Matthew Dowd is a partisan political analyst at ABC News who routines spouts his woke wisdom on Twitter. Today, Dowd decided to dismissively attack Megyn Kelly and wound up getting hammered by her and then ratioed, more than once. It started with a tweet that he has since deleted. Here’s a screenshot:

Putting Lauer, who has been accused of rape, in the same basket with Kelly seems pretty dumb. Kelly pointed out she has been one of the people speaking for women who have been victimized by guys like Lauer.

Yes, I could just sit back and “enjoy my money,” @matthewjdowd, but instead I’ve chosen to speak up for women being harassed and abused who have been muzzled by NDAs. Sorry you find that so annoying. https://t.co/Fy86s5QTsF

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) October 19, 2019

Dowd decided he could self-rescue with another tweet:

Megyn, i am all for that, and if you read my feed you would know that. However, did you stand up for Christine Blasey Ford, Anita Hill, and all the accusers of President Trump? Also, i know you are blasting NBC, but i don’t see you saying much about Fox.

— Matthew Dowd (@matthewjdowd) October 19, 2019

There are a few problems with this tweet. For starters, Kelly would have been in college during the Anita Hill hearings. Asking if she stood up for Anita makes about as much sense as asking Dowd if he stood up for Mary Jo Kopechne.

As for Christine Blasey Ford, her own best friend didn’t stand up for her, despite pressure to do so. Maybe that fact should matter just a bit to an ABC political analyst?

Also, Dowd seems to have completely missed that Kelly attacked Trump’s behavior toward women more directly than most reporters in 2016. A lot of people on the right still hate Kelly for the question she asked Trump at one of the GOP debates. That question later prompted Trump to say Kelly had “blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her…wherever.” In fact, Dowd’s own network put together a highlight reel of the feud between Trump and Kelly back in October 2016 (see below). I guess Dowd missed it.

Kelly continued to criticize Trump in 2017 for offering an opinion about Al Franken. Suffice it to say that Kelly has criticized Trump’s behavior toward women a lot. And yet, that’s still not the dumbest thing in Dowd’s tweet. The dumbest thing is his claim that Kelly has blasted NBC but “I don’t see you saying much about Fox.” Here’s Kelly’s response:

.@matthewjdowd – umm, there is a whole movie about me standing up for the women at Fox. & I put Trump accusers on the air. Also my job as a reporter was not to “stand up” for Blasey-Ford. It was to report fairly on her w/o taking a side. You should try it sometime. https://t.co/lLnOCSrm0I

— Megyn Kelly (@megynkelly) October 19, 2019

Kelly is referring to the new film Bombshell in which she’s played by Charlize Theron. Since we know Dowd doesn’t pay attention to his own network, maybe he read the NY Times, which published this back in 2016 about Kelly’s role in taking down Ailes:

It is no secret that Megyn Kelly played a role in Roger Ailes’s ouster as the chief executive of Fox News after she, and others, accused him of sexual harassment.

But in her new book, “Settle For More,” which will be released on Tuesday, Ms. Kelly, the Fox News anchor, suggests that by making her allegations known to 21st Century Fox — in a phone call to Lachlan Murdoch, the executive chairman — she may have ensured that the investigation into Mr. Ailes’s behavior was a genuine one that he was not able to impede.

Again, you don’t have to like Kelly to recognize that claiming she hasn’t said much about sexual harassment at Fox is just stupid. She literally wrote a book about it. After getting ratioed by people pointing out how wrong he is, Dowd finally decided to tap out with this tweet:

Megyn, i wish you well. I would put my objectivity up against yours any day of the week. You worked at Fox News.

— Matthew Dowd (@matthewjdowd) October 19, 2019

Dowd should really look up the word objectivity in the dictionary because I’m not sure he knows what it means. To be objective is to lack a bias in your reporting. We’ve just seen a display of Dowd’s bias in action. For him, the fact that Kelly worked for Fox is literally the last word, the only thing that matters on this or any other topic. He doesn’t seem to be aware of any facts that contradict his preconceived view even though many other news outlets (including his own) have reported on Kelly’s battles with Trump, Ailes, etc. In short, he’s a hack and, based on this exchange, not a particularly bright one.

Here’s ABC News recounting of the Trump-Kelly feud from 2016: