Transcript of Washington Post editor-at-large resigns over Bezos' decision. He explains why

The Washington Post is in turmoil tonight after the publisher announced that the newspaper will not endorse a candidate for President. That's the first time they have not done so in 36 years of presidential elections. The Post itself reporting that the decision came from the paper's owner, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. Now, the editorial page had drafted an endorsement of Kamala Harris before the decision was made, according to a source, and the fallout has been immediate. Washington Post editor-at-large, Robert Kagan, resigning from the newspaper tonight. Others possibly to follow There are people canceling their subscriptions. I've heard some of them, they're using that as a way to express their feelings. Others are threatening to do so. Just moments ago, eight Washington Post columnists, including David Ignatius, Ruth Marcus, Eugene Robinson, a nationally known names, of course, speaking out and calling the decision, quote, a terrible mistake, and a, quote, abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love. Robert Kagan is out front, as I said, the just resigned editor at large of the Washington Post, also author of Rebellion: How Anti-Liberalism is tearing America apart again. Bob, I have so much to ask you.

I know it's a emotionally, mentally, in every way, an incredibly difficult day and moment for you. So you made this decision to resign. Tell me how you came to that decision. What got you over the line?

Well, it was a pretty easy decision. This is obviously an effort by Jeff Bezos Bezos to curry favor with Donald Trump in the anticipation of his possible victory. Trump has threatened to go after Bezos' business. Bezos runs one of the largest companies in America. They have tremendously intricate relations with the federal government. They depend on the federal government. And Trump has made it clear that he will attack media organizations that are critical of him. He's threatened to take away CBS's license. And this is clearly an effort by Bezos to try to on Trump's good side in advance of his presidency. If we want to know how Trump is going to stifle the free press in the United States, this is the answer. This is how it's going to happen, especially when the media is owned by corporate Titans who have a lot to lose if Trump is angry at them.

Obviously, the Los Angeles Times going through this as well. But when you say clearly an effort by Bezos to curry favor with Trump or because of his fear of Trump, You just laid out all your reasons there. I'm just wondering, Robert, do you know from meetings you've had, things you've heard today, and your capacity as reporting, do you know any more specifics, or is that just your belief based on things that have been said in the past?

No, I mean, it's the latter. I've read what you've read. That's all I know. I don't have any inside information. But look, Trump did threaten Bezos in the past. He talked about taxing Amazon on more heavily and other things. The Post has had no trouble endorsing presidential candidates up until now. By the way, this argument that they're making that somehow they want to become above it all on this thing, they've endorsed all kinds of candidates in this election season. They endorse the Democratic nominee in Maryland. They've endorsed other Democratic nominees. So is it just only in the race that Donald Trump happens to be running in that they've decided not to endorse? It's absurd. I think we understand. I I think anybody who has got a sensible understanding of the situation knows why this happened.

All right. So to the point that you're raising that they've endorsed other candidates this cycle, I'll share with everybody, obviously, what you know, which is Will Lewis, your former publisher's explanation. So he's saying this is a return to the paper's roots. That's how he's clarifying it. And the way that they're putting this out there is, Washington Post is founded in 1877. It did not endorse a presidential candidate until 1976, and then chose not to endorse in 1988. So he continued to say, We see it as consistent with the values the Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader, character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration of the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects. Is there anything real in that, or do you think that that is just a whole load of garbage?

What you just said. Look, it's absurd. They have to say something. What are they going to say? We are, in fact, bending the knee to Donald Trump because we're afraid of what he'll do. They're not going to say that. Obviously, they're going to say this. But look, the editorial page, not just the Washington Post as a news organization, but the editorial page has been laying out for almost eight years arguments as to why Donald Trump is not only the wrong candidate, but an actual threat to American democracy. The editorial page has been doing this. For them to decide that this is the election that they're going to sit out when they have made it very clear, the editorial page, that Trump represents a threat to democracy. Look, there's no explanation other than the most obvious one. This is a simple question with a simple answer.

There was one question I wanted to ask you, Robert, as you think through this, and that is in the sense of we live in this world that's just so polarized and so fractured and so angry. And is there anything, and I'm not saying this is the argument they're making, but is there anything to be said for if well-known established, venerated institutions like the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times, and New York Times is not yet endorsed. I don't know what will happen there. But if they don't endorse, that maybe in the future, in a world where half of this country is going to vote for Donald Trump and half of this country is going to vote for Kamala Harris, that there might be a future for an institution like the Washington Post to reach both sides, as opposed to being seen as only a liberal, more democratic newspaper. Is there anything for you intellectually in that?

No, because everybody knows or should know that the editorial page of every newspaper is separate from the news coverage. I don't think the Washington Post acts like a liberal newspaper. I know people who are critical of Post may think that, but it isn't. It's trying to deliver the news. The editorial page has a different function. The editorial page presents opinions on a lot of issues. They tell Americans what they think about all kinds of things that Americans should be doing. No one has ever thought that somehow that gets in the way of the Washington Post doing its job as a news organization. Everybody can come up with all kinds of reasons why they're doing this. But I think we should just see clearly that this is the beginning of how Trump is going to control the media, especially that media that is controlled by corporate interests, because all of corporate America has been now bending the knee to Trump. We saw Jamie Dimon do this back in January at Davos, where he decided to say out of the blue Trump is right about some things. Corporate leaders want to make sure that they're not at odds with a president who does threaten them if they behave badly.

All right, so just a couple of things to understand where we are, because I think a lot of people want to know. Do you expect more resignations I mean, I know your friends, your colleagues, Ruth Marcus, David Ignatius, put out a statement saying that they don't support this. But do you think more people are going to resign?

I have no idea. Everybody has to make their own decisions about this thing. It's a little easier for me to resign than for others. So I don't presume to judge what others do, and we'll just have to see.

Now, in terms of the subscriptions, right? That's the outrage that's out there right away. People canceling their subscriptions to the Washington Post. If people feel strongly, you can understand why they do that. That's the lever they have to pull. But do you think that's the right lever, given what you're saying and how you see this happening? Or do you think people should be actually looking at their Amazon subscriptions? I mean, that That, of course, is the company for Jeff Bezos.

Yeah. And by the way, as much as the post would like to keep up its subscriptions, as much as Bezos would like to see the post keep up its subscriptions, the amount of money that Bezos has at stake at the post is a tiny fraction of the money that he has at stake with Amazon. That's why he's decided to weigh his stake in Amazon ahead of his interest as the owner of a major newspaper. That's a shame. Again, people can cancel, people can do what they want, but let's at least understand what's happening, and let's understand what a warning this is for the future, because people worry about what Donald Trump may or may not do. But here is anticipatory capitulation on the part of a major media organization, and that is before he's even President. Imagine what it's going to be like when he is President and does wield enormous power over how corporate All right, Robert, I appreciate your time.

I know it's a difficult day for you. You said the decision was not difficult, but nonetheless, I know that the moment is for you incredibly so. So thanks so much.