NewsNation host and founder of Mediaite, Dan Abrams, was taken to school by former Fox News host Megyn Kelly.

It happened right after the 34 guilty verdicts were given to the former president, and Kelly protested that she did not believe that the former president did anything against the law.

The host said “there was definitely wrongdoing” on the part of the former president even if you could make the case that what he did was not against the law.

“What was it?” questioned Kelly, to which Abrams replied, “What was the wrongdoing? Alright, number one, it’s $130,000 to a porn star to keep her quiet, to try to protect your campaign. Can we at least agree that’s wrong?”

“How was it wrong?” protested Kelly. “I don’t know what kind of weird marriage these two have. Same as I didn’t know what kind of weird marriage Bill and Hillary Clinton had. So I don’t know what their covenant is in terms of what he’s allowed to do on the outside of his marriage.”

“I’m not talking about the sex. I’m talking about the $130,000 to keep [Stormy Daniels] quiet to protect his campaign,” Abrams said.

“It’s not immoral,” Kelly snapped back. “There’s nothing wrong with that at all. Nothing.”

“You don’t think he falsified business records either?” Abrams said.

“I don’t know what he did,” Kelly said.

“What does that mean?! We just had a whole trial! We heard every detail of this! How can you not know?” Abrams snapped back.

Kelly said that Trump’s payoff to Daniels could “easily” be deemed “as a legal expense” and that there was “nothing illegal about paying hush money for an NDA.”

“There’s not, but when you’re doing it to protect your campaign, it is. That’s the difference,” Abrams said.

“What law are you citing, Dan?” Kelly said.

“Campaign finance laws!” the host said.

“Wrong! You don’t know what you’re talking about! You’re wrong!” Kelly said.

“Explain to me then. Tell me what I’m getting wrong,” Abrams hit back.

“It does not amount to a campaign contribution if it is the kind of payment that could ever be made outside of the campaign context,” Kelly maintained.

“That’s not the standard. The standard is substantiality,” Abrams said.

“It’s not,” Kelly said.

“It is!” Abrams said.

WATCH:

Journalist @megynkelly joins Dan to debate Trump’s guilty verdict. Kelly predicted a guilty verdict and says she believes the jury “followed the instructions that the judge gave them.” pic.twitter.com/fa8lUTMMTK

— Dan Abrams Live (@danabramslive) May 31, 2024