Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Some AARP Members Leave over Perceived Endorsement of Health Care Reform; Model Wins Google Lawsuit over ID of Critical Blogger; Obama Renominates Bernanke for Fed Chair

Aired August 25, 2009 - 08:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: And good morning to you once again on this Tuesday, August 25th. I'm Kiran Chetry.

JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to you. I'm John Roberts, thanks for joining us on the most news in the morning, and here are the big stories that we'll be breaking down for you in the next 15 minutes.

A chilling timeline laid out. Drug after drug after drug with Michael Jackson pleading and demanding even more. Court documents obtained by CNN showed the coroner in Los Angeles found a fatal dose of the powerful drug Propofol killed Jackson and his own doctor gave it to him. There are reports the singer's death may be ruled a homicide. We'll have the story from Los Angeles just ahead.

CHETRY: The federal government trying to prepare for the worst- case scenario when it comes to swine flu. Experts are now predicting an alarming number of Americans will get sick and die in the coming months because of swine flu. There are new figures coming from the president's advisory panel that say half of all Americans could catch the H1N1 virus and that 90,000 Americans could die from it.

ROBERTS: He's a man who printed up a trillion new dollars get us out of a recession that started almost two years ago. And in about an hour, President Obama is expected to nominate Ben Bernanke to another term as chief of the Federal Reserve. What could this mean for your bottom line? The CNN Money team is all over this one this morning.

CHETRY: Also this morning, the White House taking the CIA out of the terror interrogation business. The move is coming after a report that was made public, revealing a laundry list of interrogation techniques. It's feared that some in the FBI even say it went too far. In a moment, we're going to look at whether the CIA's treatment of terror suspects was tough but necessary or just plain criminal?

ROBERTS: But first, after weeks of speculation, we begin the hour with the cause of death of Michael Jackson. Court documents of show the singer overdosed on the powerful drug Propofol, a drug, doctors say, never should be given outside of an operating room. And the documents say Jackson's own physician, Dr. Conrad Murray, gave him the deadly dose. Murray's lawyer says the police are twisting his client's account of things.

Our Thelma Gutierrez has the documents and the hour-by-hour breakdown leading up to Jackson's death.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

THELMA GUTIERREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: John, Kiran, the affidavit paints an unsettling picture of what investigators believe took place in the hours leading up to Michael Jackson's death.

(voice-over): This 32-page document released in Texas reveals there were lethal levels of the powerful drug Propofol in Michael Jackson's blood at the time of his death. The police affidavit says Dr. Conrad Murray, Jackson's personal physician, told detectives he had been treating the star for insomnia for six weeks, giving him an I.V. drip with 60 milligrams of Propofol diluted with Lidocaine every night.

Murray worried Jackson was becoming addicted to Propofol, in attempt to win him off, put together other combinations of drugs that succeeded in putting Jackson to sleep for two nights prior to his death.

On June 25th, when those drugs failed, Murray told detectives what he did hour by hour. Murray says he monitored Jackson's vital signs the entire time. According to documents, at 10:40 a.m. after repeated requests and demands from Jackson, Murray administered 25 milligrams of Propofol and Jackson finally went to sleep. After 10 minutes, Murray says he went to the bathroom and was gone for two minutes. When he returned, he says, Jackson was no longer breathing. Murray said he administered CPR until paramedics arrived, but those efforts proved futile.

(on camera): Dr. Conrad Murray's attorneys released a statement saying, "Much of what was in the warrant affidavit is factual. However, unfortunately, much is police theory. Most egregiously, the timeline reported by law was not obtained through interviews with Dr. Murray, as was implied by the affidavit" -- John, Kiran.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTS: Thelma Gutierrez for us this morning -- Thelma, thanks so much.

Dr. Conrad Murray remains the chief target of a man slaughter investigation. He has not been charged, but reports the coroner is ruling Jackson's death a homicide makes it likely that Murray soon could face charges. And if that is the case, what does it mean for the doctor? Our Anderson Cooper spoke to senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER 360": Jeff, from a legal standpoint, a homicide, does that mean -- what does that mean legally? I mean, could Dr. Murray then be charged with, what, manslaughter, murder?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: It means legally taking the life of another. It means Michael Jackson did not die of natural causes. It means he was not a suicide. It means the government has concluded that someone else killed him.

There are a wide variety of charges within homicide. Intentional homicide, you can get the death penalty for. Negligent homicide is a much less serious crime. It's an unintentional negligent killing. Certainly, he seems to be in that end of the spectrum. No one seems to suggest that Conrad Murray intentionally killed Michael Jackson.

COOPER: But by doing something which medically is unsound, he could be charged with, what, second-degree murder?

TOOBIN: No, it would be -- it would be some version of manslaughter, an unintentional killing. But you can still go to prison for several years. Keep in mind, though, that these sorts of medical situations, it's very rare that they give rise to criminal charges. Malpractice suits, yes; losing your medical license, yes. But an actual criminal case resulting in jail sentence is very unusual.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERTS: Murray has insisted that he did nothing wrong. And in a video that he released last week, he said he has faith that the truth will prevail.

