To be fair, Kimmel’s entire schtick is “professional sycophant” to every guest. I could never stand to watch his show because he so damn obsequious. His interviews are beyond fluffy. So the way he treated Trump was completely expected. He was a cloying asskiss to Clinton too.
But, what he could have, and should have, done is to refuse to have Trump on his show at all. If he had to turn down every candidate in order to be impartial, then that’s what he should have done.
We didn’t really know if Spicey had drunk the koolaid or not. Through this uncomfortable interview, we found out. And I’m not sure which is worse:
being a Scaramucci and actually believing everything Trump says;
or being a Spicey and saying you believe everything Trump says while knowing it’s false.
I had originally thought Spicer’s performance (regarding, say, the “largest ever” inauguration crowd size) was the Asch Conformity Experiment in action. But, no, he was just lying.
How dare you contradict the echo chamber! For that ye shall be punished with gifs and cliches!
And on a sidenote, I completely agree with you. And although I loathed Spicer when he was employed by teh Cheeto in Chief, at this stage I’ll take whatever ideological common ground I can get. And late night talk show hosts have a long and I think admirable history of giving people a chance during these interviews. And I think both Kimmel and Spicer did great, and lessened our collective divisions and doom just a little bit.
And now he gets to do a bit at the Emmys where his choice to repeatedly and brazenly lie for a criminal President is treated like a wacky setup for a joke. That’s our Spicey!
(But seriously if we could stop normalizing these people that would be great.)