'This Week': 'Bridgegate' Scandal

New Jersey Assemblyman John Wisniewski and attorney Randy Mastro on the latest New Jersey "Bridgegate" investigations.
3:00 | 03/30/14

Coming up in the next {{countdown}} {{countdownlbl}}

Coming up next:

{{nextVideo.title}}

{{nextVideo.description}}

Skip to this video now

Now Playing:

{{currentVideo.title}}

More information on this video
Enhanced full screen
Explore related content
Comments
Related Extras
Related Videos
Video Transcript
Transcript for 'This Week': 'Bridgegate' Scandal
Now to Chris Christie, back in the news and back on offense an internal review cleared him of any wrong doing in the bridgegate scandal. The head of the investigations and the one in the legislature are here live. First the back story from Jim Avila. Stop. Chris Christie got his mojo back. Can you get to it already? Reporter: It took three months and there are $3 million for a hand-picked law firm to find it. Clearing him of responsibility for the bridgegate scandal. It had knocked some of the swagger from the governor. Look at his face 76 days ago when the chief of staff's e-mail humiliated the front-running presidential candidate. And look at him now, when asked why he was kept in the dark by staff. That's not a revolving door where anybody can walk in any time and have at me willy-nilly. I'm the governor of New Jersey. Reporter: He may be feeling good about the investigation he can control. But the next two he cannot, including one underway at the state house in New Jersey, and the next critical one, the U.S. Attorney's probe. The federal investigation could take two years to complete. But with the endorsement of his own lawyers, governor Christie began a media blitz this week that began with an exclusive ABC news interview with Diane sawyer. Report said I had no knowledge of it before it happened, nor did I authorize it or have anything to do with it. Ask that's the truth. Reporter: The report and the governor blame that fired deputy chief of staff, Bridget Kelly, who released a statement calling the report venomous and offered to cooperate with the federal investigation if granted immuny. For "This week," Jim Avila, Trenton, New Jersey. And we are joined by the new Jersey assembly man, John Wisniewski. Thank you for coming in this morning. You have joined the critics, calling it a whitewash. But has your own investigation turned up any evidence showing that governor Christie knew about the slowdown or authorized it? We haven't had a chance to talk to some of the key players as this report hasn't either. Bridget Kelly who sent the e-mail that said time for traffic in fort lee. We don't know why or who authorized her. It's hard to believe, understanding how this governor's office works, that she woke up and decided it would be a great idea to find traffic. You have not found any evidence yet. We have not and are not finished. You're not finished. Any reason to believe that Bridget Kelly is going to talk? She's made it clear through her lawyer she's only willing to go forward and speak to law enforcement authorities if she gets immunity. Waiting for the decision on the documents. She is a state employee. We believe we will have an opportunity to look at the documents. We believe they will speak volumes to move the investigation forward. But it's too early to conclude the governor had nothing to do with this. Far too early. You had the same documents from Mr. Wildstein that's gone to the committee again. There's nothing to show he had anything to do with it. There's the e-mail to the governor where he marks up an exit statement for a man the governor said he barely new. That was weeks later. Is he so involved in crafting an exit statement for David wildstein, yet had no knowledge. It's far too early to draw conclusions about who knew what in this investigation. But no key testimony, why not leave it to the U.S. Attorney? We don't know what we're going to get. We are waiting for judge Jacobsen's decision. We ought to wait for that decision. We ought to look at the documents. We're still going through thousands of pages of documents. This report draws a lot of conclusions and speculation. There's no foot notes to testimony that was taken or interviews that were taken. This report really rushes a judgment that's too early to make. Okay. Mr. Assemblyman, thanks so much for joining us. Randy master joins us now. You heard Mr. Wisnieski said it's a rush to judgment. We looked at 2,000 pages of documents and interviewed 70 witnesses, and as he admitted, we haven't seen a shred of evidence that the governor knew anything about this lane realignment decision beforehand. If it were there in the hard evidence, we would have seen it. They have the documents responsive to our subpoena relating to the George Washington bridge incident. They have the same information we have. And he and his committee have been at this for five months. How do you respond to the charge of conflict of interest. Your own law firm was also working for the port authority. Is that a conflict of interest on its face? No, it isn't. The representation of the port authority, which has been cleared by the port authority, was something where both governor's offices agreed that my firm should represent the port authority. We had access to their documents as well. Let me be clear. We have no incentive at our law firm to do anything other than get to the truth. We will be judged at the end of the day by whether we got it right, and, George, we believe we got it right. We had to work harder to get it right. So much hinges on Bridget Kelly. And her lawyers had a harsh statement on the report. Here's what it says. It says this report is venomous, gratuitous and inappropriate sectionist remarks concerning Ms. Kelly have no place in an independent professional report. The only credible investigation is being conducted by the U.S. Attorney's office. If provided with the procedural safeguards, she will be fully cooperative. She's not alone. Her personal life, describing her as emotional was sexist and gratuitous. Your response? I'm glad you asked. We treated both David wildstein and Bridget Kelly the same. They deserved the assessment that we gave both of them about their personal conduct and about their actions. Exactly the same way because they violated the public trust. And that's what the evidence showed, George. All of it relevant to not only their consciousness and guilt, but their culpability. And in Bridget Kelly's case, if I say may say, Bridget Kelly not only sent the yeem, the ulterior motive. What is that motive? I'm glad you asked that. We say what we know and don't know. We can't establish the motive because we didn't have the chance to question Kelly and wildstein. But it was obvious to target the mayor of fort lee because of their exchanges. Bridget Kelly not only sent the e-mail that said time for some traffic problems in fort lee, she then, after the fact, when the governor sent his chief of staff to find out whether she knew about this beforehand, she called a subordinate that night and asked her to destroy incriminating evidence. She is at the heart of the problem, and so is David wildstein, and treated like they should have been. They abused the public trust. They should be held accountable. Are you confident your report will not be contradicted by the U.S. Attorney? We are. We had no incentive to do anything other than get to the truth. For the skeptics, some have a visceral reaction to the bridge controversy. Reminds me of the movie line, "They can't handle the truth." We believe we got to the truth, George. We will find out. Thank you very much. And coming up in two

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

{"id":23118929,"title":"'This Week': 'Bridgegate' Scandal ","duration":"3:00","description":"New Jersey Assemblyman John Wisniewski and attorney Randy Mastro on the latest New Jersey \"Bridgegate\" investigations.","section":"ThisWeek","mediaType":"Default"}