CHETRY: And more in our developing story. A frightening worst-case scenario for the swine flu if it resurges this fall as expected. President's advisory panel now predicting that half of all Americans could catch the H1N1 virus in the next few months. But in even more disturbing number, 90,000 Americans could potentially die from it. That's more than double the number of deaths in an average flu season.

CNN senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen is in Atlanta now with more details.

And, Elizabeth, these numbers are pretty alarming. So, just so we're clear, this is the worst-case scenario, correct?

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Correct, Kiran, and I'm so glad you pointed that out.

There are a range of things that could happen with swine flu this fall and winter, what you said is the worst-case scenario. So, let's take a look at that range. What this reports from the president's says there could be 30,000 to 90,000 deaths from swine flu alone this year and usually, in a regular year, seasonal flu kills about 36,000 people. So you can see sort of where it falls, what the perspective is.

Now, let's take a look at illness. This report says between 30 percent and 50 percent of Americans will become ill from swine flu. In a normal year, between 5 percent and 20 percent become ill from regular flu.

So here's the bottom line, Kiran. There is no question that this flu season has a huge potential to be worse than other flu seasons because you have two types of flu running around. You have regular seasonal flu that comes every year, plus you have swine flu. The big question is exactly how many people will get sick and how many will die? The answer is nobody really knows -- Kiran?

CHETRY: And do we have any idea. We keep saying that it could be resurged, it could stronger than before, when we saw the cases of swine flu this past spring, it didn't turn out to be as virulent of a virus as it could be. So, how do they know what it's going to be like come fall?

COHEN: You know what? They don't. Because, you know, flu is unpredictable. For example, one thing that's already happened that was totally unpredicted, is swine flu never went away. Swine flu has been with us this entire summer. It's killed more than 500 people since it's been around in April.

So, you're right, they don't know. It could resurge in a big, big way, and we could see those 90,000 deaths, it's possible. Or it could sort of come back and sort of stake its claim, but kill 30,000 people. Still, that's 30,000 people dead, we just don't know.

CHETRY: And again, the situation right now with the vaccinations, I understand that the federal government is trying to undertake this huge initiative to go from, you know, recently developing it to getting it out to as many people as possible in quite a short amount of time. How do we -- how do we figure that out as consumers and as patients?

COHEN: Right. Here we are, end of August, and they're still studying this vaccine and they hope to actually give this vaccine to maybe even half the population between the months of October and December. So yes, that is doing it certainly in a quick way, but that's the way -- the only way they say they can really stem the tide of swine flu.

So consumers are -- you know, people are going to have to make a decision. Do you want the vaccine? And don't you?

I'll tell you -- if swine flu comes back or actually it never left, but if we see this huge number of people dying and getting sick from swine flu, I suspect there will be a huge demand for the vaccine.

CHETRY: And meanwhile, what do you do to prevent catching seasonal flu and swine flu?

COHEN: Right, it's all the same thing, and it's pretty much what your mom told you.

First of all, you should wash your hands frequently, because often, it is spread person to person by hands. You can use soap and water or hand sanitizer. Don't go out of the house if you're sick, don't go to school and don't go to work. And also cough into your sleeve, do not cough or sneeze into your hand. So, those are three big things to remember.

CHETRY: All right, some good tips. Elizabeth Cohen, thanks.

COHEN: Thanks.

ROBERTS: The attorney general points a special prosecutor to look into CIA interrogation tactics. Will criminal charges fall out of this? We'll find out.

It's 10 minutes now after the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROBERTS: Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning.

How far is too far to prevent another terrorist attack? Attorney General Eric Holder has asked John Durham to find out. The request follows the release of a report describing the worst of the alleged interrogations, including threatening suspected terrorists children, mock executions, threatening with a handgun and a power drill, and more.

Joining me now to talk more about this is Peter Brookes. He's a former CIA official and now with the Heritage Foundation, and Fran Townsend, a former homeland security adviser to President George W. Bush. She is now a national security contributor for CNN.

Folks, thanks for being with us.

PETER BROOKES, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Good morning.

ROBERTS: And, Fran, let's start with you. You know, the results of this inspector general's report, well-known inside government circles for about five years now, still shocking to the public, words like "unauthorized" and "inhumane" practices being used against detainees.

Do you think there's possible criminal charges involved in here?

FRAN TOWNSEND, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, John, when we look at what the real question is before the Justice Department, it is -- did the things that were done go beyond the authorization given by the Office of Legal Council and the Justice Department? John, it's worth noting that -- as you say -- the report is four or five years ago inside the government, and, in fact, during that time, Justice Department career prosecutors looked at the I.G. report, weighed it against the Office of Legal Council memos and they've already made a determination the prosecution's not appropriate.

Attorney General Holder reopened that and asked a new set of prosecutors to do this again -- and that's what people feel is inherently basically unfair to the officers at CIA who already been put through this ringer.

ROBERTS: Well, the argument would go, I guess, among some critics of that would be that the Bush White House protects itself and you put it in the realm of a different White House, maybe they'll come up with a different conclusion.

But, Peter, in terms of what Fran said, regarding this: did the interrogations go beyond the guidelines? Clearly according to the inspector general's report it would seem that answer is yes.

BROOKES: Well, I can't judge that. I wasn't there in the room. I didn't read the guidelines myself. These are allegations that were made.

But my bigger concern, John, is the effect it's going to have on our ability to prosecute, our ability to undertake intelligence operations today. I think this is going to have a chilling effect on the Central Intelligence Agency. And in many ways, I see the Obama administration at war with the CIA.

I think this opens a lot of problems --or creates a lot of problems for our folks out there. I think some of these CIA officers today -- the ones in the field today -- are wondering if they need to get the terrorists or get a lawyer. I mean, I don't see this as really advancing what we want to do and see it as a major policy flip- flop.

When Obama went to CIA he said, "Hey, look, things happened in the past, we're going to leave them in the past and we're going to move forward." I don't see this at all. In fact, I think this is really picking a scab that I think was on its way to healing.

ROBERTS: Yes.

Fran, we remember back in 2006 in an interview in a hypothetical scenario, former President Bill Clinton said, quote, "We get lucky, we get the number three guy in al Qaeda and we know there's a big bombing going off in America in three days and we know this guy knows where it is. Don't we have the right and responsibility to beat it out of him?"

And then there were a couple CIA memos that former Vice President Dick Cheney requested be released, those were released, heavily redacted. Former Vice President Cheney said, quote, "the documents released Monday clearly demonstrates that the individual subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda, this saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks.

So, when you look at what former President Clinton said and what former Vice President Cheney said about the enhanced interrogation, is there a whole lot of daylight between those two things?

TOWNSEND: Well, you know -- you know, John, let's be honest. This is the conversation we have the luxury of having now in 2009 because we're nearly eight years without another terrorist attack on this country. It's easy eight years later to sit on the couch and quarterback a game that happened eight years ago. People felt under tremendous pressure to protect this country.

And, you know, Director Panetta is very concerned. In his memo to the CIA workforce yesterday, he rightly says, "Look, we've been through this. What I'm focused on is going forward and honoring the mission to protecting the American people against threats today."

I really worry, John -- not only about the morale at CIA and CIA officers, but our foreign intelligence partners. You know, I still travel around the world in the Middle East and they say now, if you can't keep your own secrets and protect your own people, why should we share counterterrorism information with you? That's a real problem.

ROBERTS: Peter, at the same time, all of this information came out, the White House announced that its creation of a new High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group is going to be based at the FBI, watched over by the National Security Council. Are they saying to the CIA, "You're out of the interrogation business"? And if they are, what kind of effect does that have on national security?

BROOKES: Well, I don't know what motivated this, John. But, I think, you can on the surface say it was another swipe at the CIA, saying we don't trust you to carry out interrogations. I think the Obama administration was saying that we're so unhappy with what happened in the past despite that we've been safe for almost eight years now from a terrorist attack, that we're going to move that responsibility away, put it with the FBI and then have oversight responsibilities from the National Security Council.

I don't think there's going to be operational responsibilities to have in National Security Council nor should there be. But, I think, once again, this is another swipe at the CIA, but at the same time, they think they're pointing out that there were mistakes made, they want to say they're trying to improve the situation.

But, once again, I think it's going to have an effect on the morale, and there's going to be people concerned about intelligence -- which is really our first line of defense.

ROBERTS: Fran, is there something to be said for the argument that it didn't work the old way, there needs to be a new way and this is the way that we think it can be done best.

TOWNSEND: John, I don't -- I'm not sure there's any evidence to suggest it didn't work the old way. Here's what I think the benefit is of this task force -- if there is any -- and that is, you know, the FBI because, it objected to Bush administration interrogation policies did not participate.

You now have a task force where all the agencies, law enforcement and intelligence will all apply the army field manual. They're going to apply the same rules. They're going to share information. They're going to coordinate and follow-up leads.

And to the extent that that actually happens and the implementation of this task force, that will be a positive thing.

ROBERTS: All right. Fran Townsend and Peter Brookes, good to talk to you this morning.

BROOKES: Thank you.

ROBERTS: Thanks for dropping by. I appreciate it. Kiran?

CHETRY: All right. Ben Bernanke, Fed chairman getting the nod for a second term. Our Christine Romans is going to talk about what people are saying. Is he the man to help guide us back on the road to prosperity?

It's 19 minutes past the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC PLAYING)

CHETRY: Twenty-two minutes past the hour. I mean, the music just coming right in on us. We had a small coffee collision, as well.

CHRISTINE ROMANS: John has cleaned up the whole mess. Everything is great. You could never tell. If we didn't tell you, you would...

(CROSSTALK)

CHETRY: It smells like Colombia in here. Well...

ROBERTS: I mean it. I figured I should clean it up.

CHETRY: Christine Romans is "Minding Your Business" this morning. She joins us now.

And we've been talking all morning about the appointment or the reappointment...

ROMANS: Right.

CHETRY: ... I guess you could say of the Fed chair, and who is supporting it and what it means moving forward.

ROMANS: Speaking of clean-up, this is the clean-up man, Ben Bernanke.

CHETRY: True.

ROMANS: The president expected this morning to reappoint him, to re-nominate him for a second four-year term. What are the criticisms of Ben Bernanke, the Fed chief, is that he was slow to realize the magnitude of the problem. But then once he did, he was aggressive and creative in different ways and try to clean it up. I want you to listen to something he said May 17th, 2007, when we were all asking what's going to happen with this little subprime problem.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN BERNANKE, FED CHAIRMAN: We do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system.

ROMANS: And, of course, now, we know there was incredible spillover, historic spillover historic spillover. And now...

(CROSSTALK)

ROMANS: Exactly. And the depression -- the depression expert Ben Bernanke who signed on in 2006, ended up presiding over something that he was trying to prevent another depression, irony of all ironies. Now, the big question for him, will he be able to help unwind all of this so we don't have further problems down the road? Chris Dodd is the chairman of the powerful Senate banking committee. This is what he said, "Chairman Bernanke was too slow to act work during the early stages of the foreclosure crisis. But he ultimately demonstrated effective leaderships and his reappointment sends the right signal to the markets. We'll be hearing with the president, with Ben Bernanke by his side, I suspect. Later this morning.

ROBERTS: Do you have a "Romans' Numeral" for us?

CHETRY: I certainly do and the number is the 1937, I remember it well -- 1937, and the significance of this "Roman Numeral," this is an important year in the depression. The depression was two big horrible spikes. 1937, after the economy started to recover, there had been a lot of emergency measures as they began to take away those measures, there were some blunders and we went boom, right back down.

1937 is the number that people like Ben Bernanke, like the president of the United States, people like every economist and business leader in this country. 1937 is the number that they are afraid of. They don't want to happen to us again.

CHETRY: All right. So, you spoke yesterday of Nouriel Roubini, right, saying it's the double dip recession, meaning you start to climb out of it and boom, you drop back down.

ROMANS: That's why it's incredibly important to keep, I think, the president's calculation, his incredibly quite to keep his team in place, Ben Bernanke who started this whole thing. And, look, he's got a lot of depression experts around him, Christina Romer on the Council of Economic Advisors. Larry Summer is certainly who's been, you know, around the block and he knows his stuff. All of these people -- now, they have to make sure that we don't make it worse.

ROBERTS: Yes. Let's hope, fingers crossed.

ROMANS: Right.

ROBERTS: Christine, "Minding Your Business" this morning -- Christine, thanks so much.

And don't forget, President Obama expected to nominate Ben Bernanke. At 9:00 a.m. Eastern, you can see that live right here on CNN.

CHETRY: All right. Well, we talk about the health care debate and a lot of people that have vocally opposed, in many cases seniors, some of them worried about what any changes would mean to them. Well, it looks like some are taking it out on the AARP and actually dumping their membership. We're going to talk to somebody who did that and also to a former AARP board chair about what's going on. Coming up.

Twenty-five minutes after the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC PLAYING)

ROBERTS: This week marks four years after Hurricane Katrina took its deadly toll on New Orleans. And in many places across the city, the wounds are still fresh.

But in our special "After the Storm" series, our Dr. Sanjay Gupta found the city's medical system is piecing itself back together. And it's doing it one clinic at a time.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Four years ago, Katrina unhinged New Orleans, homes, people, buildings bruised and battered along, with a medical system destroyed. An icon of that system -- charity hospital today -- is still closed. But out of the wood work, in unorthodox places, the community is responding.

(on camera): What does community-based therapy look like here in New Orleans? Well, you're looking at it. This used to be somebody's home but is now an outpatient clinic. Let's go take a look.

So, this is your house?

PATRICIA BERRYHILL, CLINICAL DIRECTOR, LOWER NINTH WARD HEALTH: Yes.

GUPTA: It used to be your house?

BERRYHILL: Yes, now a clinic. I still own it, but it's the clinic now, the Lower Ninth Ward health clinic.

GUPTA (voice-over): Before the storm, Patricia Berryhill was a nurse at Charity Hospital.

BERRYHILL: I had water to the ceiling here in this home.

GUPTA: Right here. So, those water to the ceiling?

BERRYHILL: To the ceiling.

GUPTA: It's just so hard to imagine.

BERRYHILL: Oh, yes, the first time I saw it -- it looked like a time bomb had hit it. Everything was destroyed.

GUPTA: The triage area used to be a den, Berryhill's kids rooms now a kid them exam room, the more all bedroom, more exam rooms.

Berryhill built the clinic alongside a friend, another nurse at charity.

ALICE CRAFT-KERNEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, LOWER NINTH WAR HEALTH CLINIC: The first patient that walked through the door was so ill that we had to send her to the emergency room. But what that did was that confirmed our belief that we needed to be here.

