merit that does it for us the press conference with governor christies is at the top of the hour. bill will be back tomorrow. "happening now" starts right now. jenna: we start off with a fox news alert. we're awaiting a news conference any minute by new jersey governor chris christie who will speak publicly for the first time since bombshell e-mails and text messages were revealed suggesting that top aides in his administration may have powerfully gridlocked traffic on the george washington bridge. the mayor on the new jersey side of the bridge who apparently refused to endorse the governor of the in a statement yesterday, christie denied involvement in the scheme. chris christie is regarded as a top prospect for the republican nomination for president in 2016 a local story some argue has

national implications. we'll have debate on that. we'll get instant reaction when the governor steps to the podium there. we'll have his news conference live as soon as it happens. first right now, today's top headlines and brand new sorries you will see here first. jon: tragic accident or murder on the boardwalk? a judge make as key ruling in the deadly crash on the venice beach boardwalk over the summer. our legal panel weighs in on that case. cancer victims could have a secret weapon in their own bodies. what it is and how it could revolutionize treatment. chaos at a convenience store. a group of kids, some as young as eight years old, caught on tape robbing the place. what police are doing with the video. it is all "happening now." jenna: a new jersey traffic jam months ago that really probably, unless you were in it a lot of folks shrugged at is becoming a

national political scandal that could have a major impact on the 2016 presidential race. differing of opinion there. we'll get to that. great to see you, everybody, i'm jenna lee. jon: a lot of traffic jams in new jersey but this is getting all kinds of attention. i'm jon scott. new jersey governor chris christie, a potential republican candidate, find his administration under fire for an alleged political pay back scheme. we're about to hear from him for the first time on this matter. take a live look at the statehouse in trenton, new jersey, in the southern part of the state. governor christie denied any involvement in what has been dubbed "bridgegate." he vowed to hold anyone responsible accountable. as he, as we wait for governor christie, eric shawn joins us live from the new york newsroom to bring us up to speed. what happened, eric? >> reporter: jon, one of the new questions people are asking this morning whether a 91-year-old woman died because the christie administration potentially engaged in that political

payback. that is one question we expect the governor possibly to address. he will likely defend himself and denounce his administration's actions in that bridge lane closing. fort lee, new jersey, emergency services tell "the bergen record" newspaper that a traffic jam delayed them from get together stricken woman. she died from cardiac arrest. that the traffic jam doubled response time for other cases. this happened in last september. three lanes on the new jersey bridge closed for four days causing delays. bridget anne kelly, saying that it ordered problems and bragging about the chaos it cost. the democratic mayor supposedly the target of retribution, denounced christie's actions. >> incredit me to peel in power, in positions of authority would be so venomous. i still don't get it. >> reporter: the governor has said he did not know anything about those closures. he is outraged and saddened saying it was unacceptable and

people will be held to account. i has been touted as a possible presidential candidate in 2016 but some critics and others say this now could tarnish his reputation. >> law and order governors like chris christie would appeal to the republicans on the right and left of that party can't be people who use politics to hurt their political opponents. we waste taxpayer money at the same time. it just won't work. when this gets quantified in dollars he will lose the taxpayer protection arguement as well. >> reporter: there are several ongoing investigations into all this the port authority inspector general's office is expected to release a report soon. the new jersey state assembly transportation committee has been holding hearings. one is supposed to kick off about an hour from now. there are also calls for united states senate investigation. barbara boon know, who is the democratic candidate who ran and lost against christie, she is a state senator. she is calling for the united states department of justice to step in. we're awaiting podium in that room in the state capitol in

trenton, the very spot abraham lincoln once stood to address the new jersey state assembly. chris christie will try to defend himself and defend his potential political future. jon, back to you. jon: just so far to make it clear, eric, there is nothing that ties the governor directly to the order to close those lanes of the bridge? >> reporter: that is absolutely correct. the emails and texts have to do with bridget anne kelly who e-mailed, quote, time for traffic problems in fort lee. so far in terms of the texts and emails have been released they have not tied the governor directly into this at all. he has denied knowing anything about this. says those who are guilty potentially will be held completely accountable. so we'll see what he has to say about that and what he knew, if anything at all. he denies he knew anything about it or was involved when he steps up to the podium, out of that door which is the governor's office in trenton. jon: waiting for the governor now, eric shawn, thank you. jenna: we'll look a live look as

they go up to the podium and perhaps put a statement chris christie will read as we await for him. what is at stake here? that is a key question of the day. juan williams, political analyst and former massachusetts senator scott brown, fox news contributor who will both watch the statement with us. before we get there, juan, what is at stake? >> well the key question here how does he handle it today, jenna. because he has two big choices. he could say, i new nothing about this. this is about my aides. they kept it from me. if he take that is the position, why didn't you know if they were acting in this way, suggests new jersey hard ball bully politics, soprano style, there will be traffic problems in trenton, ha, ha, in fort lee i should say, ha, ha. the other way he could handle it but i was aware of it but i didn't understand how serious it was. in either case these are not enviable choices for the governor and politically

damaging. jenna: senator brown, we got "the sopranos" reference out of the way. that will not be the last time we will hear about this. this is the perception issue juan brings up, rightfully so. getting back to the political question, what do you think is at stake for christie, three years ahead of the national election and his. >> he said he didn't know anything about it. he put out a very powerful statement. he is holding a press conference and will hold that person or people responsible. unlike president obama where we had the obama rollout, we've had benghazi, irs scandal -- jenna: senator brown, if i could, i apologize. governor christie just stepped to the podium. let's take a listen. >> here to this office where i have been many times before, and i come out here today to apologize to the people of new jersey. i apologize to the people of fort lee. and i apologize to the members of the state legislature.

i am embarrassed and humiliated by the conduct of some of the people on my team. there is no doubt in my mind that the conduct that they exhibited is completely unacceptable and showed a lack of respect for their appropriate role of government and for the people that we're trusted to serve. two-pieces to what i want to talk about today. the first is, i believe that all of the people who were affected by this conduct deserve this apology and that's why i'm giving it to them. i also need to apologize to them for my failure as the governor

of this state to understand the true nature of this problem sooner than i did. but i believe i have an understanding now of the true nature of the problem and i have taken the following action as a result. this morning i terminated the employment of bridget kelly, effective immediately. i terminated her employment because she lied to me. i brought my senior staff together i think about four weeks ago tomorrow and i put to all of them one simple challenge, if there is any information that you know about the decision to close these lanes in fort lee, you have one hour to tell either my chief of

staff kevin o dowd or my chief counsel charlie mckenna. i told them in an hour i would go out in a press conference and, if no one gave me other information to the contrary, that i was going to say that no one on my staff was involved in this matter. over the course of the next hour kevin and charlie interviewed each member of my senior staff. came back and reported to me that they all reported that there was no information other than what we already knew that had been testified to by senator barone regarding this incident. i then questioned kevin o 'dowd and charlie mckenna directly since they are the only two that report directly to me. they assured me that they had no information that would change my

ability, to be able to say that no one in response to angie's question, on my staff was involved in this matter. that was obviously a lie. and the emails that i saw for the first time yesterday morning when they were broken, i believe "the bergen record" story, proves that that was a lie. there's no justification for that behavior. there's no justification forever lying to a governor or a person in authority in this government and as a result i have terminated bridget's employment immediately this morning. secondly, i have and will continue to, started yesterday,

to once again now have personal one-on-one discussions myself with the remaining members of my senior staff to determine if there is any other information that i do not know and need to know in order to take appropriate action. i'm not completed with those interviews yet but when i am, if there is additional information that needs to be disclosed, i will do so. if there's additional actions that need to be taken with my senior staff, i will do so. i will tell you though it has been written a lot over the past couple days about what a tight-knit staff i have and how closely everyone works together and that is true and ever since the time i was u.s. attorney i've engendered the sense and feeling among the people closest to me that we're a family and we work together and we tell each other the truth, we support each

supported and we admonish each other when we need to be admonished. i'm heartbroken that someone who i permitted to be in that circle of trust for the last five years betrayed my trust. i would never have come out here four or five weeks ago and made a joke about these lane closures, if i had ever had an inkling that anyone on my staff would have been so stupid but to be involved and then so deceitful as to just to not disclose the information of their involvement to me when directly asked by their superior and those questions were not asked by the way just once. they were asked repeatedly. so i take this action today

because it's my job. i am responsible for what happens. i am sad to report to the people of new jersey that we fell short, we fell short of the expectations that we've created over the last four years for the type of excellence in government that they should expect from this office but i have repeatedly said to them that while i promised them the best governor's office i can give them i could never promise them a perfect governor's office and so when i find those imperfections, those mistakes, those lies, my obligation as the chief executive of this state is to act and as to bridget kelly i've acted today. secondly, i was disturbed by the tone and behavior and attitude,

callous indifference, that was displayed in the emails by my former campaign manager bill stepian. reading that, it made me lose my confidence in bill's judgment. you can not have someone at the top of your political operation who you do not have confidence in. as a result, i've instructed bill stpian not to place his name in nomination for state party chairman. and he will not be considered for state party can chairman. and i've instructed him to withdraw his consultancy with the republican governors association. if i can not trust someone's judgment, i can not ask others to do so and i would not place

him at the head of my political operation because of lack of judgement that was shown in the emails that were revealed yesterday. that has also been communicated to mr. stepian last flight. no doubt that bill was one of microssest advisors over the last five years. so for that too, i am sad to have to take this action but i also know that i have a job to do and it is the job that i have asked the people of new jersey to entrust me with and i can never allow personal feelings or longstanding relationships to get in the way of job in the way it is appropriate to do it. but i don't want any of you to

confuse what i'm saying this morning. ultimately i am responsible for what happens under my watch, the good and the bad, and when mistakes are made, then i have to own up to them to take the action that i believe is necessary in order to remediate them. as i mentioned to you earlier i spent all day yesterday digging into talking to folks and getting to the bottom of things. i know there was much discussion yesterday about what was i doing? well, let me tell you, everybody. i was blindsided yesterday morning. i was done with my workout yesterday morning and got a call from my communications director at about 8:50, 8:55, informing me of a story that had just

broken on "the bergen record" website. that was the first time i knew about this. it was the first time i had seen any of the documents that were revealed yesterday. before i came out and spoke to all of you, i wanted to do the best i could to try to get to the bottom on some of this so when it came out i could answer questions as best i can, and take appropriate action, if action was necessary. no doubt from reading those emails yesterday in my mind that action was necessary. then i wanted to make sure that i spoke to those people who advised me to make sure if there is any other information they were aware of, that i had it before i acted. i'm going to continue to this process. i couldn't get it all done yesterday, and as i said, if there's more information that i uncover i will act accordingly in terms of releasing it to the public and taking whatever action may be necessary if any is, for any other issues. and also will react to any

information that has been coming from any place else. given that there is an oig investigation and a legislative investigation. later today i'm going to be going to fort lee, ask to meet with the mayor to apologize to him personally, face-to-face and also to apologize to the people of fort lee in their town. i think they need to see me do that personally. and i intend to do that later on today. people of those communities for four days were impacted in a completely callous and indifferent way and i'm going to go and apologize for that. let me conclude with this. this is not the tone that i have set over the last four years in this building. it is not the environment i have worked so hard to achieve. we saw just a few months ago and

i've seen over the course of the last four years republicans and democrats working together not without arguments. government is never without argument but ultimately coming to resolution on some different issues in a bipartisan way and running a campaign that was in fact a bipartisan campaign. so i am extraordinarily disappointed by this, but this is the exception. it is not the rule of what's happened over the last four years in this administration. i have considered it over the last four years to be my job to be the governor of every new jersey ann, republican, democrat, independent, or unaffiliated. and i have worked with elected officials on both sides of the aisle, ones that i agree with and ones that i disagree with. the political overtones that were exhibited in those documents released yesterday and the conduct by those people is not acceptable.

but people i think all across this state understand that human beings are not perfect and mistakes are made. and i believe what they expect of me as the chief executive of this state is when that information comes into my possession that i consider it and then acted swiftly as possible to remediate whatever ill occurred. that's what i've done today. actions have consequences. and i'm living up to that right now and i will say one last thing, just so we're really clear. i had no knowledge or involvement in this issue, in its planning or its execution and i am stunned by the abject

stupidity that was shown here regardless of what the facts ultimately uncover. this was handled in a callous and indifferent way and it is not the way this administration has conducted itself over the last four years and not the way it will conduct itself over the next four. i will do everything within my power to assure the people of new jersey that and i thank them for their willingness to consider my apology on behalf of this government. in the end i have 65,000 people working for me every day and i can not know what each one of them is doing at every minute but that doesn't matter. i'm ultimately responsible for what they do. and that's why i took this action. david? >> governor, beyond the apology and terminations that you've asked, what other steps, concrete steps do you plan to

take to demonstrate to the people of new jersey and people of the country that you want to change the perception of what has happened here and will that include working cooperatively with these investigations that are now moving forward because in the past you had rather nasty words for people heading them up. >> and i apologize for that this morning, david. because i was being led to believe by folks around me that there was no basis to this. and so, you know, and let's be fair, there have been times when there have been investigations around here that have led to nothing and have had no basis but i was wrong. and so now having been proven wrong of course we'll work cooperatively with the investigations and, you know, i'm going through an examination as i mentioned to you right now. that's what i'm doing. i'm going through an examination and talking to the individual people who work for me, not only to discover if there is any

other information that we need to find but also to ask them, how did this happen? how did, you know, how did this, you know, occur to us? i think, listen, as i said before i've had a tight-knit group of people who i trust implicitly. i had no reason to believe they weren't telling me the truth. it is heartbreaking to me that i wasn't told the truth. i'm a very loyal guy and i expect loyalty in return. and lying to me is not an exhibition of loyalty. and so, you know, i'm going to look into this personally. this is my responsibility, david. and so, what steps we'll take after that, if there are concrete steps beyond what i have done today, then we'll certainly announce them and talk about them. if, you know, if not, then, you know, i will say, listen, i think we've gotten to the bottom of this and we're going to move forward with a new team. i have a new team coming in as

well, who i am trying to integrate now also in the next two weeks. so there will be a lot of action going on around here. kelly? >> -- revealed that you are a political bully, your style is-[inaudible] will this compromise your ability to? >> no, i'm not. listen, kelly, politics ain't bean bag, okay? everybody in the country who engages in politics knows that. on the other hand, that's very, very different than saying that, you know, someone's a bully. i have very heated discussions and arguments with people in my own party and on the other side of the aisle. i feel passionately about issues and i don't hide my emotions from people. i am not a focus group-tested, blow-dried candidate or governor. now, that has always made some people as you know uneasy.

some people like that style. some people don't and i've always said, i think you asked me a question after the election, are you willing to change your style in order to appeal to a broader audience and i think i said no because i am who i am but i am not a bully. and what i will tell you is, that the folks who have worked with me over a long period of time would, i believe tell you that i'm tough but i've shown over the last four years in the tone that we've set here that i'm willing to compromise. that i'm willing to work with others and campaign showed, with all of the folks who came from the other side of the aisle to support us, that if we weren't willing to have relationships with those folks it would have never happened that way. so i don't believe that, kelly, and i don't believe the body of work in the last four years displays that. now in this instance the language used and the conduct displayed in those emails is unacceptable to me and i will

not tolerate it. but the best i can do, when i see stuff like that, to end it and i know that won't satisfy everybody but i'm in the, in the business of satisfying everybody. i'm in the business of trying to satisfy the people who ileced me governor. michael. michael. >> governor, you say that you're going to individually interview all the members of the governor's office. >> senior, staff. >> what about the campaign? are you going to personally interview -- >> many -- >> how confident that this doesn't rise above bill stepeien in the campaign. >> there is no one in the campaign. there is no one above bill step yen in the campaign. bill in the campaign, was involved with fund-raising. that was bill's main staff. mike duhan was general you'll

can't and dealt with it. v ads and mail pieces. day-to-day operation -- >> they didn't know about it? >> yes, i've spoken to both of them. there were two of my discussions yesterday. angie, angie. angie. device, we don't work that way. >> how confident that you that this bullying -- retribution doesn't go beyond this. >> listen, angie, i'm not, i'm smart enough after this experience not to go out there and certify that unequivocally, okay? i don't have any evidence before me as we speak that it went beyond this incident but i can't tell you that i know that for sure as to every aspect of everything because now i have to be much more circumspect about that. prior to yesterday yesterday i believed if i looked someone in the eye who i worked with and trusted and asked them that i would get an honest answer. maybe that was naive but that's

what i believed. so now i'm going and digging in and asking more questions but i can't make a warranty on that, angie. i don't believe so. i can't make a warranty on that and i won't and when i made that four weeks ago i wound up being wrong. >> [inaudible] >> absolutely not. no. and i knew nothing about this until it started to be reported in the papers about the closure. even then i was told it was a traffic study. senator barone testified it was a traffic study. there may be a traffic study that has political overtones to it as well. i don't know the answer to that, angie. we'll find out because i don't know. senator barone presented all types of information that day to the legislature, statistics and maps and otherwise seemed evidence of a traffic study. so why would i believe anybody would not be telling the truth about that? i said that i think at the time.

