The Unlikely Critic: Murdoch's Wall Street Journal Blasts Trump's 'Vindictive' Bolton Crusade

In a surprising and pointed rebuke, the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal, a flagship publication in Rupert Murdoch's media empire, delivered a scathing critique of former President Donald Trump's relentless legal battle against his former National Security Adviser, John Bolton. The editorial, titled "Mr.

Trump’s Vindictive Pursuit of Bolton," characterized the administration's efforts to block Bolton's memoir, "The Room Where It Happened," as "punitive and destructive," a "waste of taxpayer money," and a blatant "abuse of executive power."

This sharp condemnation from a traditionally conservative and often Trump-friendly outlet underscores the growing fractures within the Republican establishment regarding Trump's post-presidency conduct and his historical approach to dissent.

The Journal's board did not mince words, labeling the pursuit "a disturbing display of bad judgment" and highlighting the irony of an administration that frequently railed against "fake news" and government overreach now weaponizing official processes against a former aide.

The core of the dispute revolved around Bolton’s tell-all book, which offered an unvarnished account of his time in the White House.

The Trump administration, through the Justice Department, sought a court order to halt the book's publication, alleging that it contained classified information and that Bolton had breached non-disclosure agreements. Bolton, however, vehemently denied these claims, asserting that he had meticulously worked with National Security Council officials for months to clear the manuscript of any classified material before its release.

The Journal's editorial powerfully argued that the government's pre-publication review process, designed to protect national security, was being twisted into a tool for political retribution.

"The danger here is obvious: A government can classify anything, even information that everyone knows, and then punish those who disclose it without permission," the board wrote, expressing deep concern over the implications for free speech and government transparency. They specifically called out the "vindictive, punitive impulse" driving the administration's actions, which they saw as a dangerous precedent.

The editorial’s significance is further amplified by the complex relationship between Donald Trump and Rupert Murdoch.

While Murdoch's Fox News often served as a staunch ally for Trump, and the Journal itself frequently offered a supportive platform, a noticeable strain emerged, particularly after the 2020 election when Murdoch reportedly grew furious over Trump's baseless attacks on Fox News for its fair reporting of election results.

This latest criticism from the Journal thus signals a broader disillusionment among some conservative voices with Trump's tactics, even within his traditional media strongholds. The message was clear: even once-loyal media entities are drawing lines against what they perceive as an abuse of power and a threat to democratic principles, regardless of past allegiances.