Media magnate Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal again savaged President Donald Trump in an editorial that lashed his tariffs as the “biggest economic policy mistake in decades,” and his threat to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell nearly catastrophically crazed.
It accuses Trump of attempting to “bully everyone into submission,” which failed miserably when his attacks on Powell sent the stock market tumbling — yet again — before the president was forced to publicly vow that Powell wouldn’t get the ax.
Trump is furious that Powell has “said publicly that tariffs will likely lead to higher inflation and slower growth.”
Fortunately, Trump can’t bully reality, the Journal chortled in the Tuesday editorial.
“Mr. Trump thinks he can bully everyone into submission, but he can’t bully Adam Smith, who deals in reality,” the editorial emphasized.
“Markets know tariffs are taxes, and taxes are anti-growth. The Trump tariffs are the biggest economic policy mistake in decades, and extending the 2017 tax reform and deregulation may not compensate for all the damage.”
Not only does Powell have a steady hand, many are terrified of the replacement Trump might bring in, the editorial warned.
“Markets are spooked because they don’t know if Mr. Trump listens to anyone but his own impulses,” it added.
Murdoch, who has played a massive role in helping elevate Trump through his fawning media properties, appears now to be desperately attempting to hose him down.
An editorial earlier this month in the New York Post pleaded with Trump to make peace with America’s trading partners and “end the tariff meltdown.”
“We’re on Team Let’s Make A Deal,” the newspaper added.
The Journal surprisingly even came to the defense last week of Harvard University, which refused Trump’s dictates that it kill its diversity programs and share information with the Trump administration on protester students.
Trump cut $2.2 billion in funding from the university, which refused to comply. It has since sued, accusing the Trump administration of suppressing freedom of speech at the institution.
“Does this mean the English department must hire more Republican faculty or Shakespeare scholars?” the Journal snidely wondered.. “Must Harvard ask applicants if they support Mr. Trump and impose ideological quotas in hiring and admissions?”