i'm not finished yet, guys. but the fact is that regardless of all that, you know, it is clear now that in the minds of some people there were political overtones or political side deals on this and that's unacceptable. so whether it was a traffic study or not i don't know. it appeared that there was one, based on what i saw in the testimony but regardless of whether there was or there wasn't, there clearly were political overtones that were evidenced in that, in those emails and other messages that were never ever brought to my attention until yesterday. yeah? >> do you understand why people would have a hard time believing that you didn't know about this -- considering your management style and closeness of your staff that you didn't know about it. what does that say about your ability to lead? >> well, listen, i am, there is

this, you know, kind of reputation out there of being a micromanager. i'm not. i think if you talk to my staff what they would tell you is, that i delegate enormous authority to my staff. and enormous authority t cabinet. and i tell them, come to me with policy decision that is need to be made, with some high-level personnel decision that is need to be made but i do not manage in that kind of a micro way, first. second, there is no way that anybody would think i know about everything going on in all agencies of government at all times but every independent authority that new jersey has on its own or by state, both with new york, with pennsylvania and with delaware. so what i can at the tell us you is if people find that hard to believe, i don't know else what to say except to tell them that i had no knowledge of this, the planning, execution or anything about it. and that i first found out about it after it was over.

and even then, what i was told was that it was a traffic study and there was no evidence to the contrary until yesterday that was brought to my attention or anybody else's attention. and so i understand why people would ask that question and i understand your question completely but what i also want to tell the people is, that even with all that being said, it's still my responsibility. i didn't know about it but it's my responsibility because i'm the governor. so i'm taking that responsibility and taking actions appropriate with executing the responsibility in accord with what the information is today. marcia? >> governor -- [inaudible] investigation to determine whether a federal law was violated. will you you or the u.s. attorney do you think there is anything to be investigated and -- [inaudible] >> as i said many times, what i was u.s. attorney i hated when

politicians stood behind a podium said and this is what the u.s. attorney should or shouldn't do and i will not engage in that kind of conduct at all. >> [inaudible] are there any other cases, are you asking your staff if there are any other cases of political retribution from the campaign with -- [inaudible] >> listen, again. let me say this. clearly that's the tone of those emails but the thing that, the other part of this that just shocks me is, as i said to you all many types before, mayor sock colynch was never on my radar screen. he never recalled being asked for his endorsement. part of this i never saw this as political retribution because he

didn't do anything to us. we sought endorsements from democrats and we didn't receive most of them. we received 60 at end of the day. we pursued hundreds, i never, i don't have any recollection of anytime anybody in the campaign ever asking me to meet with mayor sokoloch or call him which is the typical course used attempting to get endorsement. that staff would work with the elected official first, when they thought, using the vernacular, the call me in to make a phone call have a meeting and might with the elected official to bring it over the line. i don't remember meeting mayor sokolich. i don't remember in that context. i'm sure i met him an event in bergen county. until i saw his picture last night on television i wouldn't have been able to pick him out of a lineup. part of this is the reason that

i retribution never came into my head because i never even knew that we were pursuing his endorsement. no one ever came to me to get me to try to pursue the endorse mane. >> now that you know it did happen? >> of course. of course. john. >> you say you will continue to ask questions of these starve. i wanted to know questions of yourself. these are 65,000 employees, people close to you. one case went to the birthday party. >> what was that is last piece? >> went to a birthday party. mine? >> one of staff member thaw fired this morning. >> a few of them were there. >> i'm asking what do you ask yourself they either thought this is what the boss wanted and as a group went rogue and cover it up and lied to you?

>> i said earlier, jon, i'm heartbroken bit and disappointed. i haven't gotten to the angry stage and i'm sure i'll get there and i'm stunned. what does it make me ask about me? it asking me what did i do wrong to make east these folks lie to me. there is a lot of soul-searching that goes on around this. when you're leader of a organization and i had this happen to me before where i had folks not tell me the truth about something, not since i've been governor but in previous leadership positions you wonder what you can do about it. john, i have not had sleep last two nights and i've been doing a lot of soul-searching. i'm sick over this. i worked for the last 12 years

in for reputation of honesty, directness and blunt talk and one i think well-deserved. when something like this happens it is appropriate for you to look at your several and i certainly am and i'm soul-searching on this. what i want people of new jersey this is the exception and not the rule. they have seen that over the last four years in what i've worked and what i've done. i don't want to fall into the trap, this one incident happened there that the one incident defines the whole, it is not. just like one employee whose lied doesn't determine the character of all the other employees around you. and so, i don't want to overreact to that in that way either, john. if you're asking me over the last 48 hours or last 36 hours i've done some soul-searching? you bet i have. brian. brian. >> governor the mayor of jersey city is quoted as saying that

the day declined to endorse you and said he would vote democrat as many as 10 appointments between state officials and jersey city officials were canceled, suddenly, all at once. how do you blaine that in the context of what you now know about what some of your staff did? >> well listen, all i know is, i don't know, brian, is the first answer i'll give you to the question but what i will also say is listen, mayor phillips seems to have a lot of disagreements with lots of people. with me, with the senate president and others. there is going to be back and forth. there is going to be meetings canceled. there will be public disagreements. but the fact of the matter is, we've continued to work with jersey city over the course of time since he's been mayor. in the last year i think we approved $190 million in epa financing for projects in jersey city. the dep, deputy commissioner, was just meeting yesterday with

mayor phillip and his staff on blue acres issues to try to buy out properties affected by sandy. so we continue to work with him. i don't know about specific meetings or what's going on but certainly, you know, i will look into all of those things but the fact is that what mayor phillip knows is, when we agree with him from a policy perspective we'll work with him. when we disagree with him, we'll express those disagreements. and sometimes that will mean friction. he is suing the port authority at the moment. okay, so there is lot of back and forth and to and fro happens in these things. i look into all this stuff but in the tend have i at times been angry with mayor phillip and disagreed with him? you bet i am. i also spoke at his swearing-in in his invitation. political relationships in this state as you know go up and down. sometimes strange bedfellows and sometimes expected ones and they move so i'm sure there has been movement in those relationships over time but not anything i can

explain as to the specific question. >> governor? >> bob. >> i heard that you actually, when you said bergen record learned something new about situational a awareness universal policy you stated here include the press corps? >> well, sure. most of you, i hope, are citizens of new jersey. so you would -- >> there are exceptions. >> i know you are. we don't need to point them out but yes of course it does and because the fact is i came out here and said something that was untrue. i mean unwittingly but i said something that was untrue. i think what you all have seen about me last four years in my dealings with you, that i deal with you directly and i say exactly what i think and i think over time i have developed a reputation for telling you all the truth. as i see it. there can be disagreements but the truth is as i see it, and so yeah, would i include the press corps? of course i would because most,

if not, many if not most of you are residents on the state and you rely upon this state government to be honest and trustworthy as well and in this instance, my government fell short and i take responsibility for that and that's why i'm apologizing. beth? >> i'm wondering what your staff thinks of you about why they lied to you, why would they do that? what was their explanation and [inaudible] >> i have had had any conversation with bridget kelly since the email came out. so she was not given the opportunity to explain to me why she lied because it was so obvious that she had and i'm quite frankly not interested in the explanation at the moment. i'm not done. she had a second part of the question. i think, general sampson put out a statement yesterday that he had no knowledge of it. i interviewed him yesterday. he was one of my interviews. i'm convinced he had absolute no knowledge of this.

this was executed at operational level and never brought to the attention of the board of commissioners until chairman foy wrote his email or executive director foy wrote his email to the board of commissioners. so i sat and met two hours yesterday with mr. sampson, general sampson. and again, i'm confident that he had no knowledge of this based upon our conversations and his review of his information. so i think, you know, as he said yesterday, he's angered by this and upset about it and i know that he's going to lead, cooperate with the oig investigation that's ongoing and lead a discussion at the port authority about what could be done in the future to stop such conduct. charlie. charlie. >> you mentioned earlier that, question you were asking, the question is, what did i do to have those folks lie to me but what are you asking the question, what did i say or how did i conduct myself to cause them to behave in a way that

would have led these folks to think it was okay to hatch up such a scheme as this? [inaudible] suspicion has been that you fostered a culture through your administration or the campaign that allowed people to think it was okay to intimidate or retaliate against people. >> no, charlie, i haven't because i know who i am. i'm not that person. listen it is easy for people to be characterized in public life based upon their personality and i have a very direct, blunt, personality. and i understand why some people would characterize that, especially people don't like you as bullying but it is not that and i know that about myself and no, i haven't asked that question, charlie. i'm more focused why the truth wasn't told to me. melissa? >> [inaudible] >> pardon? >> -- afternoon to apologize to the residents there. will you apologize for -- [inaudible] you'd. >> i just did. i just did.

i'm sorry for that and i would have never made that joke if i knew the fact that is have come forward to me today. >> what problem is the joke about? >> because i thought it was absurd and i, that we had nothing to do with it. that's why. and obviously, obviously the emails evidences a kind of callous indifference to the result of that and that's what i've apologized for and i do apologize for it, melissa and i certainly intend to apologize, you know, to the mayor today. i'm going to try to get a meeting with him this afternoon. >> governor. >> terry. >> governor, looks like the retribution part, in the e-mails, one mayor -- [inaudible] >> who is that? >>? >> [inaudible] >> i read that. i didn't read that that way. at all.

and that was a reference to a traffic study that candidly i know nothing about. and, i recognize that the email said something about the gov supported it or endorsed it. i have to, because i don't know anything about it. i have to believe that was like the governor's office generically that reference because, as i stand here today i don't know anything about a traffic study in springfield. >> was your campaign, did you ever go into -- this is what happens if you endorse us? >> god no, absolutely not, no. that is not the way it operated. terry, we built relationships over four years with folks trying to be helpful to every town that we could be helpful with appropriately. so, no, nothing like that was ever done. >> governor, you said you are doing some soul-searching. i wonder if you're soul-searching kind of people you hire or the kind of people who run your campaign or kind of people you want to run the republican party here who are willing to apparently engage in

political retribution and also call the mayor of fort lee a racially insensitive name? >> yeah. >> hiring practices and your judgment? >> sure, it was a mistake. i mean, soul-searching is complete on that part of it. it was a mistake. >> to hire them? >> obviously. it was a mistake. listen, the fact is that mistakes were made and i'm responsible for those mistakes. and i obviously tried every chance i can to hire the very best people and i think that the history of this administration shows that we have hired outstanding people with great ethical standards, who have done their jobs extraordinarily well, in a government of 65,000 people, there are going to be times when mistakes are made. mistakes were made and i remediated those mistakes today by the actions that i've taken and so, you know, i'm in a constant state of trying to

figure out what's, who are the best people for individual jobs who will make me proud to have put them there. that is always been going on. that is nothing new now. there are times when people you put in those positions make mistakes. they disappoint you. you lose their, you lose your confidence in them, or they lie to you. when you find that out, the test of leadership is, what do you do? i found this out at 8:50 yesterday morning. by 9:00 this morning bridget kelly was fired. by 7:00 yesterday evening bill stepien was asked to leave my organization. that's pretty swift action for a day's work and that is exactly the way i will continue to conduct myself. if there is any other information surrounding this that comes up or anything different that comes up over the course of the next four years. phil? >> -- relatively people high in

the hierarchy, what is the crisis of confidence with the people you surrounded yourself with -- [inaudible] >> i can, i can differentiate, phil between people who have served me well and they haven't. and of course there is always going to be some, after something like this where you've been lied to, there is going to be some crisis in confidence okay? there always will be. anybody who tells you differently is not telling you the truth. if they say this happened to you and you're not going to second-guess yourself at all, then you're just stupid. of course. i've second-guessed myself and gone through my head on some of this stuff. and in the future, i'll try to be even more careful but here's what i know about human beings, phil. i hired a lot of them in my time, as u.s. attorney, as governor, and as a hiring attorney and a private practice law firm.

sometimes desprite the best background checks, despite the best interviews, despite your best intention, sometimes, people are a mistake hire. sometimes they start off as a good hire and because of circumstances that happen in their life they change. you can't prevent everything but the test of leadership is, when you find it out, what do you doo this. it is difficult personally to do. but it is my job and i've taken an oath and i'm going to execute my job. josh? >> governor, [inaudible] >> yeah, i'm sorry. >> okay. in terms of [inaudible]

are you asking for enforcement? was there then retribution and what about this some sort of vendetta exercised on the new york side, as the port authority as revelations first began appearing? >> a few things. first off, to my knowledge, and i think the mayor said this last night, i have no knowledge of him being asked for an endorsement. he may have been but he certainly was never asked by me. but i think said last night on television that he doesn't recall ever being asked for an endorsement. that is why this made no sense to me, josh because, why would you execute a vendetta against somebody who you didn't even give a chance to say no to? put aside the fact you shouldn't do that at all. but then if you never asked him for an endorsement why are you mad that he didn't give one. none of it may any sense. that is the first point. >> you still don't know what

problems -- [inaudible] >> i don't. i don't. i don't know whether again this was a traffic study that then morphed into a political vendetta or a political vendetta that morphed into a traffic study. i mean i've seen in front of the legislature statistics and other things about the traffic study so i know there is information there. i don't know what it is and so we will find out over time, maybe, but that is really in the mind of the people who were doing it and that is what i based my decisions on at the time was the testimony that people gave. lastly -- >> payback? >> no, no. listen, i don't know exactly what you're referencing but i think that you're talking about the foy memo that was leaked, is that what you're talking about? no? >> [inaudible] it seems that according to the emails the traffic issue arose, complaints were made. story appeared in one of the

newspapers. complaints were then lodged internally. so wildstein says, i don't need that -- something along the signs we're taking appropriate action against the new york side and sampson is working with us on it. >> it was something, i asked general sampson about this. yes, something to that effect. i remember something, i asked general sampson yesterday, he said he has no idea what wildstein is referring to. and the only communication that he had at that time was his concern that he expressed to fellow commissioners about internal port authority documents being leaked. and just that's not appropriate for folks to be leaking internal documents. but he has no recollection from what he told me yesterday of any conversation like that with wildstein or barone at all that references what the gist of what you said in the email. >> no internal payback operation going on? >> certainly not that i'm aware of or not out of the normal.

let's remember something too. this is a bi-state agency with significant tension, all the time. there is no tin shun between governor cuomo and i. we get along quite well. when issues rise to our level we've always been able to solve them but there is tension and always has been between new york and new jersey on the allocation of resources at the port authority. and so, let me be clear, there is some battles over there that go on that have happened in every administration over the course of my memory. but, you can't connect that to, that's kind of ongoing nature of the tension of that agency and i think of mosby state agencies and the new york and new jersey demands are greater and even more. nothing i know specific to that, josh. but i want to make clear to people, there is tension that

goes on between employees at these agencies. not everyone of those issues of tension, thank goodness are raised to my level and governor cuomo's level. the good news for people of new york and new jersey when those issues have been raised last three years to my level and governor cuomo's level we always am mickally between the two of us a resolved it and moved on. sometimes that is the role governors have to play in those agencies. >> positive? >> yes. >> [inaudible] are you questioning your own judgement whether concern of know of scandal, concerned whether putting out cones to change a couple of lanes of traffic to do a traffic study? >> let me answer that. i will let you follow up. i don't know what make as legitimate traffic study. not my area of expertise and so,

so i wouldn't have a nose for that, just wouldn't. i don't know what make as legitimate traffic study. i've been told sometimes they're done live. sometimes they're done by computer model. i heard that from professionals who testifiedtestified for the port authority. you have to go to them to ask them what a legitimate traffic study is. i probably wouldn't know a traffic study if i tripped over it. >> [inaudible] >> no, it didn't. second, follow-up. >> you said that it -- sometimes raises to the level of governments. [inaudible] that a new york representative, the port authority board was asking too many questions. >> not true. not true. i denied that story before. that is an old story and governor cuomo denied it as well. so it is not true. >> did he perjure himself when he said he didn't believe the traffic study. did he lie under oath? >> listen, i have no idea but, clearly you know, there's a

