'Fox News Watch,' March 13, 2010
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}This is a rush transcript from "Fox News Watch," March 13, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
JON SCOTT, HOST: On "Fox News Watch…”
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}FORMER REP. ERIC MASSA, D-N.Y.: I groped a male staffer. Yeah, I did.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: A disgraced Democratic congressman gets more media attention, for some, too much attention.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PATRICK KENNEDY, D-R.I.: It's despicable, the national press corps!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}SCOTT: But as the Massa mess continues to fester on Capitol Hill, should the press dig deeper?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LIZ CHENEY, KEEP AMERICA SAFE: The crux of the matter is that the American people have a right to know.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: Liz Cheney and her group, Keep America Safe, criticize Eric Holder and the Justice Department for keeping secrets about defending terrorists. Then the mainstream media take their shots, but are they aiming in the wrong direction?
Chief Justice Roberts makes news, sending a zinger at the president for his Supreme Court swipe. Is the press taking sides?
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAN RATHER, FORMER NEWS ANCHOR: He couldn't sell watermelons.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}SCOTT: Dan Rather is back in the news and blaming the media for all the unwanted attention.
Is the mainstream media giving global warming groups the cold shoulder?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}JEREMY RENNER, ACTOR: ...first time working together.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: And what role did the Pentagon's journalists embed program play in an Oscar winner?
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}On the panel this week, writer and Fox News contributor, Judy Miller; former White House press secretary, Dana Perino; Jim Pinkerton, fellow, New America Foundation; and New York Post columnist, Kirsten Powers.
I'm Jon Scott. "Fox News Watch" is on right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}MASSA: The leadership of the Democratic Party have become exactly what they said they were running against. They have become exactly what we all ran against. You cannot effectively govern this country without the consent of the governed. The entire nation has said let's rewrite the health care bill. Let's find what we can agree upon. No, no, no, we're going to ram this down the throats of the American people and anyone who stands in the way of doing that is going to be smeared and they're going to be kicked out of Congress.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: The voice of former Democratic Congressman Eric Massa there, suggesting he was being forced out of Congress as part of a setup involving the White House. The drama played out in salacious headlines and television interviews. Allegations that Mr. Massa sexually harassed male aides. The House Ethics Committee investigation began. And the Congressman tried to explain it all to Glenn Beck.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MASSA: I am at fault. I own it. Nobody forced me. I made the decision.
GLENN BECK, HOST, “THE GLENN BECK PROGRAM”: Did you ever, did you ever touch anybody sexually?
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}MASSA: No.
BECK: Or grope anybody sexually?
MASSA: No, no, no.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}BECK: OK.
MASSA: I did nothing sexual. I did things that were wrong. I should not have allowed myself to be that way with my staff.
BECK: Got it. OK, and you did nothing criminal.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}MASSA: No, no.
BECK: OK.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}SCOTT: Well, following the many twists and turns and a whole bunch of non-answers, Beck ended the hour with this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: America, I'm going to shoot straight with you. I think I've wasted your time. I think this is the first time I have wasted an hour of your time and I apologize for that. Because I think we could have spent a lot less time, you backtracking a lot. You're a lot...
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}MASSA: I'm not backtracking. I'm telling you what happened.
BECK: And corruption and you don't have anything except what I say. You don't — you're now apologizing to Rahm Emanuel.
MASSA: That was sarcastic, Glenn.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}BECK: OK.
MASSA: Did you get that?
BECK: I didn't. No, I didn't.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: All right. Let's start with the only male on the panel this week.
Jim, that would be you.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}(LAUGHTER)
This was the story that just kept on giving for the press. It kept morphing. First, he was resigning because of cancer and then he was being forced out of his seat, and then it was because Rahm Emanuel, you know, the story about the naked confrontation in the gym.
(LAUGHTER)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}The shower room at the House. Jim?
JIM PINKERTON, FELLOW, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: I guess I better begin by saying I've never met Eric Massa.
(LAUGHTER)
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}SCOTT: Nor been in the gym with him, I hope.
PINKERTON: But I would just say, what is interesting to me, once the mainstream media kind of figured on the story line that he was a — an Obama-bashing Democrat, then they went to work on him. And then — so The Atlantic Monthly and the New York Daily News started saying, hey, he was a bad guy in the navy and stuff. You never saw that kind of opposition research against, say, Kevin Jennings, the gay safe schools czar, or Barney Frank, the gay member of Congress. Only if there's somebody they don't like, they then say, by the way, there's dirt on him from 20 years ago, you should know about.
SCOTT: Judy is shaking her head. I don't think she's agreeing with you.
