Megyn Kelly and Dan Abrams shouted at each other in a blistering, five-minute argument Thursday over Donald Trump’s guilty verdict in New York.
Kelly, 53, who has a long history of feuding with the former president, appeared as a guest on Dan Abrams Live on News Nation to react to the day’s news.
After admitting that the jury had no choice but to convict based on what was presented, she spent about a minute and a half trashing the judge and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
Abrams, 58, then argued that people could debate whether it was “morally” or “legally” wrong, but that it was “wrongdoing” on Trump’s behalf, prompting Kelly to demand to know what he meant.
“First of all, it’s paying a porn star $130,000 to keep her quiet. Can we at least agree that this is wrong? I’m just talking about morality versus legality,” Abrams said.
Megyn Kelly and Dan Abrams ended up yelling at each other in a blistering, five-minute argument over Donald Trump’s guilty verdict Thursday in New York
Kelly responded by saying it was a private matter and that she didn’t know what kind of marriage Donald and Melania Trump had, just like she didn’t know what kind of marriage the Clintons had.
“I don’t care about the sex, I’m talking about the $130,000 to keep her quiet and protect his campaign,” Abrams replied.
Kelly insisted there was nothing wrong, arguing: “So if someone runs for office, they just lose their right to privacy?”
Abrams then asked, “If you’re doing it to protect the campaign and you’re spending money on it, now you’re crossing the line into legal trouble, right?”
Kelly said he was wrong, but Abrams wasn’t done yet.
He tried to back up and asked, “Don’t you think he falsified company records?”
“I don’t know what he did,” she said, which made Abrams a little irritated.
‘What does that mean? We just went through a whole process, we heard every detail of it,” he said in disbelief.
Kelly, who has a long history of feuding with the former president, appeared as a guest on Dan Abrams Live on News Nation to react to the news of the day
Kelly said it was a private matter and that she didn’t know what kind of marriage Donald and Melania Trump had, just like she didn’t know what kind of marriage the Clintons had.
“I don’t think he wrote ‘hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.’ No one who has paid hush money would write something like that. “I think he — or someone at the Trump Organization — wrote down ‘legal fees’ in the Adobe drop-down menu, and that made just as much sense because hush money wasn’t an option,” she said.
“He paid his lawyer, who paid the money to Stormy Daniels, and he paid him back, although he denied it at trial.”
“I don’t think there’s anything wrong with doing that. I think you’re paying your attorney’s fees… you could easily classify that as legal fees.”
Abrams, almost laughing, replied, “Whatever it’s for, right? Even if it is illegal behavior, you can still consider it as legal costs.’
“There is nothing illegal about paying hush money for an NDA,” Kelly responded.
“It’s not, but if you’re doing it to protect your campaign, then yes,” Abrams said.
That’s when the argument devolved, with Abrams and Kelly — who both have law degrees — seemingly oblivious to what the other was talking about.
Kelly asked, “No, what law are you citing?”
Abrams argued that people could debate whether it was “morally” or “legally” wrong, but that it was “wrong conduct” on Trump’s behalf.
Trump supporters react after a verdict was handed down in the criminal trial of former US president and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump
Abrams responded, “Campaign Finance Act.”
‘Wrong! You don’t know what you’re talking about, you’re wrong,” Kelly said, before Abrams demanded an explanation.
“This has been wrong from the start. It is not a campaign contribution if it is a payment that could ever be made outside of the campaign.”
“That is not the standard,” Abrams said, saying that “court after court” has said the standard is substantial.
As Kelly continued to say “you’re wrong,” Abrams ended the segment by saying, “We’re going to have to agree to disagree.”
The world was turned upside down after former President Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 charges of falsifying company records.
The jury of seven men and five women at the Manhattan Criminal Court deliberated for nearly 10 hours before convicting the former president.
It was the first time a former US president had faced a criminal trial, and the verdict could upset the 2024 White House race, which would prove a pivotal moment in US history.
He will be sentenced on July 11, although his legal team has vowed to appeal the verdict.