We should always try to start with the most generous take and then allow the person asking to walk your generosity back (which sadly happens quite often).
I'm not arguing the merits of any assumption of validity -- and I certainly do not believe that we should be taking our medical directives from the evening news -- but at the same time that does not mean the question is beyond reproach for it most certainly is not. It's a question that we used to consider at the top of the list prior to the past year and some change -- has it been studied and is it safe -- and anyone asking those questions should not be chastised for going against the current religion.
No one is arguing that covid is not serious or infections impacting pregnant women; in fact, that is not even part of the discussion. The question asked, as best I could tell, was if anyone was aware of any safety data on IUFD in vaccinated individuals. The proper response would have gone something like this: Not that I have read or am aware of;
here is UpToDate link on the topic. What we do know, however, is that vaccines have thus far demonstrated good efficacy at preventing serious disease and that vaccinations historically have proved to be generally safe in this population. We have to weigh the risk of the known (infection morbidity and mortality) with the unknown (new vaccine risks) and, for now, that math favors vaccination.
Lastly, on the disagreement about consensus statements -- that is, at best, a very weak form of argument. I understand why we do it, the ease and convenience it represents -- but remember that consensuses not only frequently change, they frequently reverse themselves and are found to be completely wrong. There's also different degrees of validity for consensus statements and I understand that many times that may well be the best, most practical evidence we can get -- particularly in a field such as OB where studies are quite difficult to do. At the same time, consensus based upon limited data is limited and we would probably be served by recognizing and acknowledging that fact with the caveat of "well, we don't really know as it is so new but so far here is what we believe...". As an aside, I believe the failure to do this -- and the faulty belief that they needed to speak authoritatively to a degree beyond their knowledge or understanding -- is a major contributing factor to the loss of trust currently experienced by the public health community.
...and it has been discussed and is being studied, btw, precisely because they don't know.