You're not going to find a defense here of President Donald Trump's lackeys at Fox News.
Between Sean Hannity, Eric Bolling, Jeanine Pirro and the crew of Fox and Friends, a significant portion of Fox's daily programming schedule has become a freak show of slavish devotion to America's 45th president, where grown adults appear to be vying with each other for title of Most Servile.
That said, CNN's John King might not be the best person to take shots at anyone in media for their handling of presidential politics.
"There's another network [Trump] doesn't criticize, where when they interview him they ask him, ‘Sir, we're confused, are you excellent or are you extraordinary?'" King said Monday during a broader discussion regarding the president's ongoing feud with the press.
This comes after a separate segment in which King referred to Fox as "state TV."
This is rich.
King, you may remember, famously led off a 2012 GOP presidential debate by questioning Newt Gingrich about a rumor alleging the former House Speaker once pitched his ex-wife on having an open marriage. The question was inappropriate, it had nothing to do with any policy proposal offered by the candidates and it was an obvious bit of sensationalism meant to juice the network's ratings. In short, it was the exact opposite of how a person in media should handle the seriousness of presidential politics.
Gingrich, for his part, called the question out for what it was, giving King a dressing-down in the process.
What King did is different from news commentators like Hannity cozy-ing up to the White House. However, as far as media malpractice goes, it's merely a different flavor of gross and inappropriate.
Also, King is a reporter. Hannity, Bolling and others, are news commentators. There's a difference between these stations, and King is called on to be tougher and more serious than the people he is criticizing.
There is definitely room to criticize Fox and its stable of self-debasing Trump devotees for their cheap approach to covering this White House. But let that criticism come from a reporter who didn't once try to turn a presidential debate into the front page of the National Enquirer.