difference of opinion between senator barone and pat foy about the existence of a traffic study and seemed to be that evidence that senator barone showed of statistics and maps and other things about traffic study. this could go back to the nuance what really constitutes a traffic study or not. they may be arguing about some specifics and nuance i'm not familiar with. but i certainly would not accuse pat foy of perjuring himself. i don't, i'm not. i'm telling you what i was told and what we saw before legislature but i certainly wouldn't accuse pat foy of perjuring himself in any way. >> it was not under oath, right? you still think everything he said was genuine and he is not in any way -- >> guess what? after reading everything yesterday, i don't know. but what i'm telling you is that's what i've been told. he seemed to display evidence for that the at time but that is now because of the tone and tenor of these emails and text

messages that's now, all this stuff is something that i'm not going to warranty because i don't know given some of this back and forth went on between all of them. senator barone is very respected guy. he served in this building for a long time. i've known him for a long time. when he, you know, made his testimony, i would have no reason to believe that he wasn't telling the truth. but obviously, from reading these emails yesterday, there was other stuff going on that i hadn't been informed about. bob? >> why didn't you check back with senator barone? did you ever call him? position continued to be that there was a traffic stop, and he had a disagreement with pat foy about that. so, you know, they had a disagreement, that was pretty clear, and i didn't think bill was going to change his mind because foy had already expressed those concerns in earlier written document that he -- not he, but someone had put out to the press.

matt? >> [inaudible] yesterday what was going on -- >> i had no conversation with -- [inaudible] yesterday. >> what would happen here yourself? >> no, no, listen. i had earlier conversations with bill where, as i expressed to you at the time, that bill told me he knew absolutely nothing about this. so, you know, and certain ily the e-mails -- certainly the e-mails yesterday were well after the fact. so, but that's not the basis upon which i made my decision on bill. my decision on bill was made based on the fact of the tone, the tenor and the conduct that was evidenced in those e-mails. i lost confidence in his judgment. and that's why i made the decision i made as to bill. >> governor -- [inaudible] b follow up on that point? >> brian? >> it's no secret that many in the republican party are

counting on you to run for president in 2016. do you see what has happened here playing into your decision making process over the next -- [inaudible] >> no idea what the decision making process would even look like at that point. as i've said many times before, and i know that everybody, um, in the political media and in the political chattering class wants to start the 2016 race. and universities can't help themselves but do polls that are meaningless three years away from an election, and you guys can't help but put them on the air and talk about them. my job is to be governor of new jersey, and i have -- i'll say what i've said before. i am enormously flattered that folks would talk about me in my party as someone who they think could be a candidate for president, but i am absolutely nowhere near beginning that consideration process. i haven't even been sworn in for my second term yet. i've got work to do here, and that's my focus.

my focus is on the people of new jersey and the job that they gave me. so all those considerations are, you know, the kind of hysteria that goes around this because everybody's in that world gets preoccupied with that job. i am not preoccupied with that job. i'm preoccupied with this job. as you can tell, i've got plenty to do. yes, because you're rolling your eyes and looking very disgruntled that i haven't called on you. well, i've known brian longer than you. [laughter] [inaudible] could you elaborate on your feelings for his role in this and any information that you garnered from him regarding -- [inaudible] one to show e emotion, what kind of emotion? >> i think you've -- >> [inaudible] >> i'm sad. i'm sad. that's the predominant emotion i feel right now. is sadness. sadness that i was betrayed by a member of my staff, sadness that

i had people who i entrusted with important jobs who acted completely inappropriately. sad that that's led the people of new jersey to have less confidence in the people that i've elected. the emotion that i've been displaying in private is sad. and as i said earlier, you know, i don't know what the stages of grief are, i know anger gets there at some point, but the fact is right now i'm sad. >> [inaudible] >> let me just clear something up about my childhood friend, david wildstein. it is true that i met david in 1977 in high school. he's a year older than me. david and i were not friends in high school, we were not even acquaintances in high school. i mean, i had a high school in livingston, a three-year high school that had 1800 students. in a three-year high school in

the late '70s, early 1980. i knew david, i met david on the tom cain for governor campaign in 1977. he was a youth volunteer and so was i. really after that time i completely lost touch with david. we didn't travel in the same circles in high school, you know? i was the class president and an athlete. i don't know what david was doing during that period of time. and then we reacquainted years later in, i think, 2000 when he was helping bob franks with his senate campaign against jon corzine. so we went 23 years without seeing each other. and in the years we did see each other, we passed in the hallways. um, so i want to clear that up. it doesn't make a difference except that i think some of the stories the way they're written impute like an emotional relationship and closeness between me and david that doesn't exist. i know david.

um, and, you know, i knew that bill barone wanted to hire david to come to the port authority, and i gave my permission for him to do it, but that was bill's hire. he asked for permission, i gave my permission for him to hire david. but let's be clear about the relationship, okay? and how do i feel about david now? listen, what i read yesterday makes me angry. that's the one bit of anger i felt. that language and that callous indifference in those e-mails from david yesterday are just over the top and outrageous and should never, ever have been written or uttered by somebody with a position of responsibility like that, and those sentiments. so that's the way i feel about it, and that's the opportunity to further expound on my relationship. >> governor? >> yeah, john. >> you said you haven't spoken with -- [inaudible] and why not?

>> i have made my -- >> get to the bottom of this -- [inaudible] >> john, i said i haven't spoken to them since i discovered the e-mails. but i spoke to them beforehand. and bridget clearly did not tell me the truth and bill, you know, what he told me at the time is not contradicted by the e-mails, but the e-mails and the color and character of the e-mail led, have led me to conclude that i don't have confidence in his judgment any longer, and that's why i asked him to move on, and he has. >> governor? >> so, you know, at this point there are legislative hearings that are going to come and all the rest, and i don't want to get myself in the middle of that. chairman wiz knew sky said clearly yesterday that he intends to ask bridget kelly and bill stepe to testify, and my gut sense is it wouldn't be appropriate for me to get in the middle of that because then there would be other allegations

about those conversations. so i think the smarter ting to do is as to those two folks who i made determinations regarding their future, to move on from there and talk to other folks who are still in my employ. >> follow up? >> yeah. >> hundreds of people in your inner circle -- [inaudible] are you confident -- [inaudible] that they are, you know -- >> i believe, i believe that i've spoken to everyone who was mentioned in the e-mails except for charlie mckenna who is away at a family funeral. and i am confident based upon my conversations with them that they had no prior knowledge, nor involvement in this situation. >> [inaudible] >> yeah, well, that's your characterization, not mine. but there is nobody on my staff who had any knowledge of this issue until after the issue was already done. >> follow up -- >> in the back, yes. jenna: golf chris christie

speaking nearly an hour and continues to do so son something called bridgegate or has been called bridgegate in the press which is members of his administration purposefully closing down lanes on the busiest bridge in the world as political retribution of some sort. chris christie is trying to explain that. he says he's humiliated and heartbroken but takes ultimate responsibility for what happened under his watch. he fired his deputy chief of staff and certificated ties with disturb severed ties with a former campaign manager. he says that the test of leadership is what you do after you find out something went wrong. let's talk to scott brown who's back with us, former massachusetts senator, and juan williams, fox news political analyst, listening through this entire thing. as far as tests, senator brown, did chris christie pass this one? >> absolutely. it was refreshing, actually, to hear somebody actually take responsibility and within 24, 25 hours actually go out and make a decision and fire somebody.

