WOW! It's a good thing Trump "doesn't read" the NYT!

[Miles Archer]

And, as you know, while he DEMANDED that subscriptions be cancelled for government serfs, it's been widely reported that he still reads the NYT & WaPo regularly...or, perhaps more accurately, "skims" them to find "Trump news."

[RockRaven]

1. Should read "Ukraine Extortion" instead of "Ukraine Push" but it is the NYT, and their editors

are terrible.

[NCLefty]

4. It's likely the lawyers sitting behind the editors.

If you print that someone famous committed a crime that isn't yet proven, you are going to get sued. Twice if Donald Trump is the guy you accuse.

[RockRaven]

5. Extortion has a colloquial and a vernacular usage beyond criminal code. They could still use it,

AFAIK, if they did so carefully -- i.e. their article was clear about what exactly they were alleging -- and they'd win any frivolous lawsuit by Trump on the matter. Maybe they want to simply avoid that risk/cost even if the lawsuit is 99.99% certain to be tossed out.

Or maybe their editorial staff is a bunch of both-siderist access-concerned principle-free assholes.

And even if I'm wrong about their total and absolute inability to ever use the word "extortion" until a criminal conviction for the same has been secured in court, and appealed up to SCOTUS and been upheld... that STILL does not excuse the broad swath of more useful and informative language which lies between "push" and "extortion" which the NYT editorial staff chose not to use. How are we to interpret that, hmm?

They soft peddled that headline, no matter what constraints you conjure for the hypothetical uber-responsible editor.

[Skittles]

2. love that picture

LOVE the free press

[Beringia]

3. I think a couple of the repubs invoked NYT articles

to share about Hunter Biden or other stories, but Adam Schiff would not allow it.