Megyn Kelly Accuses Trump of Receiving Debate Question in Advance; Suggests Collusion between Roger Ailes and Donald Trump

If the “tit for tat” between parties didn’t get annoying, the banter between both candidates were not nerve-wracking, and the bias of the lamestream enemedia didn’t cause one to punch their wall, then the accusations of who got debate questions in advance should.  The latest to jump on the “but, they got the questions in advance” mantra is none other than Fox News’ Megyn Kelly.  In her new memoir, “Settle for More,” Kelly makes the claim that Donald Trump received one of her debate questions in advance.  Newsmax reported:

 According to a New York Times review of the book, Republican candidate – and now President-elect – Donald Trump managed to get one of her questions ahead of time.

 And, yes, it was the infamous question that started the feud between the Trump and Kelly.

“[T]he day before the first presidential debate, Mr. Trump was in a lather again, Ms. Kelly writes,” according to the Times review. “He called Fox executives, saying he’d heard that her first question ‘was a very pointed question directed at him.’ This disconcerted her, because it was true: It was about his history of using disparaging language about women.”

Kelly does not make any speculation about how Trump got the question, but the Times reviewer writes that one of the memoirs takeaways is that “Parts of Fox — or at the very least, Roger Ailes, the network’s chairman until July, when he was given the boot after several allegations of sexual harassment were made against him — seemed to be nakedly colluding with the Republican presidential nominee.”

Megyn Kelly needs to shut up and fade into the background.  This is one “Silicone Barbie” that has a lot of room to talk about anything after her stint on the Howard Stern Show, the obvious bias against Trump, and her willingness to engage in a scenario to put forth a “gotcha” question to Republican candidates.  While Kelly didn’t make any speculation on how the question was given to Trump nor implicate Roger Ailes as the culprit who leaked the question, the reviewer indicated that was the takeaway from the book, dubbing it “colluding with the Republican presidential nominee.”  What would either of these call moderators at CNN giving a debate question to Donna Brazile to pass to Hillary Clinton on more than one occasion — a trade deal?

Kelly has lost her credibility because of participating in a behind the scenes plot at Fox to “get the drop” on Trump during the presidential debate between Republican candidates.  Add to the mix her assuming the role of victim after the “bloody” comment by Trump when she herself had no problem discussing intimate issues with Howard Stern.  It’s time for her to fade to black or join The View.  And, let’s be honest here.  There was no debate televised where the moderator truly asked the candidates any “hard questions” involving the issues important to most Americans.  It was “entertainment journalism” and “UN-reality TV” at its worse.

Does it really matter if the candidates have the questions prior to the debate?  Some may say yes because it indicates a candidate’s ability to think on their feet.  Some may say no because the candidates are going to give their platform or the answer the voting public supporting them wants to hear.  But, it gets Megyn Kelly free publicity for her “memoir” that probably will not do as well as “Mein Kampf” by Adolf Hitler before being distributed as mandatory reading in the reich.

It would be refreshing for these TV “talking heads” and “Silicone Barbies” to actually ask presidential candidates questions on issues important to Americans, their policy on threats to America, and their reconciliation of their stance and policy to the Constitution.  In other words, act like true moderators and journalists instead of propaganda peddlers or presstitutes for their favored candidate.  But, that would not make for interesting reading when writing memoirs.



About Suzanne Hamner

Former professional Registered Nurse turned writer; equal opportunity criticizer; politically incorrect conservative;
This entry was posted in General, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.