(Julianna Frieman, Headline USA) Sirius XM’s Megyn Kelly went after CBS News debate moderator Margaret Brennan late Tuesday for being “stiff and unlikeable” during the first and only 2024 vice-pesidential debate.
During the debate, Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, the GOP candidate for vice president, called out Brennan after she errantly attempted to “fact-check” his comments about Haitian refugees who have overtaken the town of Springfield, Ohio.
Vance refused to yield the floor as he tried to explain how the Biden–Harris administration enabled the influx of illegal entrants into the U.S. via the CBPOne app, effectively fact-checking Brennan’s false claim that the Haitians were there “legally.”
As Democrat candid at Tim Walz also proceeded to weigh in, the awkward power-struggle prompted the network to mute both candidate’s microphones—accompanied by a snide chuckle from Brennan, whose husband was revealed to have given $500 to the anti-Trump Lincoln Project during the 2020 election.
Kelly—who once made headlines for sparring with then-candidate Donald Trump as a debate moderator in the 2016 presidential election, when she was a primetime Fox News host—slammed the mic cut as face-saving cop-out that did more harm than good for viewers’ sake.
“The mic-cut moment with JD Vance: A debate was unfolding. They were actually starting to go at it,” Kelly told her panelists during a post-debate analysis.
“It was interesting, and it’s on one of the most important issues in the country,” she continued. “And those CBS producers cut his mic. It was malpractice, it was.”
Panelist Mark Halperin shared Kelly’s disgust toward the mic-cutting moment, stating that Brennan and her co-moderator, Norah O’Donnell, left out major debate topics during the entire event.
“I don’t understand it on one hand,” he said. “On the other hand, as I said after the first debate, if you go to a Chinese restaurant, you can be expected to be served Chinese food.”
Trump, now in his third-consecutive run as the GOP presidential nominee, slammed ABC News debate moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis for putting him in a “three on one” debate following his Sept. 10 face-off against Vice President Kamala Harris.
A whistleblower subsequently came forward to allege that the network had colluded with the Harris campaign to avoid difficult questions for her while exclusively fact-checking Trump, among other conditions intended to rig it in the Democrat candidate’s favor.
‘SOME WARMTH WOULD BE NICE’
While Kelly’s hard-hitting questions reportedly sparked a yearlong feud with Trump, the Republican leader at least had the benefit of fair and equal treatment, not to mention relative civility.
“I can tell you, having moderated these, some warmth would be nice. You don’t have to go out there like a proctology exam, you know?” she said in her analysis on Tuesday.
“You can genuinely smile and say, ‘I’m sorry, I know.’ Alright?” she continued. “And you can say, ‘I will let you guys finish this exchange, and then after this I have to move on.’ You don’t have to be so stiff and unlikeable.”
The efforts by the moderators to come to Walz’s rescue did not appear to do him any favors, with even mainstream media pundits reaching the consensus that Vance dominated all three of his debate opponents.
Kelly also noted that Brennan’s makeup made her look “severe” and “very pasty.” The CBS moderator should have worn bronzer to “warm up,” she said.
Brennan “came across as very cold and unlikeable,” Kelly said. “You’re not supposed to lose the debate as the moderator.”
PHONY FACT CHECKS
CBS News published an article Wednesday morning “fact checking” Tuesday night’s debate.
The outlet led with what it called four “false” or “misleading” claims by Vance, followed by one “true” claim by Walz that “needs context.”
The CBS News article only dared to issue Vance one “partially true” claim, reserving the other six “true” or “partially true” ratings to Walz.
In addition to the false statement made by Brennan, Walz made several demonstrably false statements during the debate, some of which were fact-checked on the spot by Vance.
Among these was his misleading claim that it is illegal yell “fire” in a movie theater.
In spite of the commonly invoked trope used by the Left to justify the curtailment of free speech, yelling “fire” in a movie theater is protected speech, although depending on the context, if a stampede were to result one might be found liable, as is the case with any protected speech that results in adverse consequences.
Some have noted that it is not only legal but one’s moral duty to yell “fire” in a movie theater in situations where a fire exists.
The reference itself comes from a line used by Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. in Schenck v. U.S., in which Holmes was arguing in favor of greater protections on free speech in opposition to the newly passed Espionage Act of 1917.
“[T]he character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done,” Holmes wrote. “…The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.”
Walz’s misinformation was not mentioned in CBS’s supposed “fact check.”
Julianna Frieman is a freelance writer previously published by the Daily Caller and The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter at @JuliannaFrieman.
Headline USA’s Ben Sellers contributed to this report.
