like Ohio or Virginia or even Pennsylvania, Corzine's attack ads wouldn't have stuck nearly to the extent they have here and Christie would likely be on his way to an easy victory. But because New Jersey is a very liberal state with a strong aversion to anything Republican, it didn't take much for voters here to balk at Christie as an acceptable alternative.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
October 20, 2009 11:53 AM in reply to jdb316
Or is it that Christie is wrong for New Jersey.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
_jonny_5_
October 20, 2009 1:26 PM in reply to BeeClone
Ding Ding Ding... we have a winner folks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BeeClone
October 20, 2009 10:45 AM
With Christie it may be death by a thousand cuts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jerryfatheart
October 20, 2009 12:42 PM in reply to BeeClone
He's so big it may take 10,000. I say this as a fat man.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BluGrass
October 20, 2009 12:13 PM
Was the $46,000 a loan, or was it hush money?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jerryfatheart
October 20, 2009 12:42 PM in reply to BluGrass
Not hush money, but probably a reward.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?