JUDY MILLER, WRITER & FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: No, I think that Massa's enemy is Massa. And I think I have to agree with the women of Congress, Nancy Pelosi and Louise Slaughter, who said, first of all, he's a very sick individual, that's Pelosi. And Louise Slaughter saying he needs help. I mean, this is a guy — it's a miracle he was even in Congress. I don't know what it says about our Congress.
SCOTT: Well, Dana, in these interesting times though, it's not all that farfetched that the White House would lean on a member of Congress to vote for this health care bill.
DANA PERINO, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Of course, they're leaning on anybody that they possibly can.
SCOTT: Right.
PERINO: But I think this is — it appears to me that this behavior is totally separate. But I do think it's interesting though that Speaker Pelosi knew more about it than she said she did initially. And the media has kind of let that be swept under the rug. But I think she should be held to the same standards that the Republicans were held to when it came to Mark Foley in 2006.
SCOTT: Did the press buy his stories too willingly? Especially the...
PERINO: Massa's story?
SCOTT: Yes.
PERINO: No. I think if anybody got the "worst press of the week award," it would be him.
(LAUGHTER)
SCOTT: It was hard to keep track of all his reasons for leaving. When a guy changes a story day by day, hour by hour, almost, you lose a lot of credibility in the media.
KIRSTEN POWERS, COLUMNIST, NEW YORK POST: Yes. Right from the beginning, the things he was saying weren't adding up. And I think that, you know, he obviously is very unstable, and it's kind of — you know, it's clear that he has a problem. And in terms of whether the press holds him to the same standard as the Mark Foley situation, I think that the big difference is that he's leaving versus what the Mark Foley situation — it was sort of an ongoing thing and it sort of fed the fire by letting him still be there. The Democrats actually dealt with this probably the best they could do when it came out, and just kind of distanced themselves.
SCOTT: Now one of the questions is, what did Nancy Pelosi know and when did she know it. Does that deserve investigation?
POWERS: Sure, absolutely.
(CROSSTALK)
POWERS: One of the biggest things with the Foley situation was what did Dennis Hastert know, when did he know it. And I think that there was a lot of blame to go around there. And so, certainly, see whether they were just ignoring it rather than dealing with it.
SCOTT: This controversy spawned another exciting television moment. Take a listen to Congressman Patrick Kennedy on the House floor.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PATRICK KENNEDY, D-R.I.: We're talking about Eric Massa, 24/7, on the TV. We're talking about war and peace, $3 billion, a thousand lives and no press? No press! You want to know why the American public is sick, they're sick because they're not seeing their Congress do the work that they're sent to do. It's because the press, the press of the United States press is not covering the most significant issue of national importance. And that's the laying of lives down in the nation for the service of our country. It is despicable, the national press corps right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: Judy, does the congressman from Rhode Island have a point? Should the media have moved on and left Massa alone?
MILLER: I'm sorry. I think that the media have covered the important issues. You cannot ignore something like Massa. Maybe we concentrate on Massa too much, but it is not as if the funding for Iraq, for Afghanistan has gone uncovered by the press. We had nine months of debate, day in, day out, about whether or not there was going to be a surge. I just don't buy it.
PINKERTON: But the press loves it when somebody attacks them from the left like that. They say, oh, he's such a hero for doing this to us. Brian Williams on NBC, The Washington Post, all giving Kennedy the great treatment of what a statesman he is, even though he obviously needs...
(CROSSTALK)
PERINO: Unhinged, completely unhinged.
(CROSSTALK)
SCOTT: We need to take a break.
But first, we have some bonus features available to us on our web site, including some of the discussion you can't see on TV that erupt in here during our break. You can hear those after the show at Foxnews.com/newswatch.
We'll be back in two minutes to talk about Liz Cheney's attempts to get answers, and some in the media who attempted to stop her.
ANNOUNCER: Who is defending terrorists? Liz Cheney asked that question and got slammed by the mainstream press. Was it fair?
And what did he mean about him when talking about these. Answers next, on "News Watch."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ERIC HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL: The pendulum is starting to swing. An America run by progressives is really — it's about to happen. and we're going to be looking for people who share our values.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AD ANNOUNCER: So who did President Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder hire? Nine lawyers who represented or advocated for terrorists detainees. Who are these government officials? Eric Holder will only name two. Why the secrecy behind the other seven? Whose values do they share?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: That was an ad produced by Keep America Safe, a Homeland Security advocacy group led by Liz Cheney, the daughter of the former vice president. Her group criticizes Attorney General Eric Holder for not disclosing details about Justice Department lawyers who previously have defended alleged terrorists. That ad brought Cheney and her group a whole lot of negative press and criticism. Cheney says most in the media missed the point.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHENEY: The crux of the matter is the American people have a right to know whether lawyers who used to represent and advocate on behalf of terrorists, some of whom had killed Americans, Omar Khadr is one of them, to be specific, whether those same lawyers are now responsible working inside the Justice Department on terrorism-related detainee issues. It's transparency.
