martha: good to have you back. bill: it's good you survived. martha: just barely we are glad to have you back. "happening now" starts right now. we will see you right back here tomorrow. can't kebt to your computer through our internet? it may be infected with malware. it is affecting computers around the world. what can you do about it now. we'll tell you coming up. the landmark supreme court decision on the president's healthcare plan has a handful of governors up in arms. governor rick perry joins us live to tell us what he plans to do in his state, it's an exclusive interview in about a half an hour for now. one man's close encounter with a great white on cape cod. just like a scene out of the movies. this kayaker will join us live with his story. it's all "happening now."

jenna: you can hear the jaws music. that is enough. no more kayaker this sum sneer that is a big great white. jenna: definitely big. a reus for the white house is where we start getting very tight in a dozen key battleground states. we are glad you are with us on this monday. i'm jenna lee. stpho: i'm jon scott. take a look at this u.s.a. today gallop poll, in swing states like colorado, florida and michigan. independents could make all the difference, and president obama stands at 47%, governor romney at 45% support, pretty much a dead heat. then taking a look at the "real clear politics" national average of the polls the president is at 47%, governor romney with 44%. so what do these numbers tell us? let's bring in tom bevin executive editor of "real clear politics." tom, it is going to be a squeaker of an election if these numbers continue to hold, and

it's all about the battleground states, isn't it? >> absolutely. and you notice the one thing obama is at 47% in our average, he's at 47% in the battle grounds, and his job approval rate is at 47%, that's why that job approval rating is such a key indicator and the president's team wants to see that number move up. no president has won election or re-election under 50%, because obviously if people don't think he's doing a good job they won't vote for him, they'll vote for the alternative. jon: at the same time mitt romney rear aegis sowed up the republican nomination not so long ago when rick santorum dropped out of the race. it is possible that voters really don't know romney yet, haven't focused on him and their minds are still to be made up. >> absolutely. that's why president obama and his team have spent an awful lot of money, actually both campaigns have spent, but obama's campaign in particular spent over a hundred million dollars so far in ads mostly in

these battleground states, some of them positive but most of them negative. they are trying to really define romney before he can define himself for voters. again they want this election not to be a referendum on president obama's first term, but a choice between the two candidates. jon: there was some bad news and some good news, i guess, for mitt romney in these polls. one in 12 minds were changed apparently by some of the negative advertising that you are talking about, and the advantage there went to the democrats. can you explain why that is? >> well, i mean i think, again, it's early. voters don't have solid impressions of romney. a lot of voters aren't necessarily paying attention at this point. and again obama is trying to define romney and define him negatively. they are calling him a pioneer of outsourcing, and obama is trying to portray himself as someone fighting for the middle class. we saw the president this morning is going to come out and talk about an extension for the

middle class tax cuts. romney is going to portray that as a tax increase on the american public. there is a lot of jocking going on right now. so far it seems like the president's, the amount of monies spent on the negative ads have had an impact on the margin. again it's way too early. there is a lot of race yet to run. jon: as has been pointed out the margins matter a lot. you can ask al gore about that. the good news for romney is that the enthusiasm among republicans is higher than that among democratic voters. >> that's right. there is good news, bad news. you can look at romney and say boy he's in a pretty good position coming out of a republican primary where it was hard fought. he shatters fundraising records. he seems to have heood enthusiasm among the republican base. the flip side question is, if the economy is such a big question, why isn't romney beating obama. we are talking about a very

small slice of the electorate, 12 to 15% in the battleground states and they will end up deciding who becomes the next president. jon: 47% of the voters who think president obama is doing a good job that's been traditionally very hard to win row election with those kind of numbers. >> that's right. that is the danger zone. he needs to see that number up closer to 50%. it can maybe be a tick under but not by much. again, it's a pretty simple calculus. if voters don't think that president obama is doing a good job, is up to the job, they'll vote for somebody else. if they -- they'll look at what the alternative is, right now that is mitt romney and he's trying to frame himself as being an acceptable alternative who can move the economy forward. jon: that's why the negative ad wars go on. tom bevan from "real clear politics." tom, thank you. >> thanks, jon. jenna: a big day on capitol hill as well, the house rules committee holding an emergency meeting online a bill introduced by majority leader eric cantor.

this would repeal the president's healthcare law. shannon bream is live in washington. shannon it seemed like yesterday you were at the supreme court with the ruling that was handed down there. why are republicans continuing to push this issue when the supreme court has already said what it's going to say. >> reporter: jenna republicans are arguing that just because the court has said something is constitutional it doesn't mean it's good for the country. they do acknowledge that our current healthcare system has significant problems but they believe the president's healthcare law isn't the st. louis and they want to show the american people they do have better ideas. here is house republican and physician tom price. >> what we believe we need to do is to provide that contrast, that positive, upbeat contrast for the american team to say, hey, those are the folks that are fighting for us in washington for patient-centered healthcare, which means patients, families and doctors making decisions not washington. that contrast is important so people as they move into the fall recognize they have a choice here in washington. >> reporter: republicans say now that the supreme court has clearly defined the mandate as a

tax they believe they actually are going to get some democrats to vote with them on this repeal, jenna. jenna: lawmakers have a lot in front of them right now including all the issues surrounding the economy. one of the questions that our viewers have is, is the time and energy put into this really worth it? >> reporter: democrats are confident there will be bash lash against republicans for taking time on this vote. americans are tired about all the fighting over the healthcare law and say the court has settled the matter. here is a democrat from california. >> we should be moving forward, why are we going backwards talking about what was already done, litigated, debated, passed, and also affirmed by the supreme court? we should be talking about jobs. >> reporter: democrats are launching a series of ads by the way in a number of critical house district outlining the benefits of the healthcare law that have already kicked in and telling voters in the different districts that their republican representative in congress is about to vote to strip those benefits away. by the way the repeal vote if it

stays on schedule is set for wednesday. jenna: they are back from break and ready to go. back to work for the lawmakers. shannon thank you very much. another big issue including the healthcare law right now are the state exchanges and the medicaid expansion. as part of the supreme court ruling states can now opt out of new federal funding that would expand their medicaid coverage. of course there is a consequence to that. there is also a consequence to deciding to not set up the state exchanges. texas governor rick perry says he's not going to do either. and he's out with a big announcement today about what his state will do, he's going to join us in an exclusive interview about 20 minutes from now. jon: we are looking forward to that. some new information on the deaths of six american troops in afghanistan. the taliban now claims responsibility for a roadside bombing that killed them. nato confirms the victims' nationalities but is not providing other details. our world affairs contributor and our af-pac correspondent

dominique d-natali is streaming live from islamabad. >> reporter: it must have been an incredibly powerful device. the soldiers were riding against a max-pro vehicle. this vehicle has specifically a chiseled base that is designed to deflect the blast n. this case it went through the base of the vehicle and killed everybody on board. apparently there was also a military working dog who was traveling with them, and a grim irony there in the fact that of course military working dogs are very much used to detect bombs in places like this. the attack happening in a province in what is regional command east in the east of the country up against the pakistan border. we've seen a lot of heavy contact with the taliban over the past two years. but it seems that the taliban are very much fighting back this season. over the weekend two other nato soldiers killed. their nationalities not concerned. one in kandahar, another in

helmand province. a lot of bloat shed over the weekend at the hands of the taliban, 36 people killed in all, most of those civilians in car bombing attacks. we have seen a response from nato this weekend, we saw a taliban commander in the province where the sunday incident took out six soldier, that commander and three of his men apparently were killed in a strike there. the tempo rising this season, particularly in the summer months. jon: awful news out of afghanistan. dominique d-natali thank you. jenna: more than 30 years after she drowned in the waters off the california coast the l.a. county coroner is reportedly changing the official cause of death for actress natalee woods. the latest on a decades old hollywood mystery could. ing up. and facebook once again pushing the limits of user privacy. find out how its new mobile ads will be tracking you, and whether you should be worried about this.

our current dividend tax rate will expire this year, sending taxes through the roof and hindering economic recovery. the consequences? millions of americans will see their taxes on dividend income spike, slowing investment in u.s. companies and jeopardizing development in energy projects that create american jobs. ask congress to stop a dividend tax hike -- for all of us.

