Megyn Kelly Breaks Ranks, Criticizes Trump and Fox News Amid Controversial Venezuela Operation

In a rare and pointed rebuke from within conservative media ranks, former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly sharply criticized both former President Donald Trump’s foreign policy strategy and the network she once helped define, describing recent coverage of the Trump administration’s military operation in Venezuela as akin to “Russian propaganda.” The extraordinary critique reflects growing ideological fissures within the right‑wing media ecosystem and highlights deepening debates over the United States’ role in foreign conflicts.

Speaking Monday on her SiriusXM program, The Megyn Kelly Show, Kelly urged listeners to temper unquestioning support for Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela, where U.S. forces recently captured former Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro during a high‑risk operation that has drawn both praise and fierce criticism. “I turned on Fox News yesterday, and I’m sorry, but it was like watching Russian propaganda,” Kelly said. “There was nothing skeptical. It was all rah‑rah cheerleading.” (AOL)

A Former Insider’s Stark View

Kelly, who spent more than a decade at Fox News and was once considered a stalwart defender of conservative causes, framed her remarks as a call for caution. She compared the current media environment to past U.S. interventions that she said “didn’t work out well,” invoking the Iraq and Libya wars as cautionary examples of regime‑change efforts gone awry. “We’re not great at going into these foreign countries, decapitating them at the leadership level, and then saying either we’re going to steer the country to a better place or it’s going to steer itself,” she told her audience. (RealClearPolitics)

Kelly’s comments mark a significant departure from her long history as a defender of Republican presidents and conservative media outlets. Once a prime‑time anchor at Fox, she now runs an independent media platform where she blends commentary with occasional critique of her own political movement.

Her decision not to “join the Fox News cheerleading brigade this time,” as she put it, signals a rare moment of dissent from a figure still broadly associated with right‑leaning audiences. “I’ve been burned too many times,” Kelly said, explaining why she remains cautious in her assessment of the mission’s consequences. (RealClearPolitics)

The Venezuela Operation and Domestic Backlash

The U.S. mission in Venezuela, ordered by the Trump administration in early January, resulted in the capture of Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, who were subsequently brought to New York to face federal charges including narcoterrorism and weapons offenses. While the Trump administration has branded the operation a lawful action to counter drug trafficking and secure Venezuelan oil resources, critics across the political spectrum have condemned it as overreach.

Democrats and civil liberties advocates have argued that the operation lacked constitutional authorization from Congress and set a dangerous precedent for unilateral executive action. Representative Jasmine Crockett sharply criticized the mission during a January 6 appearance on The View, likening Trump’s behavior to that of Venezuela’s own autocratic leader and calling the action politically motivated rather than grounded in legitimate law enforcement needs. (New York Post)

Within Republican ranks, the reaction has been mixed. Some conservative pundits and former Fox colleagues dismissed Kelly’s critique outright. Mark Levin, a prominent Fox commentator and Trump ally, labeled her remarks as symptomatic of internal strife within MAGA‑aligned media outlets. (AOL) Meanwhile, other right‑wing commentators continued to tout the operation as a decisive strike against geopolitical threats, underscoring tensions between interventionists and those who champion a more isolationist “America First” posture.

Right‑Wing Media: Celebratory or Critical?

Kelly’s comments come amid broader scrutiny of media coverage following the Venezuela raid. Analysts note that major conservative outlets, including Fox, have largely framed the operation in overwhelmingly positive terms, emphasizing Trump’s decisive leadership and the strategic value of Venezuelan oil reserves. Critics worry that this approach sidelines journalistic skepticism in favor of partisan advocacy.

A recent Reddit thread on the r/NewsRewind subreddit highlighted how Kelly’s critics and supporters alike reacted to her condemnation of Fox’s coverage. Some users characterized her critique as hypocritical given her own past role in amplifying pro‑Trump narratives, while others saw her stance as a refreshing break from entrenched partisan messaging. (Reddit)

The broader conservative audience response suggests a divide: while some pro‑Trump media figures continue to echo the administration’s framing, a significant segment of right‑wing consumers appears troubled by the escalation in foreign military intervention and Fox’s uncritical coverage.

Historical Ironies and Broader Implications

Kelly’s rebuke also forces reflection on her own legacy in conservative media. During her Fox tenure, she was known for robust advocacy on behalf of Republican leaders and causes. Her current critique, therefore, carries an element of self‑reassessment. While she acknowledged seeing the “strategic advantages” of U.S. action in Venezuela—particularly in countering influence from Russia, China, and Cuba—she also warned that simplistic cheerleading risks repeating the mistakes of previous interventions. (BizPac Review)

Political analysts say that Kelly’s remarks may resonate with moderate conservatives and younger right‑leaning audiences who are increasingly skeptical of endless military engagements abroad. These voices, once sidelined in conservative discourse, have gained traction amid rising costs of living at home and growing war weariness among American voters.

Yet her critique is not without controversy. On social media platforms like Reddit, many users dismissed Kelly’s comments as belated self‑preservation or pointed to past controversies in her career to undermine her credibility. Others argued that her critique reveals a deeper malaise within conservative media, where audience fragmentation and clashes over foreign policy are reshaping long‑standing alliances. (Reddit)

A Shift in the Conservative Narrative?

Whether Kelly’s stance represents a broader realignment within conservative thought remains unclear. Her warning against unchecked support for military intervention and her readiness to publicly call out Fox’s framing could encourage other commentators to express more independence. A Guardian report on conservative media reactions indicated that while most right‑wing commentators defend Trump’s actions, a minority are voicing concern about the war’s broader implications and its departure from traditional Republican principles of limited engagement abroad. (The Guardian)

For now, Kelly’s comments stand as one of the most forceful critiques from a prominent conservative figure toward both Fox News and a Republican president in recent memory. Whether this moment deepens internal divides or prompts a broader conversation about the role of media in shaping national strategy remains to be seen.

Looking Ahead

As the political fallout from the Venezuela operation continues, lawmakers in Washington are bracing for extended debate over the legal and ethical foundations of the raid. Congressional briefings by Trump administration officials are scheduled this week, and critics are mobilizing to challenge executive authority in court and in the court of public opinion. (The Guardian)

Kelly’s critique may now become a reference point in those debates—a sign that even within the conservative movement, there is no monolithic stance on war, media responsibility, and presidential power.