The Wall Street Journal has taken a critical stance against several of former President Donald Trump’s decisions during the onset of his second term. Among the most contentious actions were the pardons granted to January 6 rioters, which the newspaper described as setting a “new low” for presidential clemency. Trump’s decision to strip government-paid security from his former aides further deepened the Journal’s disapproval, highlighting a pattern of controversial moves. Additionally, Trump’s foray into the crypto market by selling $Trump brand crypto coins was labeled as "remarkably poor judgment" by the publication.
The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal also expressed significant concern over Trump delaying the implementation of a law intended to shut down TikTok in the United States, categorizing the action as “illegal amnesty.” The newspaper's editorials maintained a consistent tone of criticism towards these actions but did not entirely dismiss Trump's early policies. For instance, they praised his inaugural address for its message of aspiration and optimism, despite overall skepticism about his governance.
In contrast to its criticisms, the Journal supported some of Trump's initiatives, such as dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts and his attempts to open Alaska to more development. Yet, it remained firm in its critique of his withdrawal from the World Health Organization, calling it a "mistake." The newspaper also urged Trump to abandon plans to end birthright citizenship and to reconsider the firing of inspector generals. The Journal’s editorial voice has been noted for its intellectual independence, balancing praise with well-founded criticism.
"The difference is intellectual independence, that you speak your own minds, you’re not just a cheerleader," said Tom Rosenstiel.
The Wall Street Journal has not hesitated to voice its concerns about Trump's pardons, particularly those involving January 6 rioters. Their editorial stance also called out presidential appointee Robert F. Kennedy Jr., labeling him as a "dangerous to public health." Furthermore, Trump’s decision to strip protection from former officials under threat from Iran was heavily criticized by the publication.
“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,” noted The Wall Street Journal.
Despite these criticisms, some commentators have expressed a favorable view of Trump's early actions in his second term. Hugh Hewitt likened Trump's governance achievements to exemplary sports performances, while Wayne Allyn Root opined that Trump had secured his status as the greatest Republican president.
“Trump did the governing equivalent of batting 1.000 or hitting 10 for 10 from behind the arc in the NBA,” remarked Hugh Hewitt.
“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,” claimed Wayne Allyn Root.
However, not all reactions were positive. The Wall Street Journal's editorial warned that Trump's engagement in the crypto market might indicate that his current advisers do not distinguish between supporting the president and serving the presidency effectively.
“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,” wrote The Wall Street Journal.
The Journal's editorials reflect a careful scrutiny of Trump's actions, underscoring their commitment to covering his presidency objectively. Paul Gigot encapsulated this approach by asserting their editorial philosophy.
“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,” stated Paul Gigot.