GUPTA: The days are long. The two nurses alongside two part- time doctors, two medical assistants, care for about 80 patients every week. And the cost to the patient, even those without insurance, is a pittance funded in part by government insurance like Medicaid and donations.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, ma'am. All right.

GUPTA: Across town, under a bridge, a free therapeutic drum circle.

DR. IAN JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, PROJECT RISING SUN: We've had an increase in mental illness from the storm with a decrease in providers and a decrease in hospital beds.

GUPTA: This is not a cure for depression. But organizers say it's a subtle, non-stigmatizing way to give relief. The circle, the clinic, both a response to hemorrhaging hospital budget and an emergency room still to the brim with patients.

(on camera): Are you going to get to a time when this doesn't need to be a clinic anymore?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We hope we'll get put out of business, in a way, because if that happens, that means that we will have adequate health care.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN, New Orleans.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: And a reminder, tune in at this time tomorrow, Sanjay will be back in New Orleans looking at the lingering emotional effects from hurricane Katrina and one group's effort to help residents cope four years after the storm.

KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: It's 31 minutes past the hour right now. We check our top stories.

Lightning near Kennedy Space Center forced NASA to scrub the space shuttle launch of Discovery early this morning. But they're going to go for it again at 1:10 eastern this morning. The shuttle is carrying, among other things, a new space treadmill for the international space station. It's named Colbert in honor of Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert.

ROBERTS: North Korea is asking President Obama's top envoys to come to Pyongyang to talk about the country's nuclear program. That's according to a report in a South Korean newspaper.

There has been no comment from the U.S. embassy in Seoul yet, but the report cites an unidentified, high-level diplomat in Washington who says if the American officials come, they could meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.

CHETRY: And despite mounting anger, the man who freed the Lockerbie bomber is defending his decision and denying any quid pro quo.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KENNY MACASKILL, SCOTTISH JUSTICE MINISTER: It was a decision based on the laws of Scotland and the values I believe that we seek to uphold. It was not based on political, diplomatic, or economic considerations.

And it's a matter of great regret that Mr. al-Megrahi was received in such an inappropriate manner.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHETRY: The Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, who embraced the free bomber, wants to pitch a tent, I guess you could say, in New Jersey near the homes of some of the victims' families. Gaddafi is coming to New York next month for the U.N. General Assembly, and there were plans for him to stay in a tent at a Libyan-owned estate.

A senior is State Department official calls it "awful," but as host as the United Nations, the U.S. may not be able to stop it.

A lot of seniors are concerned about how possible changes to health care will impact Medicare and things like access to prescription drugs. So as this debate rages on, there's a small but vocal group of seniors who are opposed to President Obama's health care reform plan, and they're showing that they're disapproving of it by turning in their AARP cards.

After the president said AARP was backing the plan, the group said it lost at least 60,000 members -- still a pretty small percentage of its 40 million roster, but that's in spite the fact that the AARP says it only supports portions of the proposal.

For more on all this, I'm joined by former AARP member Elaine Travis. She's somebody who gave up her membership, and the current board chair for AARP Bonnie Cramer. Thanks so both of you for being with us this morning.

As we know, there's been a lot of fiery debate about any health care reform, what it would look like. And Elaine, you have been an AARP member, you say, for the last eight years, and you decided to turn in your -- your membership, to terminate it, why?

ELAINE TRAVIS, FORMER AARP MEMBER: Well, because I heard that Obama is backing it. And, you know, we've always -- people have suspected and known that AARP is a liberal organization, but it really has come to light with this.

And I heard -- on television, I heard Obama say that the AARP had endorsed it, and I just couldn't believe it. I thought if any organization should be fighting against this health plan, it should be the AARP. And here they were endorsing it.

I felt like, you know, they should be -- they should be running ads against it, they should be telling us to go call our congressman, things like that. Here they were endorsing it.

CHETRY: And Bonnie, I want to ask you about that, because you say that AARP has actually not endorsed a plan. The president did say something that gave many people the impression, though, that AARP was behind health care reform, at least in the current form. Do you care to clarify where AARP stands?

BONNIE CRAMER, BOARD CHAIR, AARP: Yes. Well, AARP has not endorsed any particular plan.

There are provisions in several bills that are currently in the Congress that AARP does support. But we have not endorsed any plan in Congress.

As you know, bills are still being put together in Congress. So I do want to make it clear, our CEO has made it clear, and we've stated many times in the past weeks that we have not endorsed any plan at this time.

CHETRY: Yet Elaine said when she called to cancel her membership and said it was because of the support from AARP for the president's plan, that the person on the phone didn't deny there was some support.

Are there portions of it? Are you against any portion of it? How are you sort of -- if people call you and say where are you guys coming down on what changes are being proposed, what would you say to your members?

CRAMER: Well, I hope the person who took Elaine's call told her how we're fighting to protect Medicare, to save Medicare for future generations, how we're fighting to lower the prescription drug cost, particularly for people in the infamous donut hole, that coverage gap, and how we are fighting to hold down the out of pocket costs for Medicare beneficiaries, which have increased, doubled over the past seven years, and are projected to do the same in the next seven years.

Now, yes, there are things that we are not happy with in any bill that has come through Congress. For example, the bills do not speak to long-term care. That is a major problem for seniors throughout the country who may be caring for someone with Alzheimer's disease. So that's a major flaw. Another thing that we are very concerned about that is not yet reflected in the bills in Congress is we are working hard to bring the cost of prescription drugs down, and that includes having generics for biologic drugs. Those have not been spoken to adequately in plans.

So those are some of the things we are not happy with.

CHETRY: I want to ask you about that, Elaine. AARP is saying they want to support reform, they want to make sure that they protect Medicare benefits and try to find ways to lower costs.

You say you are on Medicare, you thought about doing Medicare Advantage but decided against it. Do you trust that perhaps that they were misrepresented and that they are looking out for the best interests of seniors?

TRAVIS: Well, no, absolutely not. I was going to get into Medicare Advantage this fall, probably. But, you know, it'll probably be gone.

What they're doing is just, you know, taking away from Medicare. They're reducing Medicare by $500 billion. And they're going to do away with the Medicare Advantage plan. You know, that's just disastrous for seniors.

And I don't know what AARP is doing. They say they're doing something. I've heard them talk about tort reform. I haven't heard anything they've said, you know, what they're trying to do. They just say they are, but what are they doing?

They sure aren't contacting their members about it. We don't know anything except that Obama even last week said on national TV that the AARP had endorsed it. So what are we to think?

CHETRY: Elaine, is any of this politically motivated? I know you were a former chair, right, for a precinct chair in Dallas for the GOP. Are you just opposed to many of the policies of this current administration?

TRAVIS: No, I'm not against it because it's Obama's plan and because I'm on the other side. It's just because it's such a disastrous plan.

And it's going to lead to a single-payer system if we get this thing in, because we know that's what Obama eventually is working towards.

And with a government bureau, you know, telling someone, making life and death decisions for us, we just can't have that. We know enough about the Canadian system and the Great Britain system that that's not for America.

CHETRY: And Bonnie, quickly, before we go, some seniors who have canceled their AARP memberships are joining ASA, the American Seniors Association. This is a group founded some years ago, a few years ago, by somebody who says, his name is Stewart Barton, actually. He says it was founded on conservative values, and they believe that the current legislation attacks baby boomers and seniors and that any type of employer mandate would kill jobs.

Do you worry there's any type of competition coming from other groups who perhaps may represent more of what some seniors are looking for in terms of where they stand on these health care issues?

CRAMER: Well, let me say first that I hope we can gain the trust of Elaine back as she watches us work over the next few months.

But, you know, Kiran, we have faced at AARP tough choices before. In 2003, as we fought to get prescription drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, we had one party in Congress very angry with us at that time, the Democrats.

In 2005, we pushed back hard on the president's attempts to privatize Social Security. At that time, we had the Republicans very angry with us, and we lost members during both of those battles.

But we gained those members and more once those battles were over and people saw the benefits.

So we're confident. AARP has a long history, a 50-year history of doing what's right for seniors, and we'll continue to work to make health care reform something that does serve seniors and that, most importantly, protects Medicare.

CHETRY: All right, we've got to go, but just quickly, yes or no, Elaine, would you consider joining AARP again?

TRAVIS: No, I feel like this Obama is trying to force this health care plan through. And he is not listening to ordinary people. And he's certainly not listening to the AARP correctly because he still thinks it's going -- no, I probably won't get back in.

CHETRY: All right. I want to thank both of you for sharing your points of view this morning, Elaine Travis as well as Bonnie Cramer, the board chair for AARP. Thank you.

CRAMER: Thank you.

CHETRY: And we do have a lot of questions. We know that you have them about health care reform. And we're trying to do our best to sort fact from fiction, putting a lot of answers together online. And if you'd like to check that out, go to CNN.com/healthcare.

ROBERTS: We're awaiting President Obama. He's on Martha's Vineyard in Oak Bluffs. In the next few minutes expecting him to make the announcement to nominate Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke for a second term.

Live look right now inside the file center, there are the correspondents discussing tape of the adhesive kind. There's NBC's Ron Allen, Dan Lothian sitting right behind him. That's where all of the action is going to be. We're monitoring it. It should be up in the next few minutes or so, so make sure you stay with us. It's 42 minutes after the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROBERTS: Developing story this morning, we are awaiting President Obama, who is going to be introducing Ben Bernanke for a second term as the Fed chair. There's the podium at the Oak Bluffs School where the White House traveling press corps has set up.

The president's expected sometime in the next 15 minutes, we thought he might actually be early, but now looking less likely, so maybe more toward 9:00.

CHETRY: So even on vacation, there's a traveling press corps and a podium.

ROBERTS: Absolutely.

CHETRY: The work never ends.

ROBERTS: Kind of deadly duty, actually, just sitting there in the school all day waiting for something to happen. But, you know, inevitably it does.