jenna: fist book and advertising companies may soon be tracking you on your cellphone. the social networking site is considering a plan to allow advertisers to target users based on any of those apps that you may or may not upload on your mobile phone. not only that, facebook will also be looking at what people do on those apps. is this an invasion of privacy? >> reporter: to basically lay it all out, what facebook is trying to do is make money off of you whenever you access a company's website on your mobile phone. for facebook investors they have been very eager to hear about this mobile app strategy, considering that facebook shares since the ipo date are still down about 17%. facebook users, however, are not so eager, because what the "wall

street journal" is reporting is that facebook is considering a new type of mobile advertising based on two different things, first the type of apps that you download, plus the activities that you do on those apps. we haven't seen this type of targeting behavior ever before. the mobile arena, we must note is considered the holy grail for facebook, considering, jenna, about 500 million users, basically half of its overall user base access facebook on their mobile phones and the company isn't making any reasonable amount of money off of that. jenna: hundreds of millions of people that are using facebook. what about these privacy concerns? >> absolutely something to be concerned about, jenna. this is even a departure for facebook, because online when you do access a facebook website you're only served up ads when you opt into those ads or you like a certain web page, for example, the general motors web page or the coca-cola web page. the new mobile plans for you doesn't require either. this is new territory that not

even apple or google even play in right now, so privacy experts are watching this very closely. if and when this does launch next month the privacy experts say that in order to make this more palatable you have to be able to opt out of this mobile ad sharing all together. there must be note must a reason that facebook likes this. it will go to 80% this year growing to over $2.6 billion in revenue, something this a lot of people are trying to take a bite of right now. jenna: i can understand that. thank you. jon: the mexican drug cartel u.s. authorities call the most powerful drug trafficking organization in the world. authorities raided one of its headquarters right here in the united states. wait until you hear what agents found in a residential neighborhood near a popular university. also, did you catch this. the head of the republican national committee with a very blunt assessment on sunday,

slamming president obama's re-election team for what he calls the most negative campaign ads he's ever seen. he also outlined the g.o.p. plan to support governor romney. we'll get a tpap debat a fair & balanced debate on this is comments after the break. [ manager 1 ] out here in the winds, i have to know the weather patterns. i upgraded to the new sprint direct connect. so i can get three times the coverage. [ chirp ] [ manager 2 ] it's like working in a giant sandbox with all these huge toys. and with the fastest push-to-talk... i can keep track of them all. [ chirp ] [ chirp ] [ male announcer ] upgrade to the new "done." with access to the fastest push-to-talk and three times the coverage. now when you buy one kyocera duracore rugged phone, for $49.99, you'll get four free. visit a sprint store, or call 855-878-4biz. [ chirp ]

jon: republican national committee chairman going on the defensive on fox news sunday outlining his party's plans to back mitt romney for president and blasting president obama for running what he calls the most negative campaign he's ever seen. >> this president has already shown that he's not who he said he was. he claimed he was going to bring everyone together he would be this uniter. he's been the most devisive, nasty, negative campaigner that this country has ever seen. jon: joining us now for a fair & balanced debate kate obenshain.

and former aid to chuck schumer, christopher hahn, also a fox news contributor. the most negative campaigner he's ever seen, chris for christopher, what do you think? >> he's employing a strategy on the playground, i'm rubber, you're glue, whatever you say, blah, blah, blah. for him to say obama is the most necessary tiff di negative. did he watch when romney spent 90% of his money on ads against his fellow republicans. what do you think the superpac is raise all this money for? they are going to attack the president. please. i don't understand this guy. jon: we are not talking about a primary here, we are talking about the general election which seems to be set now with mitt romney going against the president. what about his comments? >> yeah, there is a major transformation here from the great uniter to the great divider. barack obama has absolutely no

choice but to go negative when the number of americans going on disability out paces the number who got jobs last month, when we were promised unemployment would be below 8%, would be around 5 and 6%, when the government has taken over vast swathes of the economy and promised to raise taxes on working americans. obama has no choice but to go negative and he's doing it viciously. this is what his entire administration has been about. he can't defend his ideology, he can't stand up and champion a set of ideas because it's not working, jon. so he has to go negative, and he has to lie, that's the thing, he's objec obfuscating and lying about mitt romney's record. jon: go ahead. >> my favorite thing republicans are doing this week is blaming the president for people going on disability. the other day i stubbed my tow. >> blaming them for the economy. >> if barack obama wasn't president i won't have stubbed my tow. please, me explain tog saw.

we were in one of the worst ditches this economy has been in in 75 years. >> and obama was going to get us out. >> he has this country moving in the right direction again. it is not going as fast as some would like but it moving up. >> the right direction in. >> we are not losing jobs, we are not bleeding 650,000 jobs a month like we were when the president took office thanks to the policies that mitt romney wants to go back to. mitt romney has to go negative. he can't run on his record as governor. he wants to list teen his rhetoric that he's done on this campaign trail. he doesn't believe this anything, all he can do is attack. jon: chris, the job numbers that came out for may and june were pretty anemic. are you satisfied with those? do you call those right direction numbers? >> jon, of course i'm not satisfied with them. >> you just said it's the right direction. >> no, listen adding 60 and adding 80,000 jobs is better than losing 650,000 which that economy brought us. >> this economy is disastrous and there is no way of getting

around that. 80,000 is not only anemic, it's appalling. you won't see any ads about obamacare. we know it's going to be a massive tax, another hraoeurbgs it will be a massive tax on hard-working americans. >> now you're kaoeug lying kate. i have to call you out on this. >> that's exactly what it is, chris. even the supreme court said -- it's a tax on -ts very people -- >> can i get a word in kate. jon: go ahead, chris. >> kate, listen, kate. we both know that it's not a tax on hard-working americans,. >> yeah we do, we know it's a tax. >> who want you and i to pay for it when they break their leg. >> you're dealing with the people -- jon: hold on kate. >> it is not a tax on everyone. and there are a lot of things about the obamacare that people are going to love and people do love. >> oh, my gosh, yeah they'll love all the freebies that are thrown out there. look, obama said he was going to

help those americans who couldn't afford health insurance and so what does he do, young people, low-income americans, he's forcing them to purchase insurance and -- insurance they cannot afford by the way, and if they can't then he's going to slap them with this tax, this penalty tax instead of encouraging americans who can't afford to buy health insurance towards tax credits. it is absolutely a tax and it's absolutely something he promised he wouldn't do. >> we were talking about politics you went to obamacare. jon: you know, well, chris, you know, the election is about obamacare, and everything else the president has done in the last three and a half years, that's what we will be vogue on in november. >> absolutely. christopher hahn, kate obershane, it's always good to have you two arguing. jenna: we'll go back to the riddle chris started with, i'm paper, you're glue, blah, blah, blah, blah, it book ends it doesn't it?

breaking news on the healthcare overhaul. first on fox, texas governor rick perry joins us live to reveal what his state will do now that the supreme court has backed the president's healthcare overhaul. what will happen with medicaid? what will happen with the exchanges? hello, governor. we'll see you right after the commercial. [ male announcer ] what's in your energy drink? ♪ wer surge, let it blow your mind. [ male announcer ] for fruits, veggies and natural green tea energy... new v8 v-fusion plus energy. could've had a v8. welcome to hotels.com. summer road trip, huh? new v8 v-fusion plus energy. as the hotel experts, finding you the perfect place is all we do. this summer, save up to 30%, plus get up to $100 on us. welcome to hotels.com.