SCOTT: Judy, Liz Cheney took a lot of shots from the liberal press and from conservatives as well for her position on this issue. Did somebody miss the point?
MILLER: Look, I think she's right about transparency. We have a right to know who the Justice Department officials are. But she's absolutely wrong. And conservatives were the first to point that out about lawyers having an obligation to defend everyone. That's at the crux of our legal system. And hats off to Chris McGreal of The Guardian, who resurrected a quote by her father who said, after 9/11, it's necessary for us to be a nation of men rather than a nation of laws. What's at issue here is the rule of law and the right to a defense. And she's wrong on that. And I think the press is right to call her on that.
PINKERTON: I thought she just said the issue was transparency. I don't recall her saying that it's wrong that somebody does a pro bono defense of these alleged terrorists, or I should just say terrorists. I think she said, why are they keeping it secret. Why was the press so fired up about Dick Cheney's energy task — whereas they demanded full disclosure of all those people? That was a cause celebre for years. And now the press, the mainstream media is just rolling over when Holder says I don't want to disclose who the seven is.
(CROSSTALK)
SCOTT: It is another transparency issue for the Obama administration. And is it because the Cheney name is attached...
(CROSSTALK)
PERINO: I'm sure it probably has something to do with it, of course. But I was a press secretary during a time when everybody wanted to have lawyers who had worked on detainee issues during the Bush administration, wanted to have their heads on a stick. And these are lawyers who had done what they were obligated to do as professionals, and like Bybee, Yoo, Bradbury. These are really good professional people. So I have no problem asking about the disclosure of who these people are. They're political appointees. And in a democracy, to suggest that you can't know who's working on those issues, is ridiculous.
I disagreed with a lot of the conservatives who came after her because, as Jim pointed out, that they missed the point.
SCOTT: So would you say, Kirsten, that the mainstream media is too dismissive of conservative concerns here?
POWERS: I think definitely they're pretty dismissive of conservative concerns, to be honest. I think they probably have a reaction to that ad, you know, which I find very offensive. I mean, if her issue really is transparency, then she should do a different ad. To me, it seems to be demonizing people who defend accused terrorists...
MILLER: Yes.
POWERS: Which goes — as Judy said, you know, look, Ted Bundy gets a defense lawyer, you know? I mean, Charles Manson gets a defense lawyer. Bad people get defense lawyers. That's the way it works in this country.
PINKERTON: The issue isn't that they — what they did before they entered the government. The issue is they may well be affecting policy in the government. If you're a lawyer for Exxon, you then can't go to the Energy Department and work on energy policy. If you're lawyer for some terrorist, you can't then go work on terrorism policy.
SCOTT: All right, time for another break.
A verbal dust-up between the chief justice and the president gets the media all stirred up.
ANNOUNCER: A supreme face-off as Chief Justice Roberts takes a poke at the president over the Supreme Court diss. Has the press taken sides?
And what role did journalists embeds play in this year's Oscar winner? The details next, on "News Watch."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: With all due deference to separation of powers, last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the flood gates for special interests, including foreign corporations to spend without limit in our elections.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: Well, that January speech is back in the headlines. President Obama ripping the Supreme Court there during his State of the Union address. One justice clearly showing he did not agree. Samuel Alito, shaking his head, mouthing the words "not true" when the president summarized a then-recent Supreme Court ruling that he doesn't much like.
This week, the chief justice, John Roberts, answering a student's question, came out saying he is not OK with the tradition of the justices not expressing their feelings and being props at what he says has become a political pep rally.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN ROBERTS, CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT: The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court, according to the requirements of protocol, has to sit there expressionless, I think, is very troubling. To the extent of State of the Union has degenerated into a political pep rally, I'm not sure why we're there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: Dana, does he have a point? Is it a pep rally?
PERINO: He absolutely has a point. Look at the thing — when you practice a State of the Union as president, you work on that speech for weeks, you practice it, giving it in the family theater over and over again, so he knew exactly what he was doing. The problem for President Obama was that he had the facts wrong. Borne out by Justice Alito mentioning it. And the Supreme Court justices have to sit there, they can't show any emotion. The president gets to deliver this great line in the speech, get a huge standing ovation from the Democrats, and they can't do anything about it. A month later, he's giving a lecture where he's asked a question and he answers it in such a — you heard him, in such a classy way. I think that John Roberts comes out on top on this one.
SCOTT: So how many Supreme Court justices will be at the next State of the Union?