CHETRY: There you go.

Well, turning to another story we've been following -- fashion models are used to be in the harsh spotlight, but after an anonymous blogger gave one model the title of "skank" on the internet, that model sued.

ROBERTS: Absolutely, yes. What happened next turned the blogosphere world upside down. Our Jason Carroll is here with that. It's sue, countersue, just information, millions of dollars.

JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and a lot of people wondering out there who are anonymous bloggers, you know, how much anonymity they really have.

Well, for months there was speculation about who was the anonymous blogger that had started this whole thing, now her name no longer a secret. She used harsh language to describe a model but says that language she used and her identity should have been protected.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CARROLL: It's the kind of photo spread no model would want, a feature on the blog called "Skanks in New York City." Former "Vogue" cover girl Liskula Cohen ended up on the blog, telling CNN's Campbell Brown she was determined to find out who was behind putting her there.

LISKULA COHEN, SUED GOOGLE AND WON: I wanted it gone and I didn't want it to be there for the rest of my life. And I knew the only way for it to be gone was to call my lawyer. CARROLL: She's not the only one calling a lawyer -- so is the woman behind the blog, Rosemary Port, a 29-year-old fashion student and casual acquaintance of Cohen.

Port's attorney is saying she is the real victim.

SALVATOR STRAZZULLO, PORT'S ATTORNEY: I not only feel my client was wronged, but I feel now it sets precedent that anyone with money and power can get the identity of anyone that decides to be an anonymous blogger.

CARROLL: Port's name released after a judge sided with Cohen, who sued Google to reveal information about the anonymous blogger. The blog had appeared on Google's Web site.

The court rejected Port's claim blogs like hers serve as a modern day forum for conveying personal opinions and shouldn't be regarded as fact.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: The court says, look, there was specific evidence that this one person may have libeled another person. In that circumstance, we're going to disclose that name.

CARROLL: Google says it complies with court orders, saying "We have a legal team whose job it is to scrutinize these requests and make sure they meet not only the letter but the spirit of the law."

Port still says Google should have kept her name private and plans on suing Google for $15 million.

Cohen's attorney says he can't believe Port's nerve.

STEVEN WAGNER, COHEN'S ATTORNEY: Her being a victim here? I have trouble understanding that in its entirety.

CARROLL: Web watchers like "Wired" magazine's Nicholas Thompson say this is a lesson for all anonymous bloggers.

NICK THOMPSON, "WIRED" MAGAZINE: Some of the effects will be good. People will recognize, wait a second, the law does apply to the blogosphere. And some of it will be bad. There will be people who won't publish things that maybe they should publish that would be good for society.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CARROLL: Port's attorney says his client should've had the chance to at least appeal the judge's decision before information about her identity was revealed.

Cohen's attorney says much of this could have been avoided if Port had simply apologized for what she had done.

Now, speaking of blogs, a number of folks have written into our blog here on CNN.com/amfix. Adam wrote in and said "Why shouldn't the freedom of speech be protected on the blog? The blog was written by an American on American soil."

But overwhelmingly, most of the people who wrote in were like Donna, who said "The court decision has not prevented bloggers from stating their opinions. It only says that if you express your opinion, you are accountable for what you say."

Also Dick wrote in to say "If you publicly give your opinion or critique, you should have the guts to at least sign your name."

CHETRY: And that was the opinion, people saying, yes, we get free speech. You have a right to your opinion and you have a right to even post your opinion. But you should have the guts to put your name by it.

CARROLL: Overwhelmingly, a lot of folks were in support of the model. But the bigger issue now comes from a lot of the anonymous bloggers out there, what you write, if it's defamatory, you better watch out.

ROBERTS: When you look at the editorial page of the newspaper, which is essentially what a lot of the blogosphere is, people put their names on their editorials. Or if it's the newspaper editorial, you know who is the editor, you know who's the editorial page editor, it's not anonymous, right?

CARROLL: And it sort of makes you look at the Internet too, how it's evolving. Because in the beginning the Internet was pretty much a free for all. People were writing and saying whatever they wanted.

And now as the Internet continues to sort of evolve, we see how some things are beginning to pull back.

ROBERTS: People find at least some degree of accountability.

CHETRY: Yes, because before you can post, you often have to sign up or put your name or people to be able to find out who you are eventually.

ROBERTS: So what do you think? Should bloggers' identities be private? Sound off at CNN.com/amfix.

CHETRY: Well, we are going to be talking about -- we tracked Bill a little bit. We felt Bill, the hurricane, but bill didn't hit land here -- a little. Some people felt it a lot depending where you were on the coast.

But it has been a rather quiet season for hurricanes. Why is that? We'll be joined by Rob Marciano and Jacqui Jeras, two great minds in our weather department breaking it down for us.

It's 15 minutes after the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: It's 53 minutes past the hour.

