'Remarkably poor judgment': Wall Street Journal takes a critical eye to start of Trump's 2nd term

[January 30, 2025]  By DAVID BAUDER

Amid all of the enthusiasm in conservative media for President Donald Trump's first week back in office, the Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal has notably applied some brakes.

The Journal has editorialized against Trump's pardons of Jan. 6 rioters, called presidential appointee Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “dangerous to public health,” suggested Trump give up the effort to end birthright citizenship and twice said he was wrong to strip protection of former officials under threat from Iran.

The newspaper also said that Trump showed “remarkably poor judgment” in selling $Trump brand crypto coins and described as “illegal amnesty” the president's order delaying implementation of a law that would have forced TikTok's shutdown in the U.S.

It stands in contrast to the excitement shown about Trump at some outlets popular with conservatives, including the Murdoch-owned Fox News Channel, which had a segment on Monday about whether Trump's likeness should be carved into Mount Rushmore.

“Trump in four days has cemented his status as the G.O.A.T. — the greatest Republican president of all time, better than (Ronald) Reagan or Abraham Lincoln,” Wayne Allyn Root wrote in World Net Daily. “And I'm writing this on his fifth day!”

There's still some muscle left in newspaper editorials

The Journal is also showing that there is muscle left in the idea of newspaper editorials, after decisions by owners of The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times last fall not to endorse a candidate in the presidential race between Trump and Kamala Harris.

The Journal is a respected legacy news organization. Its news pages are not driven by a political point of view, but its editorial pages have long been a leader in conservative thought. Its editorial writers have praised some of Trump's early moves, including dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion efforts and attempts to open Alaska to more development.

On Inauguration Day, the Journal wrote that Trump “delivered a message of aspiration and optimism that most Americans will welcome. If this captures his real plans, he has a chance to leave office in four years as a success.”

But in the details, the Journal has found some of Trump's action wanting. The pardon of Jan. 6 rioters “is a rotten message from a president about political violence done on his behalf, and it's a bait-and-switch,” the newspaper said, pointing to earlier Trump comments that he would be looking at individual cases.

Trump's decision to strip government-paid security from his former aides Mike Pompeo, John Bolton and Brian Hook — all threatened by Iran — “looks like a new low,” the Journal said. “Decisions about security details are supposed to be based on neutral assessments of the danger, not some vindictive whim,” an editorial published on Jan. 24 said.

The newspaper also had sharp words for Trump's decision to enter the crypto market. “In his first term, Mr. Trump was often deterred from some of his worst impulses by legal advisers who saw their job as serving the presidency as much as the president,” the newspaper said. “The crypto caper is a worrisome sign that Mr. Trump's current advisers don't understand the difference any better than he does, or that they are too cowed to speak up.”

Paul Gigot, editor of the Journal's editorial page, said that “we are covering Trump like we do every president, and that means supporting his decisions when they warrant it, and criticizing them when that is deserved. It's no more complicated than that.”

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One en route from Miami to Joint Base Andrews, Md., Monday, Jan. 27, 2025, as White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt listens. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

The Journal's editorials show they are fulfilling a role as thoughtful opinion journalists and not simply advocates, said Tom Rosenstiel, a University of Maryland professor and co-author of “The Elements of Journalism” with Bill Kovach.

In that book, “we make the point — how do you define what is the difference between pure advocacy and opinion journalism? The difference is intellectual independence, that you speak your own minds, you're not just a cheerleader,” Rosenstiel said.

Is it the ‘second coming of JFK,’ as some in conservative media gush?

In general, the conservative media “has been treating this like the second coming of JFK,” said Howard Polskin, author of “The Righting” newsletter that tracks trends in that space. For every piece that offers some criticism, “there are 15 that are gushing with praise,” he said.

“We've talked and dreamed of this scenario for years, but now it's happening right in front of our eyes,” Kurt Schlichter wrote in TownHall. “It's beautiful, man. It's like the jungle exploding in a fireball in ‘Apocalypse Now.’ We love the smell of napalm in the morning. It smells like victory.”

On Foxnews.com, conservative columnist Hugh Hewitt said Trump had a near-perfect first week, with the only exception being the decision on security for the former presidential aides. “Trump did the governing equivalent of batting 1.000 or hitting 10 for 10 from behind the arc in the NBA,” Hewitt wrote.

In two noted liberal editorial pages, The New York Times has opposed the Jan. 6 pardons but otherwise not commented editorially on Trump's early moves. Before the inauguration, the Times wrote that people should not be intimidated by Trump. The Washington Post has called Kennedy unqualified, suggested Trump revisit plans to fire inspector generals and said the decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization was a mistake. It criticized pardons by Trump — and by predecessor Joe Biden.

Tuesday was also a day of celebration for many in the conservative media who felt welcome in the White House for press secretary Karoline Leavitt's first briefing. She made a point of saying she would open up the briefing room to podcasters and media influencers, along with reviewing the status of hundreds of people denied access during the Biden administration.

On social media, Monica Paige of Turning Point USA praised the “fabulous and professional briefing” by Leavitt and said, “thank you for finally giving a voice to those who have been silenced over the last four years.”

Natalie Winters of Steve Bannon's “War Room” also delivered a report from the White House and said her eyes were not just going to be on the Trump administration. She said the media was going to be “the hotbed of resistance.”

“I'm going to be covering what President Trump is doing but, more importantly, what the mainstream media is doing in terms of lying and deceit in the narratives they're going to be crafting to neuter and nullify President Trump's America first agenda,” Winters said.
___

David Bauder writes about the intersection of media and entertainment for the AP.

All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved