Another CNN personality has joined the growing chorus of current and former insiders accusing Scott Jennings of being two-faced.
Julie Roginsky, a mainstay on the network until, she claims, she was axed for a blistering Substack attack on Jennings, has joined two others in accusing him of unloading on Trump in the green room before going to bat for him when the cameras are rolling.
Roginsky joined the movement on X, writing: “Can corroborate @MilesTaylorUSA and @WalshFreedom accounts that Scott Jennings trashed Trump in the green room repeatedly in front of me. Also have my suspicions that he has a say in getting people banned from the show who stick it to him and make him look like a fool.”
The latest accusations build on claims from former Trump administration official Miles Taylor, who said the commentator “mocks Trump with us during commercial breaks—but fawns over Trump when the camera is rolling,” calling him “a perfect metaphor for the GOP.”
Those claims have since been echoed by several others. Former CNN contributor Joe Walsh said he could confirm the behavior, while also accusing the pundit of having him sidelined from the network’s NewsNight program.
A fourth voice, Wajahat Ali, added that the pattern was widespread, writing that “nearly every GOP hack did so” during his time at the network.
The mounting pile-on follows Roginsky’s last appearance on CNN, the day before she published the Substack post trashing Jennings and CNN.
In it, she wrote: “CNN once sold itself as the grown-up in the room. It was the network you turned to when the stakes got real. That reputation—earned over decades—was built on restraint, seriousness, and a basic respect for viewers. Which is why CNN’s continued reliance on Scott Jennings is not just baffling, but corrosive to its brand.
“This is not about ideology. CNN has long—and rightly—made room for conservative voices. The problem is not that Jennings is a Republican. The problem is how he behaves, what he contributes, and what his presence signals about what CNN now tolerates.”
Roginsky continued: “On air, Jennings does not debate; he blathers. He talks over women with particular frequency, interrupts relentlessly, and treats panel discussions as contests of volume and obstinacy, rather than as exchanges of ideas. He mugs to the camera and rolls his eyes, while calling any fact he does not like a lie. It is performative obstruction—the cable news equivalent of flipping the board when you’re losing the game.
“This is not ‘spirited debate.’”