t but centurylink is committed to being a different kind of communications company by continuing to help you do more and focus on the things that matter to you. anti-aging cream undeniably. it creamed unbelievably a $500 cream and now women have made regenerist microsculpting cream also unscented. women love it. in original and also fragrance-free. >> announcer: meet mary. she loves to shop online with her debit card, and so does bill, an identity thief who stole mary's identity, took over her bank accounts and stole her

hard-earned money. now meet jack. enough to enjoy retirement.saved angie, the waitress at jack's favorite diner, is also enjoying his retirement. with just a little information, she's opened up a credit line, draining the equity in jack's home. unfortunately, millions of americans just like you learn all it may take is a little misplaced information to wreak havoc on your life. this is identity theft, and no one helps stop it better than lifelock. see, ordinary credit monitoring services tell you after your identity has been stolen. they may take up to 60 days to alert you-- too late for jack. lifelock has the most comprehensive identity theft protection available. if mary had lifelock's bank account alerts, she may have been notified in time to help stop it. if jack had lifelock's 24/7 proactive protection, he could have been alerted by phone or e-mail as soon as they noticed an attack on their network, before it was too late. lifelock has the most comprehensive identity theft protection available, guarding

your social security number, your money, your credit, even the equity in your home. while identity theft can't be completely stopped, no one works harder to protect you than lifelock. you even g a $1 million service guarantee. that's security no one can beat. you have so much to protect and nothing to lose when you call lifelock right now and get 60 days of identity theft protection risk free-- that's right, 60 days risk free-- use promo code "not me". order now and get this document shredder to keep sensitive documents out of the wrong hands-- a $29 value, free. [click-click] [♪...] jenna: well, now this fox news alert, breaking news on the health care overhaul. governor rick perry sending a

letter today to the obama administration saying texas will not implement some key provisions of the health care overhaul. they include the medicaid expansion and the state exchanges. joining us first on fox, former 2012 republican candidate for president and texas governor rick perry in his first interview since texas made this decision. so, governor, why? >> well, if anyone had any doubt, we wanted to put it clearly to bed that texas wasn't going to be a part of expanding socializing of our medicine. so we're not going to participate in any exchanges, we're not going to expand medicaid. we're just not going to be a part of, again, socializing health care in the state of texas. and going in direct conflict with our founding fathers' wishes and freedom, for that matter. people need to be free to make those decisions about their health care, not be forced by this administration into these exchanges or into bankrupting states with the expansion of

medicaid. jenna: all right. let's take this step by step. if you don't set up the state exchanges, if you decide to do that which you have said today that you will not do, the federal government says as part of the law they will step in, and they will do that. so if part of your goal is to keep the federal government out of the lives of texans, then why give them that power? >> well, the bottom line here is that medicaid is a failed program. to expand this program is not unlike adding a thousand people to the titanic. you're going to further drive this country into debt, and that's really what we're discussing here, is how are we going to get this country back on track economically, fiscally sound. this is not the way to do it. you don't expand a program that is not working already. if the federal government was serious about working with the states and finding solutions to the health care needs, what they

would do is block grant those dollars back to the states. i can assure you that texas and other states would find more effective, efficient ways to deliver health care to their citizens and do it in a way that preserved those individuals' freedom. jenna: so the federal government says, in fact, that is sort of what they're trying to do. they say they're going to pay for 100% of the medicaid expansion for a few years, and then when you get past 2014, they're going to pay for about 90% of it. so to some that seems like a good deal because for every $6 billion the texas government spends between, let's say, 2014 and 2019, somewhere around there, the federal government could give you $76 billion. so why isn't that a good deal? >> well, i'm always intrigued with the content that there's free money out there and that we can pour more money into a program that is already failed

and somehow or another we're going to have a different result than what we had the first time. again, i want to go back to if the federal government was serious about assisting the states, of being a good and trusting partner -- and, listen, we don't know what this, these exchanges are going to look like. there's still a substantial amount of wording in this legislation that i'm pretty sure congress is just now reading for the first time and that we're being forced to try to participate in. and this would be like let's sell you a house, and the federal government's going to take care of all the contracting on it. if you'll just sign here on the dotted line, we know the fine print's not finished yet, but trust us. well, we don't trust this administration, and we don't trust washington, d.c. to be able to deliver health care in our states. if they trusted us, they would basically block grant it back to the states, and we would do a

substantially better job than what you're going to see with these exchanges and with the expansion of medicaid. jenna: so let's talk about solutions then. according to a new federal government report, i know you've seen this, texas has ranked last when it comes to health services provided by the state. i know, i know your folks have come out and aggressively said, hey, this is not something that we necessarily agree with for obvious reasons. but the facts are one out of four texans is without health insurance, one out of four texans is on medicare or medicaid. the health crisis, the big crisis for the country and for your state, what is the solution? >> well, let me address this issue. you don't have people come from all over the globe to the state of texas for their health care. we've got some of the finest health care in the world whether it's md anderson or ut southwest, some incredible health care facilities in the country. so the idea that this federal government which doesn't like texas to begin with to pick and

choose and come up with some data and say somehow texas has the worst health care system in the world is just fake and false on its face. the real issue here is about freedom. and the state of texas has decided through the years that we have the best interests of our citizens, not the federal government, and that if we can make those decisions in austin, texas, and at the local level, we'll best deliver health care for our citizens. jenna: how, governor? >> and the idea that -- well, every texan has health care in this state from the standpoint of being able to have access to health care. every texan has that. how we pay for it and how we deliver it should be our decision, not some bureaucrat in washington, d.c. that may have never been to texas a day in their life or, for that matter, any of the other 49 states trying to mandate this one size fits all health care. it is not going to work, it is a failed system. block grant back to the states if you want to see success and

effectiveness in health care delivery in this country. jenna: governor, one of the things you mentioned is that texas is really a magnet for a lot of folks. are you okay with your hearing, by the way? are you able to hear us all right, governor? >> go ahead. yes, ma'am, quite good. jenna: it always works better that way. you mentioned that texas is really a magnet state for so many reasons, and we've talked a lot about texas on this show because of the economy. because texas has really provided a place for a lot of businesses to come and families to set up shop. and one of the things that this health care law does is it says to small businesses that have more than 50 people, hey, listen, you have to provide health insurance to your employees. what do you say to a small business owner who brought his business to texas and has grown it and now wants to shop in the exchanges to provide health insurance to their employees, but they can't? what do you say to that person when you say, listen, we're not going to set up these exchanges? >> well, i say to them that they moved to the state of texas for freedom. they move today the state of texas because we have the best

economy in the country. eight years in a row now according to chief executive officer magazine. and that's the reason they came here, is because we have that limited approach to government. we believe in freedom. and we believe that those small businesses should be able to make the best decisions. you know, if the private sector wants to set up, if the private insurance sector wants to set up these types of ability to trade across lines and what have you, i think they ought to have the ability to do that. but not this one-size-fits-all, federally-mandated, washington-centric concept that the obama administration through obamacare is trying to force upon us. you know, i'm still stunned that there weren't enough courageous men and women in the united states congress to stand up and say this is bad public policy, it is going to exacerbate the problem in the states, it's going to cost the states more money, and it is going to bankrupt many states, including the state of texas if this thing

gets put into place the way that they envisioned it to begin with. that's not courage, in my opinion. jenna: okay. quick final question then. with that on the horizon, what is one solution you're offering to the state of texas to make sure that, one, it doesn't go bankrupt, and, two, that there are more health care options for the citizens of texas? >> well, obviously, to block grant those dollars back to the states. that is the single most effective way to efficiently and effectively allow health care to be better implemented in the states. it doesn't make any difference whether you're california or whether you're colorado or whether you're mississippi or florida. all of those states best know how to run their health care. you block grant those states, those federal dollars back, and we will have better, more efficient, more effective health care in this country. jenna: governor perry, i know you haven't received a response from the white house on your letter you sent about two hours ago. we look forward to hearing from you when you do potentially get that response. >> well, hopefully this

administration will, in fact, respond. jenna: thank you so much for your time today, sir. >> you're welcome. jon: that letter's probably in his mailbox right now. so what happens if several states like texas decide to opt out of the medicaid expansion? is it a political problem? let's get some answers to that now from former howard dean campaign manager and fox news contributor joe trippi. joe, you know there were 26 states that sued to block the implementation of elements of obamacare. now the supreme court has said this thing is legal, but big state governors like rick scott in florida and you just heard the golf of texas -- the governor of texas there saying they don't want any part of what the federal government wants to force upon them. >> well, it is politics, but it's also -- there are a bunch of things going on here. this is great politics for rick perry in texas. he gets to look like he's standing up to the big, bad washington government and the obama administration. a lot of these governors get to do that. but it doesn't address the

problem. house and senate voted for this bill. the president signed it, and the supreme court says it's constitutional. so the other politics going on here is a problem for romney, i think, because it says, jon, that republicans may be still obstructing the bill, still obstructing the law, and that creates a schism there, i think. jon: you saw what happened in the 2010 elections though. i mean, the house changed parties in large part because a lot of folks didn't like what the congress had done back in 2009. >> no, and that's exactly right. and i think a lot of people on the gop side running for the house and the senate want to replay that card. and i think rick perry, this move helps that. on the other hand, it doesn't look like romney wants to replay that card. it doesn't help him because right now people want somebody who's going to pull the country together and just sort of move

this and implement it, not obstruct it. and republicans are starting to look like obstructionists on this, i think. jon: well, so the federal government is holding out this candy here, states, we're going to pay for all of your medicaid needs until 2020, and after that we're going to pay for 90%. now, sounds great, but we all know what the budget situation is in this country. who's to say that in 2020 it doesn't become 75% or 60% or 50%? >> well, but by opting out and saying we're not playing and letting the federal government come in and set up the exchanges, rick perry's letting happen exactly what he doesn't want to have happen. he's letting the government, the federal government have more control over health care in his state. more impact on it. so what a lot of this is about the politics of can i kick, can we hope, i mean, there's got to definitely be a hope on rick perry's part that romney becomes president so that it's dismantled in the house and the senate, and romney dismantles

the health care bill. and he was right by not starting these exchanges, and the federal government never gets to do it. jon: but why -- >> what's wrong about that is there's 1.8 million people in texas who do not get expanded health care coverage unless these exchanges are created. and as we saw, that state's ranked at the bottom of the country right now on health care. jon: why not, why not let governor perry have his way? why not block grant that money to the states? don't they know better than washington how to spend money on their citizens? >> well, i think, look, i mean, that's not what -- that wasn't the solution that got passed by the senate and the house and wasn't signed by the president, and the supreme court ruled constitutional. jon: but that system, that -- obamacare would not pass today, right now, in the u.s. congress. you know that. >> no, no, i don't think there's anybody who would think that it would pass. potentially, i mean, frankly,

because of the 2010 election on its own just the shift in the house that happened. so, no, there's no way it would pass now. the problem is, it's the law -- i mean, for rick perry and these governors, it's the law of the land. and deciding that you're not going to play -- jon: so you're saying they should, they should live with a law that they don't like and a lot of the voters don't like? >> well, that's the way, that's the way democracy works. there's a lot of laws that i don't like or that you don't like. we all live by them because they're the law of the land. either change if law or implement it. jon: joe trippi, always good to get your perspective. jenna: if you break the law, you're in an entirely different situation, you and joe trippi. jon: i'll try not to do that. jenna: all you want to do is get away, go to the beach, right? jon: uh-huh. jenna: except when this happens. a close call in the waters off cape cod. a kayaker's brush with a great white shark -- i wonder what he thought, what went through his

head when he saw that little fin out of the water? he's going to join us live and tell us the entire story next. hmm, it says here that cheerios helps lower cholesterol

as part of a heart healthy diet. that's true.

...but you still have to go to the gym. ♪ the one and only, cheerios jenna: we start with this off the west coast, a kayaker's close encounter with a shark in california. he escaped uninjuried and with quite a souvenir. a sheriff's deputy says the man was fishing when a shark attacked the front end of his kayak. he fell out but was quickly rescued by a nearby boat. when he was checking out the damage on his kayak, he found a tooth stuck right in it. word of the attack didn't seem to discourage other kayakers and surfers who continued to paddle along in the area. californian, you know, we're very brave. jon: very hearty people. [laughter] jenna: well, another close call as well, this time in the waters of cape cod, massachusetts. you can see the dorsal fin of a great white shark right behind that kayaker. the man is walter, and he says at first he didn't notice that this 12-14 foot shark was right

behind him until lifeguards and swimmers started yelling at him to get out of the water, and that's when he decided it was about time to bad l back to shore -- paddle back to shore as quick as he could. the beach was immediately closed to swimmers, has reopened since, but walter joins us live on the phone. sometimes, walter, pictures tell us everything we need to know, but probably not in this situation. what went through your mind when you turned around and saw that shark? >> to be honest with you, i was obviously very nervous, but all i could think of was to turn around and paddle. so that's, that's what i did. i wanted to make it to shore and get out of his territory. jenna: wow. what did he look like? >> what did he look like? it was a dark image, obviously. i didn't -- i didn't put a lot of time in it, to be honest with you. i couldn't see his head, so i had to assume it was underneath me. i could see the tail, and i could see the pretty wide, round image, so i didn't see the tip of the shark, you know, his

head. so i turned and paddled. [laughter] i did, i did notice when he turned away, and then i dumped. that's when the kayak went over. jenna: ooh. that must have still been a little scary. i wouldn't want to be in the water at all. >> you know, i pretty much got up and ran out of there. [laughter] jenna: now, i read in one interview that you said that your daughter, you know, was feeling a little nervous about kayaking, and she was nervous for a particular reason. can you tell us a little bit about what you and your daughter talked about the morning before you went out on that kayak? >> sure. she had just mentioned, my sister was telling us to be careful with the sharks because they've been sighting them, obviously, at the cape. so i was down playing it with her, telling her that what's the odds of bumping into a shark anywhere with the amount of people in the water at any given moment and the amount of shark sightings, it's pretty rare. so i was telling her that and even making a joke, doing the little jaws, you know, the sound when the shark comes.

[laughter] jenna: well, you know, we can only laugh about it now because, you know, everything's okay. this was your first time kayaking. do you think you're going to go out and try it again? >> probably, probably not at the cape. [laughter] maybe more in maine where there is fewer sharks. not as many seals, so i don't think they'll be heading there quite as much. no, i enjoyed kayaking, though, and it was fun. thankfully, i was out there long enough to get it down. jenna: now you have an amazing christmas card photo, so not all's lost. walter, thank you for sharing your story with us, an incredible one. we appreciate the time and hope you have a good vacation. jon, you have one more thing? jon: no, i was going to say i did a story once where we tried to lure sharks in, and he -- jenna: you need walter. jon: yeah. that's one to tell the grandkids about. talk about walking a thin line, a tight rope walker wearing a blindfold slips. we'll show you what happened

next.

jenna: well, we have some breaking news for you now. the deadline for that malicious software has arrived, and it is today. so if you're waking up this morning and you have no internet connection and you can't figure out why, you might want to consider the fact that maybe your computer is infected by one of these viruses. so what should you do if you can't get online? rick leventhal's live in our new york bureau with more. >> reporter: jenna, if you're a procrastinator and you get notices about a possible virus in your computer and you ignored it, you're out of luck today. it may not be the internet doomsday some predicted, but there are tens of thousands of computers users in the dark across america this morning and many more around the world all because sometime in the past few years people inadvertently downloaded a virus, redirecting

some four million computer users to rogue web sites that stole personal information like credit card numbers. a so-called click-jacking crime scheme that raked in an estimated $14 million in stolen funds before the fbi stepped in, busting the perps and creating a temporary solution. >> not only did they have to follow the trail of evidence to see who was responsible for it and capture it so it could be entered into court, but they also had to try to make sure that innocent victims wouldn't lose internet service during the investigation. >> reporter: so the feds created a server that warn quarantines sick computers so they wouldn't infect others and gave folks a temporary way to surf the went in time to get the system scrubbed. and millions heeded the warnings to check their systems and take the proper steps to clean them up if necessary. but if you wait until today, bad news. the fbi shut down its temporary clean service this morning, so if you have no web, you won't be able to get online to fix it yourself.

you can call your help desk or internet service provider's customer service and wait a very long time. jenna: that's the price you pay as a procrastinator. you're in the same club as rick. your computer's find though, right? >> reporter: no, it is, actually. working like a charm. jon: i didn't check my internet service this morning before i left the house. hmm, we'll see. severe weather in virginia, widespread damage as an apparent tornado barrels through one town. it tore apart a dance studio and tore a mall to shreds. reaction from witnesses who miraculously walked away unscathed. look at that damage. also this florida teenager, he's on trial today. he could get 50 years in prison in the brute brutal beating of a female class mate. he's got a, well, an interesting defense to share. we'll tell you about it coming up. g a payout from a legal settlement or annuity over 10 or even 20 years? call imperial structured settlements. the experts at imperial can convert

your long-term payout into a lump sum of cash today. @ last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans... in alabama we had more beautiful blooms...

in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spotn the gulf... and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. ...more talk on social security... ...but washington isn't talking to the american people. [ female announcer ] when it comes to the future of medicare and social security, you've earned the right to know. ♪ ...so what does it mean for you and your family? [ female announcer ] you've earned the facts. ♪ washington may not like straight talk, but i do. [ female announcer ] and you've earned a say. get the facts and make your voice heard on medicare and social security at earnedasay.org.

jon: fox news alert. we are still awaiting an appearance in the east room of

the white house by the president. he wants to talk about extending the bush era tax cuts and raising taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year. it would be a temporary extension of the tax cuts in the president's world, only one yearlong. we'll hear the president when he steps up to the microphones any minute now. we'll have it for you live. coming up this hour on "happening now" we'll go live to a federal courthouse in d.c. where a texas id law is being challenged right now. does it help cut down and voter fraud or add barriers to voters. as koffi annan holds talks with bashar al-assad russia says it will stop sales to damascus. do you think politics can get out of hand here? wait until you see how this went off the rails and ended up in

gun play. jenna: that gives us something to look forward to, jon. thank you so much. a lot of mixed stories coming up. jon: makes you feel better about the situation in our government, doesn't it. jenna: that is for sure. jon: gun play not usually involved. jenna: not that bad. first we have to start off with this story, though, emergency responders calling it a miracle that anyone or everyone survived. you can see why when you take a look at some of the pictures. these are some of the new images we are getting of the devastation, a deadee heatwave giving way to violent and severe weather. we are glad you are with us, everybody. i'm jenna lee, a brand-new hour of "happening now." jon: i'm jon scott. a powerful storm hammers virginia tearing the roof off a dance studio while dozens of cheerleaders were practicing inside. >> we were scared and we were just like praying to god. hoping we weren't going to die.

