Megyn Kelly and Dan Abrams have blistering five-minute fight over Trump verdict

Megyn Kelly and Dan Abrams ended up yelling at one another in a blistering, five-minute long argument over Donald Trump's Thursday guilty verdict in New York.

Kelly, who has a long history of falling in and out with the former president, appeared as a guest on Dan Abrams Live on News Nation to react to the news of the day.

After admitting the jury had no choice but to convict based on what was presented, she spent about a minute and a half trashing the judge and Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg.  

Abrams then argued that people could debate whether it was 'morally' or 'legally' wrong but that there was 'wrongdoing' on Trump's behalf, to which Kelly demanded to know what he meant.

'Number one, it's paying $130,000 to a porn star to keep her quiet, can we at least agree that's wrong? For a minute, I'm talking about morality vs. legality,' Abrams said.

Kelly responded by saying that it was a private matter and that she didn't know what kind of marriage Donald and Melania Trump had, same as not knowing what kind of marriage the Clintons had.

'I don't mind the sex, I'm talking about the $130,000 to keep her quiet to protect his campaign,' Abrams retorted.

Kelly insisted there was nothing wrong, arguing: 'So when somebody runs for office, they just lose the right to privacy?'

Abrams then asked: 'When you're doing it to protect the campaign and you're spending money on it, you are now crossing the line into legal problems, right?'

Kelly said that he was wrong but Abrams wasn't done.

He tried to back up, asking: 'You don't think he falsified business records either?' 

'I don't know what he did,' she said, to which Abrams became someone annoyed.

'What does that mean? We just had a whole trial, we heard every detail of this,' he said incredulously.

'I don't think he wrote down 'hush money payment to Stormy Daniels,' nobody who paid hush money would write down such a thing. I think he - or someone at the Trump organization - wrote down 'legal expenses' from the drop down Adobe menu and that made as much sense because hush money wasn't an option,' she said.

'He was paying his lawyer, who paid the money to Stormy Daniels, and he was reimbursing him, though he denied that on the stand.'

'I don't think there's anything wrong with doing that. I think you pay your lawyer money... you could easily classify that as a legal expense.'

Abrams, close to laughing, responded: 'No matter what it's for, right? Even if it's illegal conduct, you can just put it as a legal expense.'

'There's nothing illegal about paying hush money for an NDA,' Kelly responded.

'There's not, but when you're doing it to protect your campaign, it is,' said Abrams.

That's when the argument devolved, with Abrams and Kelly - both of whom have law degrees - seemingly unaware what the other was referring to. 

Kelly asked: 'No, what law are you citing?' 

Abrams responded: 'Campaign finance law.'

'Wrong! You don't know what you're talking about, you're wrong,' said Kelly, with Abrams then demanding an explanation.

'This has been wrong from the start, it does not amount to a campaign contribution if it is the kind of payment that could ever be made outside the campaign.'

'That's not the standard,' Abrams said, saying 'court after court' has said the standard is substantiality. 

With Kelly continuing to say 'you're wrong,' Abrams ended the segment saying 'we're going to have to agree to disagree.' 

The world was rocked after former President Donald Trump was found guilty on 34 felony charges for falsifying business records.

The jury of seven men and five women at Manhattan Criminal Court deliberated for nearly 10 hours before convicting the former president.

It was the first time a former U.S. President has faced a criminal trial and the verdict could upend the 2024 White House race, proving a pivotal moment in the history of the United States.

He faces sentencing July 11 though his legal team has promised to appeal the verdict.