POWERS: Who knows. I don't know why they can't show emotion. And I think that Alito did show emotion. He was clearly irritated. and they're free to do that. I mean, to me, this actually seems somewhat whiney. You know, it's not as though the Congress can really do anything to them. They're lifetime appointments. I mean, they're fine. There's nothing — they have the best jobs in the world.
PINKERTON: When a liberal president criticizes a conservative Supreme Court decision, the media, like the New York Daily News, called the president a, "legal scholar."
(LAUGHTER)
If this had been a decision about abortion rights and a conservative president said how dare the Supreme Court legalize abortion or something like that, the New York Times and entire establishment would have come down like thunder on the president for doing that. Instead, now, they're praising him.
SCOTT: Can't do a media show without take talking about Dan Rather, the former CBS anchor got some attention this week for this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RATHER: The big undertow in the coming election is going to be President Obama's leadership. and the Republicans will make the case, and a lot of Independents will buy this argument, listen, he just hasn't been doing — look at the health care bill, the number one priority, took him forever to get it through, and he had to compromise it to death. And a version of, listen, he's a nice person, he's very articulate, and this is used against him. But he couldn't sell watermelons...
(CROSSTALK)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: Well, that got all kinds of attention. In The Huffington Post on Wednesday, Rather wrote, "What has caused this cement to go viral is the trumpeting of an online and cable echo chamber that claims the banner of news but trades in gossip, gotcha and innuendo. Many who got this ‘news’ did so without any context, just a headline that popped up on their phone or in-box." Judy, does he have a point?
MILLER: Look, Dan, welcome to the age of the World Wide Web.
(LAUGHTER)
I mean, statements that you wish you hadn't made get echoed all around the planet. There's nothing you can do about it. And in his defense, I must say, he also apologized on The Huffington Post. He said he apologized for what he called a poor choice of words. He is from Texas. He said that people sell things on the road, whether they're white or black or...
SCOTT: And in the history of Ratherism, that helps defend him too.
Let's move on and talk about another issue in the media, global warming. Take a look at the current cover of The Weekly Standard: "Questionable science of global warming." Always a hot topic for the magazine. But "Is this what you would expect from USA Today?" Their cover story on Thursday, is the global warming movement cooling"? Or should I ask, is the media giving the cold shoulder to global warming groups?
Kirsten, is it?
POWERS: I don't — I think that's probably an anomaly. You know, and if anyone was going to do it probably would be USA Today. I think we'll know a trend has started if the New York Times is doing it.
PERINO: If they were giving them the cold shoulder, it would be about time.
(LAUGHTER)
MILLER: Well, Science magazine pointed out this week that it was partly the scientific community’s fault for not being clear about what were obviously attempts to manipulate data.
SCOTT: A lot of questions out there.
We have to take one more break.
Do embedded journalists get the real picture of war?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RENNER: Everybody get back! Go, go, go!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: How did the Pentagon's journalist embed program help "The Hurt Locker" win at the Oscars? That's next, on "News Watch."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RENNER: Drop the phone! Drop the phone!
(CROSSTALK)
RENNER: I can't get a shot.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT: That's the winner of the Oscar for best picture, "The Hurt Locker." It follows the U.S. Army Explosive Ordinance Disposal Team in Iraq. The film received a number of other awards and favorable reviews. Some critics, though, say it does not portray reality. The screenplay written by Mark Bole, a former reporter embedded with U.S. troops in Iraq.
This week, the Pentagon added to the reviews, tying the success of the film to the success of its journalist embedding program. Quote, "We feel that embedding gives opportunity to get firsthand knowledge of the challenges our people face as they prosecute the war. Journalists who spend any time with our troops walk away with a sense of professionalism and a sense of the challenges that they face every day."
So, Jim, does the Pentagon have a point?
PINKERTON: I think they do. Mark Bole, who won the Oscar for the screen play, certainly said so. Kathryn Bigelow, I thought, was very gracious in praising the troops. It comes with an intimacy with them and understanding what they go through.
SCOTT: "The Hurt Locker" seemed to give a favorable view of the way our troops comport themselves in Iraq.
You've been there before. We've got "The Pacific" starting this week on HBO. Is that embed program a success?
MILLER: Well, I think the embed is essential. I agree absolutely with the Pentagon, everybody who has exposure to these people. Look at the spate of Hollywood movies that are anti-military, anti-American. This was that rare exception that saluted the brave work of these men and women. Bravo. Long last. Thank you, members of the Academy.
(LAUGHTER)
SCOTT: We have to say goodbye. A wrap on "News Watch."
Thanks to Judy Miller, Jim Pinkerton, Dana Perino and Kirsten Powers.
I'm Jon Scott. We'll see you next week.
Content and Programming Copyright 2010 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.