Jimmy Kimmel Calls Trump's Presidential Plaques 'Sad' in Latest White House Display

Jimmy Kimmel on Wednesday joined a growing chorus of criticism over President Donald Trump’s expanded White House display known as the Presidential Walk of Fame, a collection of portraits that Trump has added to his tenure. In his late-night monologue, Kimmel read aloud inscriptions on the plaques dedicated to Joe Biden and Barack Obama that HuffPost reports were written by Trump himself. By contrast, Kimmel noted, Trump’s words about Ronald Reagan appeared markedly more favorable, a contrast he used to underscore the controversy surrounding the display.

According to Kimmel, the texts on the Biden and Obama plaques were disparaging in tone and purportedly authored by the president. He read from the inscriptions and described them as sharp, partisan criticisms rather than neutral descriptions of the former presidents’ legacies. The comedian also highlighted a different tone regarding Reagan, noting that Trump claimed Reagan was a fan of his, a claim Kimmel publicly challenged. Reagan died in 2004, and Kimmel pointed out that he was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease roughly a decade before that, pressing the question of what, if anything, such praise could reasonably reflect. He floated the idea that Reagan might have admired something as tangential as Trump’s business-era commercials rather than any political achievement, a line that drew laughs from the audience and a prompt rebuttal from the host.

What followed, according to Kimmel’s account, was a broader condemnation of the Trump inscriptions. He described the effort to cast Trump’s own words in bronze as emblematic of a broader trend he finds troubling, using sharply delivered lines to criticize both the taste and the source of the plaques. In recounting the Reagan segment, Kimmel offered a mix of sarcasm and critique, underscoring the discrepancy between Trump’s public praise of Reagan and the harsher rhetoric attributed to him for Biden and Obama. He asked viewers to consider the context of a display that blends commemoration with personal political messaging, suggesting that the inscriptions reveal more about the president’s current attitudes than about the legacies of the figures memorialized.

The monologue, which HuffPost covered in reporting on the segment, framed the episode as part of a larger pattern in which late-night hosts scrutinize the culture and politics that seep into the White House’s ceremonial displays. Kimmel’s performance sits within a broader media conversation about how presidents use monuments and public symbols to shape narratives, and how comedians reflect, critique, or amplify those narratives for a national audience. While Kimmel’s remarks were delivered in a comedic context, they touched a nerve about how the Administration presents its interpretation of history.

The images tied to the discussion accompany this report, including a still from HuffPost coverage that captures Kimmel mid-monologue as he challenges the inscriptions and offers his assessment of the display. The debate over the plaques continues to surface across entertainment and political news outlets, illustrating how culture and politics intersect in contemporary American life.

Observers note that the White House project, described as a modernization or expansion of a decorative display, has become a touchstone for questions about how presidents memorialize predecessors and how such memorials are perceived by the public and by critics in media and entertainment circles. As new additions to the Walk of Fame are discussed or unveiled, commentators will likely weigh the balance between tribute and political commentary, and how those choices resonate with viewers who see these artifacts as projections of leadership and national identity.

The conversation around Trump’s inscriptions is likely to continue as more details emerge about who authored the texts, how they were chosen, and how the White House will respond to ongoing public scrutiny. For now, Kimmel’s critique serves as a vivid example of how a cultural moment in late-night television can reflect and amplify debates about history, memory, and the politics of public commemoration.