Since my cobloggers have been discussing this, on both sides of the question, I thought I'd also pass along Chris Christie's column on this in the Free Press. (Before becoming Governor of New Jersey, Christie had been a federal prosecutor, culminating in heading the federal prosecutorial office for the District of New Jersey.) His conclusion:
Finally, as to Mayor Adams, I have reached no judgment on his guilt. How could I? Like every American, he is presumed innocent, and an indictment contains allegations by the DOJ that have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. His job now is to prove to the citizens of New York City that he serves the people who elected him and has not become a tool of any other force in order to save himself personally from having to face these charges. The oath he took requires nothing less from him.
The administration has an obligation to work as hard as they can to implement the policies the American people voted for in November. They also have an obligation to assure the public that the criminal law will be administered fairly and not used as a carrot or a stick to achieve any goal other than to have the guilty held to account for their conduct and the innocent free of unwarranted criminal charges.
This is an embarrassing episode for the Department of Justice and further undercuts the public confidence in our system of justice. Congress and the courts must play their constitutional role as well and not sit as idle bystanders while our system of justice is not de-weaponized, but just weaponized in a different direction. Either dismiss forever an indictment Mr. Bove characterizes as politicized and tainted, or let the charges proceed and let a jury of his peers judge the allegations against Mayor Adams.
Again, I have no well-informed view on the subject, but I agree that it's an important issue, and thought Christie's perspective was worth passing along.
The post Chris Christie on the Eric Adams Controversy appeared first on Reason.com.