>> connie was trying to tape up the window and she saw the funnel start to and she just told everybody to get in the dance room. >> we weren't that close from it hitting us. like we had just stepped foot in there and we saw it just cave in on us. jenna: sweet little girls. you're glad our okay. what is in store for folks as the heatwave lifts and there is unsettled weather out there. meteorologist janice dean is with us from the fox weather center. wow, j.d. what pictures. >> reporter: we were talking about the nice canadian cold air that was going to arrive, it's here. however that cold front you can see the delineation here between new york and raleigh where it's 80 here, 93 in raleigh. right along here is where the boundary is and that is where the potential for severe weather is today. if you live in this area around the mid-atlantic you want to be sure you're listening to your weather forecasters throughout the day and the evening. 87 is the average in kansas

city. we were talking about 106, 107 degrees. right around where we should be this time of year. d.c. 88 we are just going to be right around average. new york maybe in some cases a little bit below average, 81 for wednesday. we are loving it. we are loving it. a little bit of a change and we like it. however, the heat has got to go somewhere and it's in the west. i'll show you that in a second. severe threat again across the mid-atlantic where we can see mainly large hail, damaging winds but isolated tornadoes not out of the realm of possibility. satellite radar imagery showing you where the boundary is where we could see showers, thunderstorms and stronger severe weather and looking at the potential for maybe some showers, thunderstorms and even severe weather across the gulf coast where things are unse unsettled, warm air mass in place right here. we are going to enjoy the refreshing temperatures but the bad side is we are dealing with heat across the west. in one region we are dealing

with the cooler than average, the other region we will be dealing with the warmer than average. a little bit of good news, a little bit of bad news. hopefully there is a silver lining there somewhere. jenna: 85 seems cool, refreshing, right? >> reporter: thank goodness i can show my face around here today. jenna: janice, thank you very much. >> reporter: okay. jon: right now a legal showdown underway. it pits the state of texas against the justice department over the lone star state's proceed proceeded sraoeuter id law. chief washington correspondent james rosen is live at the u.s. district court in washington with a look at that. >> reporter: good afternoon. one of the top elections officials from the state of texas was the trial's first witness this morning where he spoke of some 50,000 dead people and convicted felons remaining on the voter roles. attorney general eric holder the named defendant in this case of texas v holder has used his authority to block texas from enact being the voting measure its legislature passed some 14

months ago and which requires all registered voters also to possess a valid state-issued photo id or to obtain one for free. doj attorney elizabeth west fall argued this morning that the texas legislature was quote motivated at least in part by an unlawful discriminatory purpose against minorities. speaking to a latino group yesterday the attorney general eluded to this showdown with texas. >> in each of the jurisdictions we have proposed changes that show to have no discriminal nare repurpose or affect we'll follow the law and approve the change. where jurisdictions cannot meet the threshold we will object under the voting rights act of 1965 and other laws. in order to guarantee that all eligible citizens have unrestricted access to the ballot box. >> reporter: adam mortara the hired gun out of chicago that was representing texas in this case told the three-judge panel that it was quite difficult to

find anyone who is eligible to vote in texas that doesn't have a photo id. also the harvard professor who was doj's expert witness has produced data showing 2 million voters in texas lack a photo id from the state. the majority of them black or hispanic. under direct examination brian keating gram the elections official from the state of texas testified that he has found both himself and his wife on the harvard professor's list of supposedly disenfranchised voters twice each and he then dramatically produced his own photo id. the attorney general for the state of texas told fox news he think it's the obama administration that is practicing discrimination in this case against the south. >> despite the u.s. supreme court ruling which clearly says that a photo voter i.d. is perfectly legal eric holder has picked on a few southern states to try to prevent them from using the same law that is being used and applied and upheld as

legal across the rest of the country. >> reporter: as we noted this is a three-judge panel hearing in this case, there is no jury. we expect a verdict by the end of the week. jon: james rosen in washington d.c. at the federal courthouse there, thank you. jenna: also in d.c. we are awaiting the president to step to the microphone any moment. there you see the white house. the president is going to be talking about ebgt extending the bush era tax cuts and where and how he wants to do this. we've had this conversation before, jon, where there's been a lot of debate about who those tax cuts should be extended for, and ultimately what congress agreed upon was extending them for everybody for a year. apparently from what we've heard earlier this morning that is not going to be the case as far as the president's proposal today. jon: right, the president wanted to let them expire for everybody, and then they were maintained for a period of time. take a look at the risers behind the podium. i'm guessing in this political

year you can expect to see a number of people that the president will identify as people whose taxes will not go up under his plan. what he's really talking about, if you want to look at flip side of the coin is a tax increase for americans who make more than $250,000 a year under this plan. that is going to be the proposal as we understand it. jenna: big question will come as to where congress will find common groun ground if they can. this is the president's proposal at this time. when the taxes would expire, it would be after the election in november, so this is both a political issue and a real issue for what is going to happen with our economy, because regardless if easy elected, these tax cuts will expire or will not. let's take a listen to the president at this time. >> thank you. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. [applause] >> everybody have a seat. have a seat. well, good afternoon, everybody.

i'm glad things have cooled off a little bit. i know folks were hot. we are here today to talk about taxes. something that everybody obviously cares deeply about, and i've often said that our biggest challenge right now isn't just to reclaim all the jobs that we lost to the recession, it's to reclaim the security that so many middle class americans have lost over the past decade. our core mission as an administration and as a country has to be, yes, putting people back to work, but also rebuilding an economy where that work pays off. an economy in which everybody can have the confidence, that if you work hard you can get ahead. what is holding us back from meeting these challenges, it's not a lack of plans, it's not a lack of ideas, it is a stalemate

in this town, in washington, between two very different views about which direction we should go in as a country. and nowhere is that stalemate more pronounced than on the issue of taxes. many members of the other party believe that prosperity comes from the top down, so that if we spend trillions more on tax cuts for the wealthiest americans that that will somehow unleash jobs and economic growth. i disagree. i think they are wrong. i believe our prosperity has always come from an economy that is built on a strong and growing middle class, one that can afford to buy the products that our businesses sell, a middle class that can own homes, and send their kids to college, and save enough to retire on. that's why i cut middle class taxes every year that i've been

president by $3,600 for the typical middle class family. let me repeat, since i've been in office we've cut taxes for the typical middle class family by $3,600. [applause] >> i wanted to repeat that because sometimes there is a little misinformation out there. [laughter] >> and folks get confused about it. moreover, we've tried it their way. it didn't work. at the beginning of the last decade congress passed trillions of dollars in tax cuts that benefitted the wealthiest americans more than anybody else and we were told that it would lead to more jobs, and higher incomes for everybody and prosperity would start at the top but then trickle down. and what happened?

the wealthy got wealthier but most americans struggled. instead of creating more jobs we had the slowest job growth in half a century. instead of wide-spread prosperity the typical family saw its income fall. and in just a few years we went from record surpluses under bill clinton to record deficits that we are now still struggling to payoff today. so we don't need more top-down economics. we've tried that theory. we've seen what happens. we can't afford to go back to it. we need policies that grow and strengthen the middle class, policies that help create jobs, that make education and training more affordable, that encourage businesses to start up and create jobs right here in the united states. so, that's why i believe it's time to let the tax cuts for the wealthiest americans, folks like myself, to expire .

