Just about 25 hours and dozens of critiques of Megyn Kelly’s first try at a network prime-time show later, the Fox News anchor bit back at those who dismissed her interview with former foe Donald Trump as weak.

Back on her nightly cable broadcast, The Kelly File, the 45-year-old newswoman, whose contract is up next year, defended her interview with the presumptive G.O.P. nominee as the second most-watched show on a Tuesday on Fox broadcast this year. Of course, that was by design. Kelly broke a months-long standoff with the candidate, who had spent months calling her “crazy” and “overrated” after she asked him a question he deemed offensive at the first Republican debate in August. Once she made good with Trump and got him to agree to sit down with her at Trump Tower for the special, she promoted and teased the interview within an inch of its life—sitting down with late-night hosts, morning show talking heads, and The New York Times in advance of the special in order to trump up their face-to-face.

But Kelly was not happy with the reviews she received, she told her viewers Wednesday night. “It . . . urged the scourge of many in the mainstream media because it was not a takedown of Trump. Not surprisingly, many of these critics failed to expose their own bias against Trump, against Fox News, or against the G.O.P.” she said.

Kelly then went on to name names, listing a litany of reporters who had passed judgement on the interview, during which she did not ask a single policy question or really dive into the bad blood between them—presumably the kind of red meat viewers were there for. The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple, who wrote that what was missing was “Kelly getting personal about what Trump had done to her,” got a call out, as did The New Yorker’s Amy Davidson.

“Today, Wemple [is] upset that I did not ‘get personal’ about what Trump’s behavior has done to my life. As if an interview about Trump should be about me," she said. “Amy Davidson of the New Yorker said ‘I surrendered to Trump,’ who she dismisses as a ‘brazen liar.’ This is the same woman who in January accused Fox News of using yours truly as a debate moderator not for any broadcasting talent because it’s ‘fun to show off the oddity of a smart blonde.’”

Kelly took one last swing, saying, “I was never going to love him. I was never going to hate him. And those who assumed either one assumed too much.”

The majority of her critics, including those she mentioned on air, did not appear to expect either of the anchor. It was not about love or hate; it was about asking questions that mattered and delivering viewers the goods she’s spent weeks selling. But Kelly’s remarks Wednesday evening made one thing clear: she may not hate Trump, she may not love him, either, but she is definitely borrowing a page out of his playbook. If a reporter writes something critical of Trump, he responds to it, often naming the writer, how they got it all wrong, and how they are biased against him. This has been a wildly successful strategy for the candidate, turning the news cycle on its head from “this story is bad for Trump” to “the media is bad and out to get us.” If it worked for a reality show host with his eye on the White House, why can’t it work for a cable-news host with her eyes set on primetime? Kelly, it seems, has learned from being the object of Trump’s ire, and now she is using it to her advantage.