Trump: Megyn Kelly too biased for next debate

A rematch is set between presidential candidate Donald Trump and Fox News Channel's Megyn Kelly on January 28.  The two are scheduled to face off in the last Republican debate before the Iowa caucus.  Will it happen? 

Mr. Trump voiced his objections in a tweet yesterday.  The Republican frontrunner wants Kelly removed from the debate panel. 

From Breitbart:

Based on @MegynKelly's conflict of interest and bias she should not be allowed to be a moderator of the next debate.

Kelly and Trump caused a rip-roar the first time around on August 6, when Kelly came out swinging, citing derogatory comments Trump had made about females in the past.  She even suggested he was "a part of the war on women." 
Should Kelly be banned?  It's no secret she is not a Trump fan.

Just this past week, Kelly sarcastically mocked Sarah Palin for her "20-minute Palin monologue, which included a full slate of her greatest hits."

After playing a clip of Palin's endorsement speech for Trump, Kelly remarked, "So that was fun."  She then asked Brit Hume his thoughts on Palin's remarks.  When Hume responded that endorsements do not mean as much today as they once did, Kelly couldn't contain the snark: "were those endorsements rhymes?  When you rhyme, it adds a special pizazz to it." 

A couple days after she had her camera crew chuckling at Governor Palin's Iowa speech, Kelly hosted contributors to the National Review magazine's cover story, "Against Trump."  Kelly began the segment calling the 22 writers "nearly two dozen of the nation's best-known conservatives."  

In contrast to her Tuesday night show, when the topic was Sarah Palin, Kelly's tone was supportive, respectful, and non-confrontational.

After TheBlaze's Dana Loesch called herself one of the founders of the modern Tea Party movement, Kelly generously brought up the commentator's NR editorial, where Loesch described standing on the sidewalk with Tea Party placards early on, at a time when Donald Trump was nowhere to be found.

Kelly then skipped to Brent Bozell, declining to challenge or question Mrs. Loesch's "conservative" credentials.

For example, Loesch did not stand with Americans protesting illegals in cities across America in July 2014.  Instead, she was at the border with Glenn Beck and Senator Cruz handing out supplies to the thousands of people crossing into our country illegally, putting a strain on our already strapped communities.

In the interview, Loesch stated she places principles above popularity, but doesn't a principled conservative put the interests of American citizens above those breaking the law at the border?  We didn't get the answer to that question, because Kelly didn't ask.

It's also interesting to note that Kelly's interview with NR editor Rich Lowry, Brent Bozell, Katie Pavlich, and Dana Loesch was devoid of the sarcasm and tongue-in-cheek digs she exhibited during the Palin/Hume discussion.

When it comes to Trump, Kelly may not be able to put prejudices aside, stop the personal attacks, and stick to policy questions.  As for Fox News, the network responded to Trump's tweet late Saturday insisting there is no conflict of interest with Megyn Kelly.  A Fox rep said Trump is "just trying to build up the audience for Thursday's debate, [and] for that we thank him."

Read more Evans @exzoom.net.

A rematch is set between presidential candidate Donald Trump and Fox News Channel's Megyn Kelly on January 28.  The two are scheduled to face off in the last Republican debate before the Iowa caucus.  Will it happen? 

Mr. Trump voiced his objections in a tweet yesterday.  The Republican frontrunner wants Kelly removed from the debate panel. 

From Breitbart:

Based on @MegynKelly's conflict of interest and bias she should not be allowed to be a moderator of the next debate.

Kelly and Trump caused a rip-roar the first time around on August 6, when Kelly came out swinging, citing derogatory comments Trump had made about females in the past.  She even suggested he was "a part of the war on women." 
Should Kelly be banned?  It's no secret she is not a Trump fan.

Just this past week, Kelly sarcastically mocked Sarah Palin for her "20-minute Palin monologue, which included a full slate of her greatest hits."

After playing a clip of Palin's endorsement speech for Trump, Kelly remarked, "So that was fun."  She then asked Brit Hume his thoughts on Palin's remarks.  When Hume responded that endorsements do not mean as much today as they once did, Kelly couldn't contain the snark: "were those endorsements rhymes?  When you rhyme, it adds a special pizazz to it." 

A couple days after she had her camera crew chuckling at Governor Palin's Iowa speech, Kelly hosted contributors to the National Review magazine's cover story, "Against Trump."  Kelly began the segment calling the 22 writers "nearly two dozen of the nation's best-known conservatives."  

In contrast to her Tuesday night show, when the topic was Sarah Palin, Kelly's tone was supportive, respectful, and non-confrontational.

After TheBlaze's Dana Loesch called herself one of the founders of the modern Tea Party movement, Kelly generously brought up the commentator's NR editorial, where Loesch described standing on the sidewalk with Tea Party placards early on, at a time when Donald Trump was nowhere to be found.

Kelly then skipped to Brent Bozell, declining to challenge or question Mrs. Loesch's "conservative" credentials.

For example, Loesch did not stand with Americans protesting illegals in cities across America in July 2014.  Instead, she was at the border with Glenn Beck and Senator Cruz handing out supplies to the thousands of people crossing into our country illegally, putting a strain on our already strapped communities.

In the interview, Loesch stated she places principles above popularity, but doesn't a principled conservative put the interests of American citizens above those breaking the law at the border?  We didn't get the answer to that question, because Kelly didn't ask.

It's also interesting to note that Kelly's interview with NR editor Rich Lowry, Brent Bozell, Katie Pavlich, and Dana Loesch was devoid of the sarcasm and tongue-in-cheek digs she exhibited during the Palin/Hume discussion.

When it comes to Trump, Kelly may not be able to put prejudices aside, stop the personal attacks, and stick to policy questions.  As for Fox News, the network responded to Trump's tweet late Saturday insisting there is no conflict of interest with Megyn Kelly.  A Fox rep said Trump is "just trying to build up the audience for Thursday's debate, [and] for that we thank him."

Read more Evans @exzoom.net.