Sen. Cory Booker (D., N.J.) referred to the Washington Post as a "left-leaning newspaper" Thursday while discussing its editorial board's opposition to the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
In an interview with CNN's Don Lemon, Booker said Kavanaugh had demonstrated he was not acceptable because of his temperament in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He cited former liberal Justice John Paul Stevens' opposition and the Washington Post's editorial calling for a "no" vote on Kavanaugh as proof that he wasn't alone.
"The Washington Post, and granted that is a left-leaning newspaper, but they have never come out—actually since [Robert] Bork, since 1987, never came out against a Supreme Court justice, and again, it was on the temperament issue and the veracity issue," Booker said. "Was he really telling the truth? Was he really being forthcoming? So this is not usual."
Booker, like most Senate Democrats, came out against Kavanaugh long before any sexual misconduct allegations came out against them. He said in July those supporting his nomination were "complicit in the evil."
Deputy Washington Post editorial page editor Ruth Marcus boasted on Twitter that it was the first time since Bork that the editorial board had come out against a nominee, noting it hadn't even opposed Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito or Neil Gorsuch. She didn't mention liberal justices nominated by Democratic presidents in that time period such as Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotamayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer.
The Washington Post editorial board, of which I am a part, has not opposed a Supreme Coirt nominee for 30 years, since Robert Bork. Not Clarence Thomas, not Samuel Alito or Neil Gorsuch. But we are calling in senators to vote against Brett Kavanaugh https://t.co/pgAeXADe0i
— Ruth Marcus (@RuthMarcus) October 5, 2018
The Post editorial intoned it didn't publish its opposition to Kavanaugh "lightly."
"We believe presidents are entitled to significant deference if they nominate well-qualified people within the broad mainstream of judicial thought," the editorial said. "When President Trump named Mr. Kavanaugh, he seemed to be such a person: an accomplished judge whom any conservative president might have picked. But given Republicans’ refusal to properly vet Mr. Kavanaugh, and given what we have learned about him during the process, we now believe it would be a serious blow to the court and the nation if he were confirmed."