and as i said before the break, it's unlike what we see in washington today when all the problems that they have, they don't get fired and they, in fact, either get promoted or laterally transferred. so, yes, it was refreshing. i think he certainly addressed it, and he's not done. obviously, he still has to do his due diligence, and that's what you're looking for in a leader, i don't care if it's democrat or republican. he did pass the test. jenna: juan, agree/disagree? >> i think he's still in the woods. he's got, as he said, a situation where he feels he was betrayed, he was lied to, and he feels sad, and he understands that his image has been damaged. the question that you raised earlier, jenna, still is on the table: are there going toy subsequent revelations that lead people to conclude that there were ties to him, that he knew about this? he says he's not going to cooperate with probes. there's several probes still out there even in the morning papers, talks about deals to put some gas lines through the pinelands, retribution against

the professor who disagreed with some of their policies by pulling the professor's grants. all of that's still on the table. he says he's conducting his own investigation. and then the final thing to say is politically he says, you know, 2016's too far away, he's not thinking about it, and we really are talking about here about the republican primaries. he's the leading republican right now in polls, any poll to take on any democrat including hillary clinton. so that's a pretty powerful perch he's on right now. jenna: and by the way, if i could, juan, sorry to interrupt, but that's part of the reason we're covering it. >> absolutely. jenna: if this was a governor that did not have these national implications attached to his name, it may not be that big of a story, but it is right now. just to be clear, do you think this does have political implications that could carry through over the next couple years? >> it does. we don't know what comes subsequently in the investigations still hanging over his head. but remember, we're really talking about will fellow republicans view this as, you

know, a one-time, strange event, or do they see this as indicative of a deep flaw in him? rush limbaugh said yesterday this is the payback attitude coming from chris christie. other republicans still mad at him over embracing obama after hurricane sandy. are they going to now see this as more evidence that he's not their type of guy? jenna: well, let's ask senator brown about that. there's no secret, right, that there's been splits in the republican party over chris christie. how do you think it plays out and what about those political implications moving forward? >> i have a lot of respect for juan, but i have to slightly disagree. politics is a blood sport. everybody knows it. everybody knows the vision within our party and that we're constantly battling between the different factions, sometimes fighting over the scraps and eating our own. we all get that. but bottom line is that this is one factor where somebody lied. he took immediate action. it's three years away, and quite honestly, there are a lot of other things that are important right now not only nationally, but in his own state.

so as long as he continues to do his job and do it well like he's done and take the blame, like he's done, i think he'll, obviously, move forward and move through it pretty well. jenna: well, we began with a surprise reference from juan, we end with a blood sport reference, i feel like we've come full circle on this. certainly a lot more on the story, surprisingly, he continues to talk now, still more than an hour since he started. juan, senator brown, great to have you both. thank you very much. >> thank you, jenna. >> thank you. jon: we've been helping you keep tabs on the big argument underway in the u.s. senate right now, whether or not to continue unemployment benefits, restore them, i should say, for about 1.3 million americans who lost them at the end of december. one republican plan would pay for that extension. it's a $25 billion a year program, one a republican plan would pay for it. senator harry reid called that scary. we'll talk with the senator who

proposed that plan, republican kelly ayotte, new hampshire, coming up. hey kevin...still eating chalk for heartburn? yeah... try new alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heartburn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer fruits chews. enjoy the relief! we are thinkers.

the job jugglers. the up all-nhts. and the ones who turn ideas into action. we've made our passions our life's work. we strive for the moments where we can s, "i did it!" ♪ we are entrepreneurs who started it all... with a signature. legalzoom has helped start over 1 million businesses, turning dreamers into business owners. and we're here to help start yours.

jenna: well, as bill to extend unemployment makes its way through the senate, we have new polling. 58% of overall voters polled think that congress should approve a three month extension of unemployment benefits for people who are currently out of work. but when broken down along party lines, these are the results. it's split. 83% of democrats approve a three month extension, and about half that number, around only 42% of republicans, support it. there's a little more than half of independents that think congress should approve the extension. the congressional budget office projects that extending the benefits would add $6.4 billion to the deficit over ten years. republican senator kelly ayotte of new hampshire is putting

>> it's being abused this is good government, and we should do it regardless? the good news is we can pay for the three month extension and fix the unfair cut to our military retirees and wounded warriors and return money to the

deficit by fixing this abuse in our tax -- jenna: which is part of your proposal, and it seems some republicans agree with it as well. that said, it's been a nonstarter. senator sessions, other republicans have suggested this before in previous years, and it's been a nonstarter for democrats. so in the effort to get a bipartisan agreement, why try it again? >> i don't understand why it's a nonstarter on something that there's been investigations finding massive fraud within our tax -- if we can't fix fraud in the tax code to be able to pay for people who are struggling to find work to give them a temporary extension of benefits or our military retirees and wounded warriors, this is just such sentence, i don't you said it -- common sense, i don't understand it. that is the so-called low-hanging fruit that senator reid said no longer exists. there is a lot of low-hanging fruit in washington in terms of fraud, waste and abuse that we can get at. jenna: senator ayotte, you order from -- you heard from senator

reid, and i'd like to talk to you a little bit about the so-called empathy gap that some say republicans struggle with. you know, the argument from democrats we're willing to support this extension because we care so much about families that are unemployed right now that we're willing to do anything to help them, and republicans are trying to make it difficult. republicans would argue we're trying to pay for it. but the perception issue of the republican party, how do you confront that? >> listen, i voted to proceed to this bill because, in good faith, and i had an idea s and many other of my colleagues have ideas on how we can pay for this with $17 trillion in debt, i'm the mother of two children, i not only have empathy for the struggling workers, and so i'm willing to vote for short-term extension, but i also think that we can make sure that we don't burden, continue to burden our children and our country with $17 trillion in debt, and we can do both. and i believe that's really important for the country, that we do both. other side we're just --

otherwise to, we're just continuing to pass this on to the next generation, and what quality of life will they have if we keep making these decisions? jenna: senator, there are some that say this is just the beginning of some negotiation, your proposal. obviously, senator reid's reaction is not positive at the time. some reports are suggesting that this is the foundation for an even bigger deal that would involve an even to bigger extension of unemployment benefits in exchange for other pay-fors. do you sew that? -- do you see that? what are your thoughts on that? >> well, it's been interesting. what i've heard from the other side of the aisle is we can't come up with any pay-fors for a three month extension, so now we want to move it to a year, so how do they plan on paying for that? it seems to me that there's some common sense proposals -- not only mine, others offered by my colleagues on the floor -- so we can resolve this now on a short-term basis. and then, frankly, we should be focusing on creating a better economic climate to get people back to work with permanent policies, energy policy, making sure, obviously, the problems

we've seen with health care that hurts hiring, other issues that we should with working on so that people can have good jobs. jenna: senator, we'd love to have you back, because we've had a few segments on our program this week about other alternatives besides extending unemployment benefits or in addition to that really have fascinateed us, and we'd love to have you back to talk about it. >> i would love to do that. jenna: thank you for your time, and we'll stay close and see how this develops. >> thanks, jenna. jon: sounds like she's going after fraud, not children. big difference, right? the white house doing damage control now that former defense secretary robert gates is out ticiz obama's leadershiping style. new reaction on that next. and a group of teachers who say their rights are being violated just got one step closer to victory. their fight could go all the way to the supreme court. good job!

still runnng in the morning? yeah. getting your vegebles every day? when i can. [ bop ] [ male announcer ] could've had a v8. two full servings of vegetables for only 50 delicious calories.

and our giant idaho potato truck is still missing. so my dog and i we're going to go find it. it's out there somewhere spreading the good word about idaho potatoes and raising money for meals on wheels. but we'd really like our truck back, so if you see it, let us know, would you? thanks. what? i'm here to get the lady of the house back on her feet. [ all gasp ] oj, veggies you're cool. mayo? corn dogs? you are so outta here! aah! 'cause i'm re-workin' the menu, keeping her healthy and you on your toes. [ female announcer ] the complete balanced nutrition of great-tasting ensure. 24 vitamins and minerals, antioxidants, and 9 grams of protein. i see you, cupcake! uh-oh! [ bottle ] the number one doctor recommended brand. ensure®. nutrition in charge™.

