Defendants Bill Baroni and Bridget Anne Kelly are seeking to keep alive their subpoenas to the law firm representing Gov. Christie's office.
NEWARK -- Citing the specter of President Nixon and the infamous Watergate tapes, a Bridgegate defense brief filed late Monday argues that lawyers representing Gov. Chris Christie's office must turn over communications demanded in a subpoena, just as was required of the disgraced ex-president.
In the brief, Michael Baldassarre, defense attorney for Bill Baroni, said lawyers representing Christie's office have been holding back on records, including cell phone messages, texts and emails, sought in a subpoena issued earlier this year. The tactics, he said, recall Nixon's ultimately failed strategy of keeping the tapes secret.
"President Nixon's tapes were not immune from a subpoena," it said. "Neither is Governor Christie's phone."
The brief, and another filed by the legal team representing the other defendant, Bridget Anne Kelly, were filed in response to a motion to limit or quash further production of potential Bridgegate evidence by Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, the law firm representing the governor's office.
Kelly's lawyer, Michael Critchley, illustrated the disagreements the defendants have with the governor's office's lawyers and federal prosecutors over the production of evidence they claim is being withheld. Christie, the filing says, recently said "the government" has his cell phone, while prosecutors have said they don't have it.
"It is unclear where Governor Christie's cell phone is, or if it still exists," the brief says.
The Baroni brief -- which frequently cites the Nixon case in its legal arguments -- says information recently produced by Gibson Dunn points to yet more information not received by either the Bridgegate defendants or federal prosecutors. Prosecutors first subpoenaed the records in building its case against Baroni, the former deputy executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and Kelly, Christie's ex-deputy chief of staff.
For example, it cited an email from Christie to David Samson, former Port Authority chairman. The email, dated Dec. 14, 2013, links to a newspaper story and says, "Per our earlier conversation..."
But a record of that earlier conversation is missing, the brief says. That and other documents "firmly establish" that Gibson Dunn has more records to produce, it says.
In another case, it says Gibson Dunn did not turn over emails between Christie and his advisers when ex-Port Authority official David Wildstein, who has pleaded guilty to charges related to the George Washington Bridge lane closure plan, resigned in December, 2013.
Baroni also said it is "troubling" that federal prosecutors have not joined the motion to quash the subpoena, suggesting that prosecutors are working with the governor's office.
Who else knew about Bridgegate?
It also asks U.S. District Judge Susan D. Wigenton to approve a supplemental subpoena seeking materials that Gibson Dunn withheld from prosecutors when they opened the investigation.
In addition, the brief mentions the role of unindicted co-conspirators, whose identities are subject to a separate appellate court review, at trial. "It is a certainty" that those individuals will assert their Fifth Amendment rights not to incriminate themselves, the brief says.
Similarly, Kelly's brief seeks information it claims Gibson Dunn should have produced, but did not. Included, it says, is Gibson Dunn's "epic failure to obtain critical text messages related to the Fort Lee lane realignment," including messages between Christie and his incoming chief of staff, Regina Egea, during legislative hearings on Bridgegate.
Further, it says that Kelly, in her former role as director of the Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, should get all available records related to the office since the indictment goes beyond the lane closures. The indictment alleges that the office was used "as a political operation to garner endorsements" for Christie's 2013 re-election campaign, information that would be important to her defense, it says.
Records so far produced by Gibson Dunn relating the to September, 2013 lane closures are insufficient, it said, because the indictment shows conversations about bridge lane closures date back to 2011.
Gibson Dunn filed its motion in April to quash in part the subpoena it received in March from the defense lawyers.
A hearing to argue the question before U.S. District Judge Susan D. Wigenton has not been scheduled.
Wigenton in February approved filing a subpoena upon Gibson Dunn.
Baron and Kelly are accused in a nine-count indictment of planning massive traffic jams in September 2013 in Fort Lee by reducing local traffic access to the George Washington Bridge as political retribution.
Gibson Dunn attorneys say the defense lawyers are seeking too much. The defense "brazenly" sought "new, sweeping demands" including "physical inspection of every electronic device Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP examined during its 2014 investigation," it says.
The Gibson Dunn motion says the subpoena is an abuse of court rules and is an attempt to turn the case into a "sideshow" about Gibson Dunn's investigation. That investigation produced a report pinning the lane closure scheme largely on Kelly and Wildstein.
Tim Darragh may be reached at tdarragh@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @timdarragh. Find NJ.com on Facebook.