If you come for Megyn Kelly, you better be ready to take a hit back—and hard. A recent encounter with a New York Times journalist proved that once again, the gloves are off, and Kelly isn’t playing by the legacy media’s rules anymore.
The flashpoint came during a lengthy interview between Kelly and Lulu Garcia-Navarro, a reporter for the Times, who attempted to frame Kelly’s unapologetically opinionated, pro-Trump stance as a liability for someone still identifying as a journalist. Kelly? She didn’t flinch. Instead, she dismantled the premise piece by piece, reminding her interrogator that the era of the pretend-neutral journalist is over—and that pretending otherwise is what’s hollowing out public trust.
Megyn Kelly schools this NYT journalist over what it actually takes to be a journalist. pic.twitter.com/BrGDjjpL1W
— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) April 1, 2025
Garcia-Navarro pressed Kelly about her rejection of E. Jean Carroll’s claims against Donald Trump, noting the civil case and other allegations. Kelly’s response was resolute:
“I don’t believe one word.”
And when confronted with other accusations, Kelly didn’t backpedal—she doubled down.
“I’ve interviewed some of them… and I reported on their stories in front of millions of people.”
Kelly’s stance wasn’t a denial of those women’s experiences—but a critique of selective outrage. What infuriates her, she explained, is the way Democrats and the mainstream media bury similar accusations when they involve figures on the left.
Case in point: Kelly pointed to a buried 2024 story involving a woman’s allegations that Doug Emhoff, Vice President Kamala Harris’s husband, had assaulted her decades ago in a drunken rage—an accusation the media barely touched. That, Kelly argued, reveals everything about the asymmetry of outrage.
.@MegynKelly: “Overall I thank the New York Times for what I thought was a fair interview. I liked Lulu – if I see her again I think it’ll be friendly. And I think there was some value to getting in front of the Times audience, which by the way is having a meltdown over the whole… pic.twitter.com/G7g2dTj7XQ
— The Megyn Kelly Show (@MegynKellyShow) April 1, 2025
When asked if she still considers herself a journalist, Kelly didn’t hesitate. “Absolutely,” she said. But don’t expect her to march to the old beat of faux-objectivity.
“I break news all the time… and when I sit with Trump or anyone else, I ask tough questions.”
“Trump didn’t talk to me for six months after a tough interview. That’s how it should be.”
More than anything, Kelly argued that her transparency about bias is a strength—not a weakness.
“When I say ‘I’m voting for him and you should too,’ there’s no confusion. People know exactly where I stand.”
In her eyes, the real trust gap in journalism comes from outlets like The New York Times—where reporters claim objectivity while filtering the news through partisan editorial slants.
Kelly described the cultural chasm between herself and Garcia-Navarro as less about politics and more about media philosophy. Garcia-Navarro, she said, didn’t grasp how today’s digital-first personalities function.
“We offer commentary, we offer opinions, and we also do journalism,” Kelly explained. “We exist in a new ecosphere where we have direct relationships with our audiences.”
And that’s a key distinction. While legacy institutions cling to crumbling credibility, new media voices like Kelly, Emily Jashinsky, and Eliana Johnson speak to audiences directly—with no editorial filter and no pretense.
As for her visit to the Times building?
“It was fun walking in… but everyone did a 180 as we walked by,” Kelly wrote.
“Let’s just say there was no tour of The New York Times. And honestly, why would she want to do that? It would give Lulu zero street cred walking through the newsroom with me.”
