A segment from CNN’s “NewsNight with Abby Phillip” on Wednesday evening seemed to get tense after conservative commentator Scott Jennings threw an insult at fellow panelist Keith Boykin, a former White House aide to President Bill Clinton.

During a discussion about Columbia University’s announcement that it had reached a deal with the Trump administration on Wednesday to pay more than $220 million to restore federal research money, Boykin called out Jennings for interrupting Republican commentator Ana Navarro, who was commenting on the agreement.

“Do you have to interrupt every conversation? Do you have to be a part of every conversation?” Boykin asked.

“You’re such a whiny [inaudible],” Jennings replied.

“A whiny what, Scott? Say it, Scott … say it, Scott, ” Boykin responded. (Watch the moment here.)

Boykin had also called out Jennings for interrupting him earlier in the conversation: “You talk about people interrupting you, but you do it all the time.”

People on X, formerly Twitter, slammed the polarizing CNN pundit for calling Boykin “whiny” after the segment aired on TV.

“Why would Abby not allow Boykin to adequately address Jennings?,” one X user wrote, calling Jennings’ behavior an example of a microaggression.

“Accusing someone else of being a whiny ass in the midst of your own whining is peak irony,” wrote another.

Alexandra Cromer, a licensed therapist with Thriveworks, said that the moment on-air said a lot about the tense attitudes that exist in our current political climate — and Jennings’ insult was a “complete communication interrupter.”

“Clinically, if you want to communicate effectively, be clear, objective and direct as possible,” she said, adding, “At that point, calling someone ‘whiny’ takes away meaning from their statements and does not promote further conversations or civil discourse.”

“In this situation, calling someone ‘whiny’ can communicate a dismissive and condescending tone,” Cromer said. “By using an insult in any circumstance, you aim to reduce the other person’s power and to obtain more perceived control over the situation.”

Cromer explained that using the word “whiny” specifically could have been an attempt by Jennings to imply that what Boykin was thinking and feeling is “not good enough.”

″[It] promotes the concept of a power hierarchy and structure within the conversation when the panel is displayed as being as equitable as possible in panelist input opportunities,” she said.

And Cromer said that Boykin’s direct response to Jennings can be an example of “a useful solution to a disagreement and/or miscommunication problem.”

She cautioned, however, that when someone is addressing someone who insulted them, they should ensure that they are using “clear, direct and objective communication.”

“The way that Boykin responded to Jenkins can also be seen as a personalized insult or weaponized conversation,” she said.

Generally speaking, Cromer recommends that people take time to organize their thoughts when on the receiving end of an insult to “be the most effective version of yourself.”

And as it relates to Jennings calling Boykin “whiny” during a panel discussion on network TV, Cromer emphasized that resorting to name-calling in any kind of professional environment can especially be viewed as being “dismissive and disrespectful.”

It can communicate a “blatant lack of respect,” as well as perhaps a “willful intolerance of views, opinions and emotional reactions that are different than your own and are outside of your own emotional experience.”