And that is the opinion of a competitor of the Murdoch family of papers, known for its views that we would call "liberal" in America (although the meaning of that word varies by country). So anything that fits whatever the Murdochs endorse is pretty automatically dismissed by the Scott Trust administrators, editors and publishers.
Newspapers have done endorsements since shortly after Gutenberg invented movable type. Long ago, most responsible papers segregated opinion onto a separate "Editorial Page" so that it was clear that it was just that: opinion.
So you should have said that instead of saying this:

The WaPo made a selection of "the less bad of two bad candidates" when they endorsed Trump.
Tell me you didn't read the piece I posted and that you're referencing without saying those words.
Hell, David, tell me you didn't even read the HEADLINE:
Jeff Bezos defends decision to end Washington Post endorsements
After resignations and loss of subscribers, billionaire owner pens piece saying endorsements create ‘perception of bias’
Their wording of the accompanying statement pretty much says exactly that but in slightly more diplomatic language.
It says no such thing. The post made no endorsement of Trump in its pages.