Why are you mis-representing what the NYT did? Are you just hoping people don't read your citations. From your citation > For example, the published piece pres

Why are you mis-representing what the NYT did? Are you just hoping people don't read your citations. From your citation > For example, the published piece presents as facts assertions about the role of “cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa”; in fact, those allegations have not been substantiated and have been widely questioned. Editors should have sought further corroboration of those assertions, or removed them from the piece. The assertion that police officers “bore the brunt” of the violence is an overstatement that should have been challenged. The essay also includes a reference to a “constitutional duty” that was intended as a paraphrase; it should not have been rendered as a quotation. The NYT didn't apologize for publishing an Op-Ed from a Senator. It apologized for doing it's job badly and publishing materially false statements as fact. It's worth noting that Senator Cotton went on to publicly call for the extra judicial killing of protestors. Which, if we're really so concerned about legitimate opinions, I would suggest murdering protestors would have more of a chilling effect than choosing not to publish their op-eds.