http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/07/1409794/-Chris-Christie-s-9-11-lie?detail=email
Marcy Wheeler had her ears open during Thursday's Republican debate, and caught Chris Christie in a big lie that probably no one else would have picked up on. It was this, when he was asked whether he really would blame "Senator Paul just for opposing the bulk collection of people’s phone records in the event of a terrorist attack?"
CHRISTIE: Yes, I do. And I’ll tell you why: because I’m the only person on this stage who’s actually filed applications under the Patriot Act, who has gone before the federal—the Foreign Intelligence Service [sic] court, who has prosecuted and investigated and jailed terrorists in this country after September 11th.
I was appointed U.S. attorney by President Bush on September 10th, 2001, and the world changed enormously the next day, and that happened in my state.
Setting aside that is the "Surveillance" Court, and that U.S. attorneys don't go before the FISC, there's a big problem here. Maybe Christie was so affected by the events of that day and the aftermath that his memory has got all foggy.
Because, as Marcy points out, Christie wasn't nominated for the U.S. attorney post until December of that year and started in January 2002. Which his official biography as governor confirms. Given Christie's, or at least his administration's, penchant for political payback, here's the part of this that is more interesting than just his lying about when he started the job.
Christie implies he was involved in the dragnet in question. He was US Attorney from January 2002 to December 2008—so he in fact would have been in office during the two years when the phone dragnet worked through the Servic–um, Surveillance court, and four years of the Internet dragnet.
But if, as he implies, he was involved in the dragnet for the entire span of his tenure—and remember, there were huge cases run out of Trenton right out of 9/11—then he was also using the fruits of illegal wiretapping to do his job. Not Servic — um, Surveillance court authorized dragnets and wiretaps, but also illegal wiretaps. Which may explain why he’s so invested in rebutting any questions about the legitimacy of the program.you know after years of failing to explain their wrongs they would realize it gets even harder when you try to do it from a stance of aggressive confrontation you lose the memory of the contrived explanation and if you are getting stung it really goes off the rails and lies crash into lies and "VOILA" a tangled web of deception when if they had just been honest they might not look as contemptible.
you know if he is as clueless as he exhibits maybe he didn't know about the Bridge-Gate???