[applause] and by the way i might feel differently, because it's not like i like to pay taxes. i might feel differently if we were still in surplus. but we've got this huge deficit and everybody agrees that we need to do something about these deficits and these debts. so the money we are spending on these tax cuts for the wealthy is a major driver of our deficit, a major contributor to our deficit. costing us a trillion dollars over the next decade. by the way, these tax cuts for the wealthiest americans are also the tax cuts that are least likely to promote growth. so we can't afford to keep that up, not right now. so i'm not proposing anything radical here. i just believe that anybody making over $250,000 a year

should go back to the income tax rates we were paying under bill clinton. back when our economy created nearly 23 million new jobs, the biggest budget surplus in history, and plenty of millionaires to boot. and this is not just my opinion. the american people are with me on this. poll after poll shows that is the case. and there are plenty of patriotic and very success actual, very wealthy americans who also agree, because they know that by making that kind of contribution they are making the country as a whole stronger. at the same time most people agree that we should not raise taxes on middle class families or small businesses, not when so many folks are just trying to get by, not when so many folks are still digging themselves out of the hole that was created by

this great recession that we had. and at a time when the recovery is still fragile. that's why i'm calling on congress to extend the tax cuts for the 98% of americans who make less than $250,000 for another year. [applause] >> if congress doesn't do this millions of american families, including these good-looking people behind me could see their taxes go up by $2,200 starting on january 1st of next year. that would be a big blow to working families. and it would be a dragon the entire economy. now, we can already anticipate, we know what those who are

opposed to legislate the high-end tax cuts expire will say. they'll say that we can't tax job creators, and they'll try to explain how this would be bad for small businesses. let me tell you, folks who create most new jobs in america are america's small business owners, and i've cut taxes for small business owners 18 times. [laughter] >> since i've been in office. [applause] >> i've also asked congress repeatedly to pass new tax cuts for ne prunes entrepreneur who hire new workers and raise wages. the proposal i make today would extend these tax cuts for 97% of all small business owners in america. in other words, 97% of small businesses fall under the

$250,000 threshold. [applause] >> so this isn't about taxing job creators. this is about helping job creators. i want to give them relief. i want to give those 97% a sense of permanence. i believe we should be able to come together and get this done. while i disagree on extending tax cuts for the wealthy, because we just can't afford them, i recognize that not everybody agrees with me on this. on the other hand, we all say we agree that we should extend ts n people. everybody says that. the republicans say they don't want to raise taxes on the middle class. i don't want to raise taxes on the middle class. so we should all agree to extend the tax cuts for the middle class. let's agree to do what we agree on. right?

[applause] >> that's what compromise is all about. let's not hold the vast majority of americans and our entire economy hostage while we debate the merits of another tax cut for the wealthy. we can have to debate. [applause] >> we can have to debate, but let's not hold up working on the thing that we already agree on. in many ways the fate of the tax cut for the wealthiest americans will be decided by the outcome of the next election. my opponent will fight to keep them in place, i will fight to end them. but that argument shouldn't threaten you. it shouldn't threaten the 98% of americans who just want to know

that their taxes won't go up next year. middle class families and small business owners, they deserve that guarantee. they deserve that certainty. it will be good for the economy, and it will be good for you. we should give you that certainty now. we should do it now. it will be good for you, it will be good for the economy as a whole. [applause] >> so, my message to congress is this. pass a bill extending the tax cuts for the middle class. i will sign it tomorrow. pass it next week, i'll sign it next week. pass it next -- you get the idea. [laughter] >> as soon as that gets done we can continue to have a debate about whether it's a good idea to also extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest americans.

i'll have one position, the other side will have another, and we'll have that debate, and the american people can listen to that debate, and then next year once the election is over, things have calmed down a little bit, based on what the american people have said and how they've spoken during that election we'll be in a good position on deciding how to reform our entire tax code in a simple way that lowers rates, helps our economy grow and brings down our deficit, because that is something we have to do for the long term. but right now our top priority has to be giving mid class families and small businesses the security they deserve. you're the ones who are driving this recovery forward. [applause] >> you're the ones who are driving this recovery forward

and i think it's time to widen the circle of opportunity and help more americans who work hard to get ahead. it's time that we learned the lessons of our past and laid the foundation for a better future. that's what i'm focused on every day and i hope congress will join me in doing the right thing. so, thank you very much all for being here. thank you. [applause] jon: president obama there saying that he wants to preserve the bush era tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 a year, but he would like to see taxes increased on the wealthiest americans that the president has staked out a position that he thinks is going to be a clear winner for him come november. let's talk about it with simon constable, with the "wall street journal." he didn't say he was extending the bush tax cuts only for a year even for those people who are making $250,000 or less, i

guess clearly he wants to get reelected and then we'll see what happens after that. >> it did strike me as a little bit of buying votes there. you get it for one year and presumably it goes up for everybody. you get your payoff only for that one year. i guess one of the things i found interesting is -- first of all how he started, he said things are cooling off. i realized he was talking about the weather, he could easily have said the economy too, that's been cooling off. he talked about certainty he wants to give folks certainty about what their tax rate will be next year, and that is something that a lot of people, the democrats and the left-leaning policy observers have sort of dismissed as ridiculous. it's interesting that he's acknowledging that uncertainty is a job killer. jon: for one year he says this would be good for the economy, this would be good for you, let's do it now, okay, but one year. i mean why -- why not get

together with congressional republicans, or, you know, because there are democrats who are opposed to this one-year extension too. why not do what he's talking about doing, come to some agreement that everybody likes. >> come to some agreement everybody likes and have it in place for a longtime. that is the sort of certainty that we could really do with. and that will be really good. one of the other things that he doesn't really talk about is how you do this tax stuff, and whether that income, or whether it's in investment dividends. one of the things that he fails to recognize or at least highlight is if we want investments then dividends need to be taxed at a lower rate. you need to have people prepared to put their capital to work, that is typically rich people, people with incomes over $250,000 a year to commit that capital for a long period of time. if that rate goes up too then that will be a problem. jon: what he didn't explain is how raising taxes on the wealthiest americans is going to

help create jobs, or do anything like that. our brain room took a number-crunching exercise and found that if the president gets what he wants, in other words, if you boost taxes on the wealthiest americans, you get enough money in a year to run the federal government off rations for about eight and a half days. it's kind of a drop in the bucket. >> that is nothing. that is a few weekends, basically, yeah. you need -- what you need to do is to stimulate the economy to grow, and by doing -- by having a tax regime that people can sort of plan with, not just one year, as you point out, or two years, but, you know, four or eight years, then you'll get that certainty back. and that will be good. and, you know, that will be really good if we could get back to day 4% growth or 5% or even back to the 90s we had one quarter of 7% growth. that was phenomenal. that would do a lot more to get us out of the doldrums than

anything else. jon: thank you. jenna: we'll turn away from politics a little bit and the economy to new technology that may allow women to have children much, much later in life, slowing down or doing away with the biological clock completely. we are going to tell you about a big medical breakthrough, and why it's also getting some backlash. and still ahead, a teenager on trial for a horrific beating that left a young girl with severe brain injuries. we are going to tell you what he's blaming for the assault. >> i'd give anything to take that day back. i can't believe i hurt somebody like that. that doesn't make me feel any better, that doesn't make what i did any less worse. and the sad part is, that is not really going to help me out.

