In a recent episode of “The Five,” tensions flared as a heated exchange broke out between liberal co-host Jessica Tarlov and Kayleigh McEnany, former Trump White House Press Secretary. Tarlov leveled insults at McEnany, accusing her of being “fresh” and standoffish after her maternity leave, implying a lack of engagement with current events. McEnany refuted this, asserting her ability to stay informed during her time off.
The conversation initially spiraled when Tarlov derided Trump’s actions regarding the naming of the Department of Defense as the Department of War and pushed conspiracy theories surrounding a recent military strike against a Venezuelan drug boat. “Seems like we are going to war in that region,” Tarlov said, asking if Trump was utilizing the conflict to advance his immigration agenda. This loaded statement drew a sharp retort from co-host Jesse Watters, who quipped, “That’s a good conspiracy theory.”
McEnany was ready to counter Tarlov’s claims. Highlighting past actions during Trump’s presidency, she noted that he had taken decisive steps in military matters, such as the elimination of key terrorist figures. She remarked, “When you say ‘do,’ when you actually do an action, you achieve the respect of the world.” Her perspective painted a portrait of strength and decisiveness that she argued was lacking in the current administration.
Tarlov’s attempts to undermine McEnany were further rebuffed as McEnany brought prepared documentation—an opinion from 1980 regarding Commander in Chief powers—to bolster her arguments about the legality of the strike. “I brought you… the legal justification for the striking of the ship,” she declared confidently, standing solidly by her stance. This insistence on factual support illustrated her approach to defending her points in the face of criticism.
As the discussion tugged between Tarlov’s accusatory tactics and McEnany’s data-driven rebuttals, it became evident that McEnany was unfazed. “I am not fresh,” she remarked, emphasizing her readiness to engage substantively rather than emotionally. The back-and-forth highlighted not only their differing viewpoints but also an underlying clash of styles—Tarlov’s provoking rhetoric against McEnany’s grounded responses filled with historical context.
Ultimately, this exchange on “The Five” served to not only kindle disputes over current policies and actions but also to reveal the dynamics within a panel that frequently juxtaposes conflicting ideologies. While Tarlov’s comments aimed to challenge, McEnany’s composed retorts demonstrated a mastery of navigating contentious conversations, leaving viewers with a stark contrast between speculation and substantiated defense.
"*" indicates required fields