(WEATHER REPORT)

ROBERTS: Ben Bernanke, current Fed chairman, going to be renominated for a second term. Some people were upset by that because figuring it was a holdover from the Bush administration, he was at the helm when everything went south. He said he didn't think it was going to spill over to the general economy, that whole subprime mortgage meltdown.

But the president seems to have confidence in the Fed chairman and so decided that he would buck some of his critics and decided to r renominate him for a second term.

CHETRY: One of the things Christine Romans was talking about is that when you're in the midst of a financial crisis and trying to claw your way out, you don't want to necessarily change the team.

Here we see the president walking up. let's listen to President Obama.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I apologize for interrupting the relaxing that I told all of you to do, but I have an important announcement to make concerning the Federal Reserve.

The man next to me, Ben Bernanke has led the Fed through one of the worst financial crises that the nation and the world has ever faced. As an expert on the causes of the Great Depression, I'm sure Ben never imagined he would be part of a team responsible for preventing another.

But because of his background, his temperament, his courage, and his creativity, that's exactly what he has helped to achieve. And that is why I'm reappointing him to another term of chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Been approached a financial system on the verge of collapse with calm and wisdom, with bold action and out of the box thinking that has helped put the brakes on our economic freefall.

And almost none of the decisions that he or any of us made have been easy. The actions we've taken to stabilize our financial system, to repair our credit markets, restructure our auto industry, and pass a recovery package, have all been steps of necessity, not choice.

They face plenty of critics, some of whom argued that we should stay the course or do nothing at all. But taken together, this bold, persistent experimentation has brought our economy back from the brink.

There are steps that are working. Our recovery plan has put tax cuts in people's pockets, extended health care and unemployment insurance to those who have borne the brunt, and continuing to save jobs that otherwise would've been loss.

Our auto industry is showing signs of life, business investment is showing signs of stabilizing. Our housing and credit markets have been saved from collapse. Of course, as I've said before, we are a long way away from completely healthy financial systems and a full economic recovery. And I will not let up until those Americans who are looking for jobs can find them, until qualified businesses, large and small, who need capital to grow can find loans at a rate they can afford, and until all responsible mortgage holders can stay in their homes.

And that's why we need Ben Bernanke to continue the work he's doing. And that's why I've said that we cannot go back to an economy based on overleveraged banks, inflated profits, and maxed out credit cards.

For even as we've taken steps to rescue our financial system and our economy, we must now work to rebuild a new foundation for growth and prosperity.

We have to build an economy that works for every American and one that leads the world in innovation, in investments, and in experts -- exports.

Part of that foundation has to be a financial regulatory system that ensures we never face a crisis like this again. We've already seen how lax enforcement and weak regulation can lead to enormous wealth for a few and enormous pain for everybody else.

And that's why there's some resistance on Wall Street for those who would prefer to keep things the way they are, we will pass the reforms necessary to protect consumers, investors, and the entire financial system, and we will continue to maintain a strong and independent Federal Reserve.

We will also keep working towards the reform of a health insurance system whose costs and discriminatory whose practices are bankrupting our families, businesses, and our government.

We will continue to build a clean energy economy that creates the jobs and industries of the future within our borders. And we will give our children and the workers the skills and training they need to compete for these jobs in the 21st century.

Much like the decisions we've made so far, the steps we take to build this new foundation will not be easy, change never is. As Ben and I both know, it comes with debate and disagreement and resistance from those who prefer the status quo.

And that's all right, because that's how democracy is supposed to work.

But no matter how difficult change is, we will pursue it relentlessly, because it is absolutely necessary to lift this country up and create an economy that leads to good jobs, broad growth, and a future our children can count on.

That's what we're here to do, and that's what we will continue to do in the months ahead.

So I want to congratulate Ben on the work that he's done so far, wish him continued success in the hard work that he has before him.

Thank you so much, Ben.

BEN BERNANKE, CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL RESERVE: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.

I'd like to express my gratitude to President Obama for the confidence he's shown in me with this nomination and for his unwavering support for a strong and independent Federal Reserve.

It has been a particular privilege for me to serve with extraordinary colleagues throughout the Federal Reserve system. They've demonstrated remarkable resourcefulness, dedication, and stamina under trying conditions.

Through the long nights and weekends and the time away from their families, they have never lost sight of the critical importance of the work of the Fed for the economic wellbeing of all Americans. I am deeply grateful for their efforts.

I especially want to thank my own family, my wife Anna and our children Joel and Alyssa. Without their support and sacrifice, I could not undertake this task.

The Federal Reserve, like other economic policymakers, has been challenged by the unprecedented events of the past few years. We have been bold or deliberate as circumstances demanded, but our objective remains constant, to restore a more stable financial and economic environment in which opportunity can again flourish and in which Americans' hard work and creativity can receive their proper rewards.

Mr. President, I commit today to you and to the American people that if confirmed by the Senate, I will work to the utmost of my abilities with my colleagues at the Federal Reserved and alongside the Congress and the administration to help provide a solid foundation for growth and prosperity in an environment of price stability.

Thank you, sir.

OBAMA: Thank you. Great job.

BERNANKE: Thank you.