On Saturday's Fox News Watch, as the panel discussed the media's lack of attention to revelations that the Obama administration knew that the attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya was a pre-planned terrorist attack in spite of dismissing the event as a protest that got out of hand, left-leaning FNC analyst Kirsten Powers declared that the media have had a "really disturbing lack of curiosity" about the episode, adding that they "should be holding" the Obama administration's "feet to the fire in a a serious way."
When asked by substitute host Rick Folbaum if the administration's goal was to "throw the media off the trail," Powers observed that "the media was never on the trail, so there was nobody to throw off."
A bit earlier, as the group discussed the media's obsession with polls showing Mitt Romney failing to beat President Obama, the liberal analyst also found that the media have been "especially egregious" in going after Romney while giving Obama pass after pass.
Below is a transcript of the relevant portions of the Saturday, September 29, Fox News Watch:
KIRSTEN POWERS: To be fair, looking at the polls, it doesn't, I personally don't think it looks great for Romney right now, but the race could change five times between now and election day, especially because we haven't had the debate. So the media is sort of wishful thinking, trying to write off Romney. And I normally do not buy into the idea that the media is completely on board with one side.
This is the exception. This campaign season has been especially egregious in terms of them just ignoring things that are bad about President Obama and obsessing over things that are, you know, that Mitt Romney has done wrong.
RICK FOLBAUM: Kirsten, if the goal was to change the subject, as Jim (Pinkerton) suggests, did it work? Did they throw the media off the trail?
POWERS: The media was never on the trail, so there was nobody to throw off, you know. The thing about it is, there's only been a few reporters who have been really on this story, you know, and I think that what's interesting, what was in the diary, the journal to be very specific, it wasn't just that he was concerned about "an" attack, he was concerned about al-Qaeda.
And that is something that now Eli Lake has reported on at the Daily Beast and Fox News has reported on that they knew within 24 hours, at least according to multiple intelligence officials, that this was linked to al-Qaeda. So that's why there was such a heavy, I mean, this was fully trying to just crush this story to make sure that no other reporter would even go after it.
FOLBAUM: Special Report anchor Bret Baier, of course, Thursday night reporting that, even though the Obama White House claimed the attack on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was due to a spontaneous reaction to a YouTube clip insulting to Muslims, they actually knew that it was a terror attack. So, Kirsten, was there a coverup? Why would the White House internally classify something as terror and then send Ambassador Susan Rice out onto so many Sunday talk shows days later to claim that it was spontaneous?
POWERS: Well, that's the question, and it does appear that there is a coverup. I have been trying to, as, you know, many people, I know Judy (Miller) has been trying to track down exactly what happened. There are many reporters who are asking questions, and you can't, you know, you're told, "Well, she was just operating under the best information she had, and she was very clear that she was couching it," is only the most recent information. But she was so specific, and I think that's the problem.
And I think, not only was she so specific, but it was just contrary to common sense. There's just no, you know, she even compared it to what was happening in Cairo, to say that the movie caused it, all these other things, you know, protesters don't carry RPGs or usually have mortars or things like that. So, you know, I think that the media has just a really disturbing lack of curiosity about this and really should be holding them, their feet to the fire in a serious way.