>> my lie logical clock imy biological clock is ticking. jenna: the most famous foot stomp in modern movies. according to some new technology, potentially a new medical procedure the biological clock may be a thing of the past. a top surgeon is suggesting that women can delay having babies until much, much later in life by using a technique similar to one being used to treat cancer. we had to talk to dr. manny

about it, he's the baby doctor. foxnewshealth.com. what are they talking about? >> reporter: they are talk being about the holy grail of reproduction which is how do you preserve ovarian function later in life. the ovaries have life of about 48 years or so. at the beginning it gives you the more moans to make little girls become women. once they became women the ovaries make hormones and of hormones and ovulate. by the age of 49, 50 the over redoesn't work well and fertility goes away. this is a presentation that they did in europe where they actually took pieces of ove ovary from healthy subjects. they froze that tissue and reimplanted it and they were able to get pregnancies and hormonal improvement in women in menopausal stages. jenna: there is obviously a lot of segments we've done about

infertility. this is a small study. one of the things they did find with this transplant without using idf or using drugs these women got pregnant naturally. >> reporter: look, to me i'm not looking for a 65-year-old pregnant patient, okay. so 65-year-old ladies out there, thank you very much, but i'm not looking to deliver anybody at the age of 65 or that come close. this is important for young women that are cancer survivors. to me this is the big ticket item. because a young woman in her 20s who may get some sort of cancer where they may need chemotherapy or radiation therapy, what happens is the best thing they can do is really take the eggs out. egg freezing is not that effective in conceiving a pregnancy later on from ivf. so this new finding, even though it's preliminary basically is taking the tissue itself, cryo preserving it and once the young woman over comes the cancer then

they can reimplant that ovary in and put it back. >> let me show you what new york magazine did last year. they were having a conversation in the magazine about older mothers. this is not a real photo, it's photo shopped but it shows a woman much older, pregnant. and they were talking about what would this look like? is she too old for this? we know if a procedure like this becomes more mainstream it potentially could be used by women who are choosing not to get pregnant until they are in their early 50s. >> reporter: my medical team in the northeast over the last five years or so we probably have delivered one of the oldest women in the northeast. jenna: how old? >> reporter: let's say over 60. and the challenges in that pregnancy were enormous because the side effects. one thing is to be able to get a conception and having a baby in your body, but then you really have to, you know, cook it for nine months, so you have heart issues, you have kidney issues,

you have liver issues, most of these pregnancies end up with let's say premature deliveries, because you can't get to the end many times. jenna: and then you wonder if it's fair for the kid as well. >> reporter: the morbidty, is a question. if you're 60 years old and go to an idf doctor and say get me pregnant, that is not going to happen. a lot of people go out of the united states to get idf over the age of 60. i would take this off the table, forget about getting pregnant later in life n your 50s we can have a conversation but certain certainly in your 60s, forget about it. for young women, cancer survivors, i think that this is a beautiful, very good thing, i think to have. jenna: all right, doctor. nice to have you here. >> reporter: you got it. biological clock. jenna: jon. jon: jenna thanks. right now a teenager in florida is claiming insanity as he goes

on trial today for attempted murder. here is a look at him. wayne tracy. he's accused of a brutal beating that left a girl with permanent brain damage. the defense says he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder because of his brother's recent suicide. these disturbing images show the extent of the injuries inflicted on a 15-year-old girl. he is accused of stomping on her head with steel-toed boots. these pictures were taken in an icu shortly after the beating in 2010. in a recorded jailhouse call with his mother tracy asked about her condition. >> have you ever heard anything about josie? >> no i haven't. last i heard she was home, she was going into rehabilitation. >> i'm still praying. >> you should. jon: she suffered irreversible brain damage we're told. let's talk about this case and specifically the plea, the defense. faith jenkins is a former

prosecutor, rachel selfis a criminal defense attorney. rachel, would you offer an insanity defense in a case like this? >> yes, i would. post-traumatic stress disorder is a very viable defense in this case. it's a very serious thing that brings grown soldiers to their knees let alone a 15-year-old boy who just saw his brother who he was very close with, who basically raised him, saw his brother hanging in a church parking lot, his dead body. and he never streeted fo treated for this and they are saying he is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and i think it's a very viable defense. jon: there are indications that he planned this thing out. he was apparently upset with this girl because she won't give him a phone number that he wanted, and so, you know, they text back and forth, pretty soon she says, she writes something to him go join your brother. well he got mad, put on a ninja outfit, rhode a bike to the bus

stop where he wore the steel-toed boots and stomped her almost to the point of killing her. there seems to be a lot of premeditation here. doesn't it require in order to win an insanity defense that you didn't know what you were doing. >> there are two things, jon. there could very well be a mental illness issue here butt insanity defense in this case in my opinion will fail for the reason that most insanity defenses fail in cases, it's because you have to be able to show as an affirmative defense, the defense has to be able to claim he did not know that what he was doing at the time he did it whether it was right or wrong. in a case where he sent text messages before he went and beat this young lady and told his friends, i'm going to jail for murder, that tells me that not only did he know what he was doing was wrong but he knew that he could be punished for it. jon: well, let's take a listen to another one of the jail phone -- jail-recorded telephone

calls, and i want to get your thoughts on the other side of it. >> i know i wasn't myself when i did what i did. >> right. >> and i know i'd give anything to take that day back just because i can't believe i hurt somebody like that. >> right. >> but that doesn't make me feel any better. that doesn't make what i did any less worse. and the sad part is, that's not really going to help me how the. >> no, if you ask god to forgive you wayne he'll forgive you. if what you did is a mistake or whatever he'll for give you and we will move forward, you know. jon: rachel, he starts that one out saying i wasn't myself that day, i suppose that could help in this insanity defense. but then he goes onto say, that is not really going to help me out. he's being a real narcissist about it. i can't imagine that is going to play well with the jury. >> i don't think any of these facts are going to play well with the jury. all it's going to take is one juror to looks at him and sees that this boy was 15 years old at the time of this. i'm very surprised he's being tried as an adult.

if anything if he does wind up being convicted here this defense could be a mitigating factor in sentencing. and i'd be very surprised if he serves the full 50 years that he could be sentenced to. jon: nobody is saying that he necessarily deserves 50 years, but a lot of this is statements, faith, were pretty incriminating in those phone calls, and the fact that he, you know, is not necessarily showing a lot of sympathy for the victim, i mean teenagers get into all kinds of texting worsts but they don't result in a 15-year-old kid stomping the head of a young girl. >> exactly. a lot of people after they commit crimes are remorseful. that doesn't mean that you should not be punished, and that you are not eld accountable. there is no insult, i understand that this young lady, the next message that she sent about his brother was very insulting, it was below the belt. i it wasn't appropriate. there is no insult that justifies the amount of violence that he inflicted upon her. jon: thanks for being with us. we'll be right back.

>> thank you. >> thank you. [ male announcer ] feeling like a shadow of your former self?

c'mon, michael! get in the game! [ male announcer ] don't have the hops for hoops with your buddies? lost your appetite for romance? and your mood is on its way down. you might not just be getting older. you might have a treatable condition called low testosterone or low t. millions of men, forty-five or older, may have low t so talk to your doctor about low t. hey, michael! [ male announcer ] and step out of the shadows. hi! how are you? [ male announcer ] learn more at isitlowt.com. [ laughs ] hey! did i ever think i would have heart disease. she just didn't fit the profile of a heart event victim. she's healthy, she eats properly. i was pushing my two kids in a stroller when i had my heart event. i've been on a bayer aspirin regimen ever since. [ male announcer ] aspirin is not appropriate for everyone. so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. i know if i take my bayer aspirin i have a better chance of living a healthy life. [ male announcer ] learn how to protect your heart at i am proheart on facebook.

[ male announcer ] ok, so you're no marathon man. but thanks to the htc one x from at&t, with its built in beats audio, every note sounds amazingly clear. ...making it easy to get lost in the music... and, well... rio vista?!! [ male announcer ] ...lost. introducing the musically enhanced htc one x from at&t. rethink possible.

jenna: iran and the west remain deeply divided today after the latest nuclear talks. now we are getting words that teheran threatens to close the secretary of state of hormuz. the iranians are giving us detailed reasons to keep talking based on their point of view. jim walsh is an international expert with the mit securities program. gordon chang is the author of nuclear showdown. new yornorth korea takes on the world. and casey mcfarland fox news national security analyst. nice to have you all with us as we continue to talk whether or not we are making progress here. that is the big question. jim, last week you sat down with someone very important from iran and got incite that very few people have gotten. >> i was at a luncheon that the

iranian ambassador hosted in new york. i received a written document that lace out from iran's perspective what their case is, the way need like to see the negotiates go. the written document is pretty hard lined. i would say the oral presentation showed more flexibility. essentially there are two things going on here, there are some issues where i think own agreement may be possible, and we can talk about what those are, stopping 20% enrichment of 20% would be one example of that. the teheran research reactor would be another example. then there are places where the sides are completely apart and it's hard to so where you would have any progress on some issues. jenna: k. t. what do you think it showed us as to whether or not we are any closer to a resolution or whether or not a resolution is possible. >> i think that is the key. is iran looking at negotiatings for their own sake or do they want to actually come to an agreement? when i worked tore henry kissinger in the 19 70s during middle east shuttle diplomacy we

