[Steve_Seattle]

"The revelations, according to national security and legal policy correspondent Charlie Savage, "tend to involve dense and obscure issues, so dissecting them requires asking readers to expend significant mental energy and time."

So, because readers might need to think about what they're consuming from a news outlet rather than just uncritically accepting what an outlet tells them at face value, according to Savage, means "raising the question of whether news outlets should even cover such claims."

Not only does this insult the intelligence of the readers, it is a lie. The NYT would NEVER hesitate to publish any anti-Trump material, no matter how complex it was. Rather, they would simplify it, even lie about it, to present Trump in the worst light possible.

[1Old Pro]

But they’ll print the accountant withdrawal story which is much more complicated because they can deceptively spin that as a negative.