The journalistic compulsion to diss President Trump hits the Wall Street Journal editorial board

An otherwise excellent editorial titled "Iran's Nuclear Escalation," where the Wall Street Journal appropriately tell Europe to join Trump's maximum pressure campaign, ended with one of the most pathetic paragraphs I have seen in the WSJ.  The last paragraph starts as follows:

One risk is that the mercurial Mr. Trump loses patience with his own strategy and tries to cut a deal favorable to Iran ahead of his re-election campaign[.]

Did Trump cave to get back in the TPP deal to get votes and please the WSJ and other globalists?

Did Trump cave and give in on the Paris Climate Accord to get votes and please journalists?

Did Trump cave on the border wall and immigration to please the WSJ and other journalists?

Trump learned from the master, Ronald Reagan, that the way to beat tyrants is to beat the heck out of them financially until they collapse.  Reagan was considered a dunce and dangerous by the media but beat the Soviet Union into collapse without shooting a bullet.

It was Obama and the Europeans, supported by the fawning journalists, who gave the collapsing Iran everything but the kitchen sink to get this fake deal.  Why would an American president ever give the biggest sponsor of terrorism, which pledged death to America and death to Israel, over a hundred billion dollars to spread their evil throughout the world?

The mercurial Obama was so concerned about his legacy that he used $1.8 billion of taxpayer money to bribe the tyrants in Iran to get this dangerous deal.

The mercurial Obama was so compulsive about his legacy that he dictatorially stopped a years-long investigation into a billion-dollar drug-running operation by terrorists to appease the tyrants in Iran.

The mercurial Obama continually said the Constitution wouldn't allow him to rewrite immigration laws, but he dictatorially did it anyway when Congress didn't give him what he wanted.

I bet the mercurial writers at WSJ can't find one instance where they or other journalists throughout the country used the term "mercurial" to describe Obama who frequently changed his thoughts and policies.

Who at the WSJ thinks Trump believes that giving in to Iran would buy him votes from his base or anyone?

An otherwise excellent editorial titled "Iran's Nuclear Escalation," where the Wall Street Journal appropriately tell Europe to join Trump's maximum pressure campaign, ended with one of the most pathetic paragraphs I have seen in the WSJ.  The last paragraph starts as follows:

One risk is that the mercurial Mr. Trump loses patience with his own strategy and tries to cut a deal favorable to Iran ahead of his re-election campaign[.]

Did Trump cave to get back in the TPP deal to get votes and please the WSJ and other globalists?

Did Trump cave and give in on the Paris Climate Accord to get votes and please journalists?

Did Trump cave on the border wall and immigration to please the WSJ and other journalists?

Trump learned from the master, Ronald Reagan, that the way to beat tyrants is to beat the heck out of them financially until they collapse.  Reagan was considered a dunce and dangerous by the media but beat the Soviet Union into collapse without shooting a bullet.

It was Obama and the Europeans, supported by the fawning journalists, who gave the collapsing Iran everything but the kitchen sink to get this fake deal.  Why would an American president ever give the biggest sponsor of terrorism, which pledged death to America and death to Israel, over a hundred billion dollars to spread their evil throughout the world?

The mercurial Obama was so concerned about his legacy that he used $1.8 billion of taxpayer money to bribe the tyrants in Iran to get this dangerous deal.

The mercurial Obama was so compulsive about his legacy that he dictatorially stopped a years-long investigation into a billion-dollar drug-running operation by terrorists to appease the tyrants in Iran.

The mercurial Obama continually said the Constitution wouldn't allow him to rewrite immigration laws, but he dictatorially did it anyway when Congress didn't give him what he wanted.

I bet the mercurial writers at WSJ can't find one instance where they or other journalists throughout the country used the term "mercurial" to describe Obama who frequently changed his thoughts and policies.

Who at the WSJ thinks Trump believes that giving in to Iran would buy him votes from his base or anyone?