jon: right now the white house on the defense, pushing back against harsh criticism in a book that isn't even out yet. but we have seen excerpts of former secretary of defense robert gates' memoir. the ex-pentagon chief slams president obama's handling of the wars in iraq and afghanistan and rips into vice president joe biden. after all the stories broke about the book, the white house gave photographers access to their normally-private weekly lunch yesterday. these are some of the pictures that came out of that event. nina easton is a senior editor and columnist for fortune, she's also a fox news contributor, and lynn sweet is the washington bureau chief at the "chicago sun-times." in particular the white house does seem to be bristling at the suggestions that vice president biden is not clued in to the, you know, foreign policy and

other decisions that the white house has to make. the white house, nina, seems to be, you know, punching back, putting out this press meeting, this press availability yesterday and so forth. what's at stake in trying to protect the vice president's reputation here? >> well, first, i have to say that that photo they released of biden and obama yesterday was pretty silly and contrived and probably wasn't the best way to go about punching back at the gates' book. this white house clearly wants to protect joe biden. we're looking at 2016 potentially for him. they want to protect his reputation. and so they're coming out and very much supporting him and circling the wagons as it were. it is interesting, gates described him as being wrong on all these foreign policy decisions. he really hasn't provided a lote interesting once he does interviews to see if he goes into more detail on where biden

was wrong. jon: and it also, obviously, lynn, talks a lot about the president and his decision making process, suggesting that when it came to the surge strategy in afghanistan, he was doubting his own orders, convinced that they might fail. >> well, i think what's notable about that, actually, is the sense that he decided to do a tell-all while the administration was still in office. now, if a president has doubts that he might share with defense secretary or people in his cabinet, that doesn't seem a problem per se, if somebody confides something to you or discusses something. you know, you want to hear other voices, you want to be able to talk frankly. so i think when it comes to the test of could he write this book, he had the right to, but i am under the impression from what i've heard that he was one of the people who always preached against leaks and how these conversations were sacred.

so it's something to talk about, isn't it, that he decides to come out with this end coo of book -- this kind of book while the administration is still in office. jon: what about that, nina? gates has been criticized for sort of kissing and telling, bringing out secrets that some people think -- and it sounds like lynn is among them -- that should have remained behind closed doors. >> and it's interesting because we've seen this tradition, scott -- jon, go back to scott mcclellan in the bush administration, back to george stephanopoulos in the clinton administration, and to have robert gates follow along that path, i think, has really taken people for a loop. i don't think they expected it. that said, there's a lot of serious insights in here that are important looking forward while in this president is in office and while afghanistan is on the table. because afghanistan, like iraq, is at a tipping point. and if this administration is reluctant to protect the gains that have been made, the blood

and treasure of in this country that have been there for years by leaving enough troops to secure the place, that's something that's very troubling. and, you know, senator mccain, senator lindsey graham were both over there recently, and they say military commanders on the ground say you need 9-13,000 troops stationed there on a semipermanent basis just to protect those gains. jon: you know, lynn, along those lines, i mean, we still have troops in korea, troops in germany years after those conflicts ended. i guess that's a discussion for another day, but "the wall street journal" seems to applaud gates for bringing out some of these issues saying that it's now left up to members of congress to keep a closer eye on a white house that dithers about some of these important decisions. >> well, that's why as a journalist, of course, i applaud anyone who wants to tell all. i was commenting on just what it seems from the people on the inside, this sense of stepping over a line. but as nina said, any more

information you get on to the decision making when you have these important decisions with afghanistan before us, when you see how iraq has trouble keeping, you know, so many news reports about the problems there. but the gates book can be very important to history, and it also could be important to just the day-to-day decisions of congress. i don't think it takes off the table the political problem that could cause, the headache they could cause for the obama white house from somebody who was trusted and who did preach to other people not to be the leak. jon: it doesn't officially come out til next week, as i mentioned, and it is already rocking the white house and all of washington. nina easton, lynn sweet, thank you both. jenna: medicaid is supposed to help the poor, the poorest in our country, but apparently it's also going to millionaires? how that's happening, next. ♪ ♪ óqoqúúñ@

jon: the lawsuit filed by a group of california public schoolteachers against a powerful teachers' union is moving forward. the teachers say the union violated their first amendment rights, forcing them to contribute money to political causes. the the case is on its way to the ninth circuit court of

appeals, one step closer to the supreme court. claudia cowan is live in san francisco keeping an eye on it. claudia? >> reporter: jon, hard to imagine getting a job and then, by law, having to pay a union to keep that job and then getting no say in how your union dues are spent, but that is the deal for public schoolteachers here in california and in 25 other so-called closed-shop states where public employees must join a union as a condition of employment. union reps say those fees help their efforts to improve workplace safety, for instance, and get better contracts for all employees. and they add teachers can opt out of paying dues that fund political activities, but many teachers say opting out is a difficult and intimidating process. they say they don't get all their money back, and now a group of them has filed a federal lawsuit saying this mandatory bankrolling violates their free speech rights, and they deserve the right to choose. >> some teachers may want to join the union, and that's fine.

but the state can't compel membership in the union. that's what this lawsuit is all about. >> reporter: besides seeing their dues spent on political issues, the teachers who filed the lawsuit say they don't want to be forced to pay for the union's contract negotiations. with 325,000 members, the powerful california teachers association takes in roughly $190 million a year with teachers required to pay about a thousand dollars each. no one from the cta would speak with us on camera, but in a statement to fox, cta president dean vogel called the lawsuit an attempt, quote: to weaken unions and the workers they represent. but supporters say this is really about the first amendment and, jon, this case will soon be heard by the ninth circuit court of appeals on a path to the u.s. supreme court. jon: let us know what happens. claudia cowan in san francisco, thank you. jenna: well, the affordable care act's expanding medicaid to nearly nine million americans. medicaid, of course, is designed to cover health care costs for our nation's poorest, but

loopholes in the system that predate obamacare leave a -- leave it very absolutely noble fraud and abuse. in fact, our next guest says millionaires are enrolling in medicaid. mark warshawsky's work in "the wall street journal" this week, he was talking about this topic. it's great to have you on the program. >> my pleasure to be with you. jenna: so first question is, why would millionaires want to enroll in medicaid? >> well, what we're talking about is benefits for long-term care, home health care and nursing home care which is very expensive, particularly focusing on the elderly, and so it's very valuable benefit if you can get it paid for by the government. jenna: and how would you get it paid for by the government even if you were in the category of millionaire? >> those are, that's according to the rules. the actual rules of the program allow you to exclude from the

countable assets that are considered for eligibility your home up to $800,000, various retirement accounts and insurance policies, valuables in your home, jewelry, a personal car and up to $115,000 for your spouse. so just add it up, that's well over a million dollars which could be excluded, and you're still eligible for medicaid benefits. jenna: how big of a problem is this? >> a study from economists at the federal reserve bank of chicago have looked at this empirically, and they found that in the upper income distribution for the, again, for the elderly, between 8 and 5% depending on where you are in the distribution do get medicaid benefits. so since we're talking about millions of possibly eligible, you know, 5 and 8%, 15%, those

type of numbers, it translates to potentially hundreds of thousands of people. jenna: so you're not saying that you're breaking the law necessarily, it's just that the law allows for these exceptions? >> that's right. i think there is some fraud as well, but that's very hard to determine. what i'm talking about is the way the rules are written and the way the program is enforced. jenna: so with the expansion of medicaid, and certainly we're seeing that under obamacare, again, these issues you're talking about predate the new health care law, but because there's more people joining, want to ask about the resources that we have to support them. so how do we fix this so the right people get medicaid and the people that can potentially afford their long-term care have another option? >> i think, um, the whole existence of the medicaid program for long-term care benefits that is available to people who are in the upper

income groups discourages planning, financial planning when people are younger or even as they just become retired from buying long-term care insurance and saving access that would finance their long-term care needs, and i think what we need to do is to tighten the eligibility rules for medicaid. so we need to count those assets that i was talking about before. that's step number one. and step number two is that we need to encourage people to prepare in advance for their long-term care needs. jenna: it's interesting because i'm sure all of us, if you're working, you're paying -- you think i'm going to get medicare which is, obviously, different than medicaid. but when medicaid is an easy alternative or one that you can think about as supplementing medicare, then you're right, you sort of get lulled into thinking there's going to be things there that may or may not be. mark, it's a really interesting topic, and we appreciate your analysis. thank you very much. >> my pleasure.

jon: a search on right now for the missing teenage son of a boston globe columnist. the latest in the mission to find caleb jacoby. and we are awaiting the launch of a private spacecraft. it is set to happen less than an hour from now. we'll tell you about its mission. >> we are awaiting that launch. we, too, are awaiting it, so coming up on hq, more on the legal fallout from new jersey's bridgegate. gregg: and we'll be talking to congressman darrell issa. he calls the latest development on the irs probe, quote, unbelievable. he's here to explain. alisyn: okay. and then join us for that very special space launch. why they're sending 800 abilities -- gregg: really? alisyn: -- to space? and we are going to be asking what you would like to send into space. get your answer ready, we'll see you at the top of the hour. tbreg greg i'm ready. see you then.

jenna: new information on a traffic story we first brought

you yesterday as it broke during our show. the coast guard is searching for a sailor missing after a navy helicopter crash yesterday. the helicopter went down ocean off the virginia coast during a training mission. four of the five onboard were rescued from the frigid water, but ultimately, two of those rescued died. the navy continues the search for the remaining sailor. jon: former arizona congresswoman gabrielle giffords marks three years since the tragic shooting in tucson that nearly killed her. she's doing it by skydiving. there she is jumping out of the plane with a friend, a tandem jump. giffords landed safely at a site between phoenix and tucson. it was three years ago yesterday that six people died, 13 others were injured when jared loughner opened fire at an event the then-congresswoman was holding in tucson. he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to seven life terms plus 140 years. jenna: we wish her well. pretty cool she did that.

right now all hands on deck at a massachusetts high school where faculty and student are launching a search for one of their own. 16-year-old caleb jacoby is the son of a boston globe columnist. he's been missing since monday. patti ann brown is back with more from our newsroom with more on this. >> reporter: well, jenna, caleb jacoby is the 16-year-old son of jeff jacoby, a conservative columnist, as you say, for the boston globe. caleb has been missing for three days, and volunteers from his school and community are fanning out to search for him and pushing the case on social media. brookline police say there's no reason to believe there was any foul play. the captain telling reporters they're leaning towards thinking he's a runaway, but their search continues. caleb was last seen monday at 12:30 p.m. he's an 11th grader at a judeo school. he also frequents public libraries and the young us legal synagogue of brookline. friends say he's not the type of kid who would run away, but a former teacher says he was a serious guy who wasn't

easygoing. caleb's father, jeff jacoby, is involved with the american jewish community and has written opinion pieces for the conservative israel network. we are deeply, deeply grateful for everything being done to reunite us with our beloved son, caleb. caleb jacoby is about 5-11, 140 pounds with short, light brown hair, and that search comets, jenna. jenna: we hope they find him. patti ann, thank you. jon: we are less than 30 minutes away now from a space launch in virginia. the privately-developed cargo spacecraft, its destination? the international space station. no astronauts onboard though. they have ants and lots more. liftoff of the private craft set for 1:07 eastern. stave heir began is live with details. steve? >> reporter: jon, this is a launch that has already been delayed three separate times. we could be looking at another delay now. we've just learned that some duck hunters are in the area of the launch pad in virginia where

this unmanned rocket is supposed to take off. they've got to get the duck hunters out of there before they launch. of course, their launch timing is at the time the international space station is above the launch pad, so this really could prove to be complicated. the scheduled program is to take a cargo ship with about 3,000 pounds of gear to the six-person crew on the international space station. much of that gear will be for scientific experiments, and it does include one high school experiment, as you say, ants, to see how they'll do in space, but also to get young people encouraged to follow space exploration. some fresh fruit also for those onboard the space station which, of course, will be welcomed. now, this is just one in a series of cargo launches by private companies in the u.s. to the international space station. the hope is that nasa will be able to ferry people using private companies by 2017. until then, nasa is paying a he hefty bill to the russian space center, $1.7 billion through

2017, to serve as a space taxi. in addition, nasa has announced the space station itself will get a longer life, an additional four years to 2024. they'll be paying a heavy price for that as well, up to $3 billion a year to keep the iss in operation through 2024. jon, back to you. jon: all right. steve harrigan, let us know about the ants and how it all goes. [laughter] thank you. i always wanted an ant farm when i was a kid. jenna: really? there's still time, jon. jon: well, yeah, i guess i could buy my own. my mother never shared that fascination. jenna: i'm going to talk to the crew. we could do that, right? [laughter] now that we know your wish -- jon: not this time of year. awfully cold for those ants. jenna: i'm just tucking it away. we're going to stay on this space beat. we have another space story that's related to a potentially dangerous new asteroid orbiting the earth.

how it was discovered and how far away it really is from us. and new information about obamacare, the way hospitals are planning to avoid having patients who can't pay for their care. ... ... ... ...

jenna: well, right now a never-before-seen asteroid spotted by nasa's newly reactivated asteroid hunting space telescope. near earth object, wide field infrared survey explorer. you got that, jon? jon: yep. jenna: all right. it came out of hibernation just last month, and it found a rock now named 2013yp139. we're told it's potentially hazardous, orbiting 27 million miles from earth, and it's getting closer. dr. derek pitts is one of our favorite people to talk talk tot

these summits, chief astronomer and director of the franklin institute planetarium. so, dr. pitts, is it going to get close? how close is it going to get? >> how long do you have to wait, jenna? it's going to take about -- it's going to be about 300,000 miles away from earth sometime in the future, over the next 100 years we really don't have to worry about it at all because its orbit around the sun is not going to bring it close to earth. if you can wait for a few centuries, maybe you might see it in the night sky. jenna: we'll see how good some of that anti-aging cream really is, dr. pitts. [laughter] but, you know, it's great to be able to identify this stuff, but then the next question is, well, how do we get rid of it if it's heading towards earth? if it comes really close? >> it is really important to be able to identify asteroids that look like they're on a potential collision course with earth as early as we possibly can because the way in which we can keep them from interacting with earth is if we can deflect them somehow.

now, a simple, a really simple way to do this would be to land a rocketship on the surface and gently push it with the rocket motors just a little bit at a time, and over time we can deflect its path enough that it would miss earth over a period of a few years or so. so the earlier we can detect, the better chance we have of being able to change its course. jenna: do we have that technology available now? >> in a way we have the technology. i mean, we have the rocket motors developed and all that sort of thing. st the idea of actually delivering it to an asteroid and anchoring there so the rocket motors can push it off course. so there's still some development of this technology that needs to be done, but you can bet that that's being worked on, because we do have to look out for these asteroids. one of them impacting earth could really ruin our day here. jenna: right, it certainly can. hopefully, we make sure the resources are going to the right places so we can make these developments. >> exactly. jenna: real quick here, what

about those ants that are on their way to space? what do you think about that? [laughter] >> you know, they'll have a great time up there in microgravity because for the first time they'll be able to float around free of gravity, but it's a great way to get students involveed in space exploration and hopefully give them a chance in thinking about pursuing careers in mathematics, science and technology. jenna: did you hear that jon wants an about farm, dr. derek? >> i wanted one, too, when i was a kid. [laughter] jenna: look at that! jon: we share the frustration. >> we do. jenna: amazon.com right after this, and you guys are both going to get ability farms. [laughter] >> thank you. jenna: dr. pitts, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. jon: well, once upon a time adapting to modern times. how smart pajamas, yes, that's the phrase, are changing bedtime, and you will not believe what they can do. we have details next. mine was earned orbiti the moon in 1971.

afghastan, in 2009. on the u.s.s. saratoga in 1982. [ male announcer ] once it's ened, usaa auto insurance is often handed down from generation to generation. because it offers a superior level of protection. and because usaa's commitment to serve current and former miliry members and their families is without equal. begin your legacy. get an au insurance quote. usaa. we know what it means to serve.

get this, bed time books could be i once upon i time kind of thing. with smart pj's, yes, a real invention. story telling pajama that use technology to display on a smart phone and tab let and they are contained in the polka kots in the kid's pajamas and scan bed time classics like cinderella and old mother hubbard and humpty dumpty. >> as a father, would you have used the technology? there had to be a few nights i don't have a good bed-time story in me. >> my problem when i read to it my kids, after 8 o'clock p.m. horizontal i am gone. good night mom. and they wake me up. >> dad.

>> i don't know how i feel about scanning the children. there is something that doesn't feel right, i don't know, we'll see. >> i like print on paper. >> maybe they will make one for adults. thanks for joining us everybody. >> america's news head quarter ares stars right now. fox news alert. minutes away from a space launch in virginia, destination the international space station. no astronauts are not on board, just insects. we'll explain why 800ants are on board. fox news alert for you. new outrage in the irs scandal. the justice department chooses a obama supporter to lead the investigation in the targeting of 500 conservative groups. welcome to hq, i am alisyn camerota. >> and i am greg in for bill hemmer. eight months ago president obama prom