found the best way you got an agreement is if both sides really wanted an agreement. they just didn't want to talk about it. the worry with iran is are they following the north korea model? north korea negotiated and unnegotiated, then renegotiated, the whole time they were making their nuclear weapons program proceed, at the end of which they said before any agreement was reached, we don't need to negotiate, we've got our nuclear weapons. iran which is a close collaborate tere of north corey arthey following that game plan or do they really want an agreement? jenna: you really keyed things up for gordon. gordon you've been studying this for years. you've been studying north korea tell us a little bit what you think about what k. t. said? does it look like iran is following a similar model and may be working with north korea? >> iran and north korea have more than a decade been working on two programs, one long range ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. this is a really serious subject, because you're just not dealing with iran you're also

dealing with north korea. china of course is in the middle of it because china sponsors both of these two rogue regimes. jenna: jim, what do we do? >> i think we what we try to do -- frankly i hear what k. t. is saying and i agree with it in part. there is a case to be made with the americans they don't want to deal with it right now. everyone wants to get through the elections. who wants to give who on capitol hill -- i've spent endless hours on capitol hill, who wants to give iran sanctions relief when it does what we want them to do on the nuclear issue. that is not going to happen. we should agree on the things that we can agree on and keep the process going forward stkwrao we've talke. jenna: we've talked about whether this is negotiations in honest between the parties. why we should form agreements with a place we've named a state sponsor of terror since the early 1980s?

>> yeah, well we negotiate with bad guys all the time. i mean it's very rare that you negotiate with your friend, because they are your friend. we negotiated with libya and we got a deal that got rid of that nuclear program. there was negotiations with south africa after it got rid of its nuclear program. it's usually the bad guys that have nuclear weapons. you negotiate with bad guys. these how we negotiated with toda moammar qaddafi's bad guys and we got them out of there. >> you negotiate with the bad guys when you got leverage. why did moammar qaddafi give up nuclear weapons? we invaded iraq he thought he was next. continuing to drag it out isn't an option. it's either their necks or nare nukes. how do you get to that point? crashing the iranian economy. nobody wants a war in the middle east. the israelis don't want it, we don't want it the iranians don't want it. how do you avoid it?

by having the iranian regime understand if they don't give up their nuclear weapons then they will have to face the iranian people who are very, very angry because their economy has just completely collapsed. i think bring on the sanctions and make them even tougher and force the issue very quickly and have it be economic warfare and not the other kind. jenna: we know that the economy in north korea is nothing to brag about yet they still have a nuclear weapon. what do you think about k. t.'s point there of strangling iran's economy, does the past show that that is the way to do it or will they still go forward and get a nuclear weapon if that is indeed their goal? >> if you have real sanctions you can strangle the iranians. right now we just have half measures, which is really what we did with north korea that didn't work. we need not just sanctions, a total embargo on trade with iran. jenna: does that include china as well, gored on? >> it will have to be if we are serious about iran and we certainly need to be. jenna: interesting. nice to have a conversation with

all of you. we appreciate your time. jon: how about this. flashing guns on live tv? no it's not a wild west movie. we'll tell you where this live debate got dangerously out of control and how i will all ended straight ahead. are you receiving a payout from a legal settlement or annuity over 10 or even 20 years? call imperial structured settlements. the experts at imperial can convert your long-term payout into a lump sum of cash today.

>> identity theft was a huge, huge problem for me and it's gone away because of lifelock. >> announcer: while no one can stop all identity theft, if the criminals do manage to steal your information, lifelock is there to help fix it, with our $1 million service guarantee. that's right, a $1 million service guarantee. don't wait until you become the next victim. call now to try lifelock risk-free for two full months. that's right, 60 days risk-free. use promo code: norisk. if you're not completely satisfied, notify lifelock and you won't pay a cent. order now and also get this

document shredder to keep your personal documents out of the wrong hands-- a $29 dollar value, free. get the protection you need right now. call or go to lifelock.com to try lifelock risk-free for a full 60 days. use promo code: norisk. plus get this document shredder free, but only if you act right now. call now! lifelock service guarantee cannot be offered to residents of new york. jenna: if you thought politics could get a little rough in washington check out this tv debate in jordan. the man on the right losing it after he is accused of buying his seat in parliament. he threw his shoe first then he went for his gun, a silver pistol right on live television. you can see that the host jumped in the middle. the lawmakers were debating gordan's role on the crisis in syria. jon has a debate next. i hope none of our debaters do

this. but i have no doubt you would jump in kpepb. jon in between. jon: i'm not sure. but i know our next guests are not passing. many of you were off celebrating the fourth last week. it was fairly quiet on the campaign trail, even the candidates took a few days aft off from official events. friday's disappointing job reports has pushed campaigning into high gear. we have jim pinkerton a writer for the american conservative magazine. alan colmes is host of the alan colmes radio show. would you agree that most americans think the economy is item number one. >> i think so. was that an old tape of hannity and combs? jon: no, no, you guys didn't get that vicious, did you? >> no, no, never. jon: we haven't seen something like that in in country. >> you're right. i think the economy is item number one. for all the things said and all the focus now, and again people don't really focus on it most of

the voters until after labor day, i do believe that the economy will be the big issue. jon: so we've got even a couple of back-to-back months, jim of bad jobs numbers, 80,000 jobs created in june, not enough to keep up with population growth. how did the media treat that number, or the story that came from it? >> right, i'm not going to pull a gun but i do disagree with allen. i think politicians are probably not paoeug attention to it but the economy they are paying attention to it. everybody knows that the economy is hurting, they know that unemployment is 8.2. everybody knows whether they are familiar with the details or not that something bad is happening in europe. th-pb i think meanwhile the political class, i think this is the point of the coverage, is that the political class coverage is the theater of eric berstrom and the flip-flop and van a tee fair and mitt romney's taxes and obama's speech a moment ago about middle class tax cuts, and the reality that

citizens and voters are experiencing is allowsee economy. and i think not surprisingly the liberaly oriented chatterers would rather chat about the politics and the theater as opposed to the economic reality that is such an under tow on americans. >> i disagree with that. i'd rather talk about the economy, i'd rather talk about the 22 months in a row of job growth. growth in the private sector and how conservatives are actually hurting growth in the public sector. i'm very happy to have that debate and i believe that debate will take place. agree with you jim that we are focused on the economy personally but politically we are not really focused -- most people aren't focused on the election for another month or two. >> you are the only one i have ever met that thinks that obama should be running on the economy. >> i think he should run on his record. >> as opposed to attacking romney, which is what the president is doing. the president and david axelrod seem to think they have a pretty weak hand to play when it comes

to running on their record. >> when we have a match up you can be sure the economy is going to come up. i understand that mitt romney is practicing for the debate and this will have to be item number one and will certainly be front and center when the candidates are facing each other. of course it's going to be a big issue. >> the media coverage is focused on other things. that was my point. the media would much rather talk about the theater of the campaign. >> are you talking about the media like it's one mone machinmonolithic entity. jon: tomorrow's headlines in "the new york times" and "the washington post" for instance alan, isn't it going to be obama presses for extension of bush tax cuts for those making $250,000 a year. >> that is the news of the day. we just showed a news conference where the president was talking about that. the news cycle changes every few hours, that is the news cycle right now. jon: those are the same tax cuts that the president argued

against, now he wants to extend them one year to get him past the election. >> the tax cut extensions the republicans agreed the tax cuts were supposed to last nine years because they knew the deficit would balloon in year number ten. every year that came up they would renege on what they originally said should be sunseted. that's the tax cuts we're talking about. >> the headline will be obama on middle class tax cuts. the larger headlines, the real reality is when they are saying another meltdown will be coming next year that will be the real news, i think it is the real news. the political theater class really isn't interested in that because in part it hur the president. >> i don't speak for the political class myself, i speak for me. the president said in the speech we just carried that, you know, let's settle this now so we don't have u uncertainty. so we settle on this stuff. jon: i thank you both for not settling this with a .38.

thank you both, alan and jim. we will be right back. a party?

[ music plays, record skips ] hi, i'm new ensure clear. clear, huh? my nutritional standards are high. i'm not juice or fancy water, i'm different. i've got nine grams of protein. twist my lid. that's three times more than me! twenty-one vitamins and minerals and zero fat! hmmm. you'll bring a lot to the party. [ all ] yay! [ female announcer ] new ensure clear. nine grams protein. zero fat. twenty-one vitamins and minerals. in blueberry/pomegranate and peach. refreshing nutrition in charge!