How perverse that the media can’t accept Trump’s stunning victory in the Middle East

President Donald Trump’s strikes on Iranian nuclear sites and the cease-fire he brokered soon after between Israel and Iran were awesome accomplishments, but much of the media hates him so much, they can only find fault in them.

Indeed, they’d prefer he failed — even if Americans suffer as a result.

Liberal news outlets, for example, pounced on a singular intelligence report that claims the strikes only set Iran’s nuke program back a few months.

Prime-time coverage spent hours treating the report as gospel, and a horrible reflection on Trump.

Yet an Israeli intelligence report substantiated Trump’s claims that the sites suffered severe damage, and a UN watchdog said Iran’s nuclear program was “set back significantly.”

Meanwhile, a Washington Post article griped that Trump’s actions “largely sidestepped the traditional foreign policy establishment and the intelligence community,” and that the prez used social-media rather than “diplomatic channels.”

Does that make them any less successful?

Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post’s signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here!

As of Wednesday, MSNBC was still calling the cease-fire “fragile” and “delicate,” though both sides halted their attacks.

Many in the press focused on legality of the strikes — even floating another impeachment of Trump.

The prez’s bombing, they said, violated the War Powers Act and were “a clear violation of international law.”

Yet they lodged no such criticism of Presidents Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton when they engaged in military actions without congressional authorization.

It’s beyond sad that so many in the media hate the president so much they can’t accept a clear and dramatic win for Americans — and rejoice in it.