Elections

AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyTrump Contradicts Pompeo Over Russia’s Role in HackHours after the secretary of state said that Moscow was behind the vast cybersecurity breach, the president suggested it might have been China and downplayed the severity of the attack.Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at the White House last week. In an interview on “The Mark Levin Show,” Mr. Pompeo called the attack a “very significant effort.”Credit…Oliver Contreras for The New York TimesDavid E. Sanger and Dec. 19, 2020Updated 3:54 p.m. ETHours after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told a conservative radio show host that “we can say pretty clearly that it was the Russians” behind the vast hack of the federal government and American industry, he was contradicted on Saturday by President Trump, who sought to muddy the intelligence findings by raising the possibility that China was responsible.Defying the conclusions of experts inside and outside the government who say the attack was a cybersecurity breach on a scale Washington has never experienced, Mr. Trump also played down the severity of the hack, saying “everything is well under control,” insisting that the news media has exaggerated the damage and suggesting, with no evidence, that the real issue was whether the election results had been compromised.“There could also have been a hit on our ridiculous voting machines during the election,” he wrote on Twitter in his latest iteration of that unfounded conspiracy theory. He tagged Mr. Pompeo, the latest cabinet member to anger him, in his Twitter post. With 30 days left in office, Mr. Trump’s dismissive statements made clear there would be no serious effort by his administration to punish Russia for the hack, and national security officials say they are all but certain to hand off the fallout and response to President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.So in the midst of a global pandemic, Mr. Biden will inherit a government so laced with electronic tunnels bored by Russian intelligence that it may be months, years even, before he can trust the systems that run much of Washington. And in his first days in office, even as he has to deal with Russia on arms control and other issues, he will have to confront a quandary that has confounded his predecessors for a quarter of a century: Retaliation for cyber intrusions often results in escalation.As Michael Sulmeyer, now a senior adviser to United States Cyber Command, put it before he entered government, America “lives in the glassiest of glass houses.” The United States is more reliant than almost any other nation on fragile computer networks that make the government and economy hum, making it an especially ripe target for short-of-war attacks like the one executed by the Kremlin.In contrast to Mr. Trump, who has always been reluctant to confront Moscow and President Vladimir V. Putin, Mr. Biden has signaled that he will not let the intrusion, whose full extent is not yet known, go unanswered.“A good defense isn’t enough,’’ Mr. Biden said Thursday, vowing to impose “substantial costs on those responsible for such malicious attacks.”He will not find that easy.Mr. Trump’s tweet was his first comment on the hack, which came to light a week ago. Privately, the president has called the hack a “hoax” and pressured associates to downplay its significance and push alternate theories for who is responsible, two people familiar with the exchanges said. Larry Kudlow, his economic adviser, told reporters on Friday, “People are saying Russia. I don’t know that. It could be other countries.”The president’s unexplained reluctance to blame Russia — which through its embassy in Washington has denied complicity in the attack — has only complicated the response, investigators say. The government only learned of the hack from FireEye, a cybersecurity company, after the firm was itself breached. And Microsoft’s president, Brad Smith, said Thursday that government agencies are approaching Microsoft — not the national security establishment — to understand the extent of the Russian breach.“This is the most consequential cyberespionage campaign in history and the fact that the government is absent is a huge problem for the nation,” said Dmitri Alperovitch, a co-founder of CrowdStrike, a security firm, who is now chairman of Silverado Policy Accelerator, a think tank.“The response has been a total disaster, not just because of the president, but because whoever is left is just polishing up their resumes,” he said. “There’s no coordination and every agency is just doing whatever they can to help themselves.”Mr. Trump’s comments on Saturday had echoes of his stance toward the hacks during 2016 presidential campaign, when he contradicted intelligence findings to claim it was China, or a “400 pound” person “sitting on his bed,” not Russia, who interfered in that election. Two years later, Mr. Trump’s own Justice Department indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers.“Never has there been a President work so hard to provide cover for Russia,” said Clint Watts, a former F.B.I. special agent and Russian information warfare expert at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. All countries spy on each other, of course, and — for now — that appears to have been the first objective of the Russian campaign, one that researchers said on Friday appears to date back to October 2019, six months earlier than initially believed.That was when hackers, presumed to be working for the SVR, one of the most elite and talented of the Russian spy agencies, first broke into the SolarWinds network management software, which is used across the federal government and by three-quarters of the nation’s Fortune 500 companies.The theory is that the Russians were trying to figure out whether they could get into the “supply chain” of software that would give them broad access to the array of systems that make America tick.What no one in the Trump administration wants to address, at least publicly, is how the Russians managed to evade billions of dollars in American-built defenses designed to alert agencies to foreign intrusions. That question, too, now seems certain to be left to Mr. Biden to answer.From their new cyber command center in Fort Meade, Md., the NSA and Cyber Command monitor incoming attacks, the way generations of American military officials jammed underground command centers to look for incoming missile attacks. In this case, the sensors never went off, and the commander of those cyber forces, Gen. Paul M. Nakasone, one of the nation’s most experienced cyber warriors, has said not one word in public about what went wrong.The private sector will face hard questions as well. The majority of infections, Microsoft said, were of private firms, many of them cybersecurity companies. FireEye only detected the attack after Russians cleaned it out too, taking the “Red Team” tools the firm uses to probe corporate and government systems for vulnerabilities.The Russian attack was carefully calibrated to avoid cybersecurity defenses. It gained access to the updates of the SolarWinds software — akin to the updates Apple and other phone makers push onto cellphones as they charge overnight — betting that small changes in code would not be noticed.By compromising the updates, they gained access to 18,000 government agencies and companies. From there they planted “back doors” into the networks of some 40 companies, government agencies and think tanks, according to Microsoft, that allowed them to come and go, steal data and — though it apparently has not happened yet — alter data or conduct destructive attacks.“This was a cybersecurity superspreading event,’’ Mr. Smith said in an interview on Thursday evening, calling it “a moment of reckoning.” While Mr. Trump began his time in office with a strong cybersecurity team in the White House, his third national security adviser, John R. Bolton, ousted them and eliminated the post of a cyber czar with direct access to the president.The new National Defense Authorization Act, which Mr. Trump is threatening to veto for other reasons, would recreate such a post. Yet until Mr. Pompeo, who ran the C.I.A. for the first two years of the Trump administration, made his assessment in an interview on “The Mark Levin Show,” the administration had all but ignored the attack in public — perhaps realizing that an administration that came into office on the heels of Russian interference in the 2016 election was leaving as the victim of one of Russia’s most well-executed cyberattacks.“This was a very significant effort,” Mr. Pompeo said, adding that “we’re still unpacking precisely what it is.” He said he expected most of the details would remain classified.“Given the gravity of this breach, it’s concerning that President Trump is paying so little attention to it,” said Senator Martin Heinrich, the Democrat from New Mexico, home to the Los Alamos nuclear lab that Russians breached in the attack.He and other Democrats have pushed for an aggressive response. “We have failed to deter the Russians,” Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a Democrat who is close to Mr. Biden, said on Thursday. “We are only going to see Putin stop this action when we stop him.” But if history is any guide, finding the right way to retaliate will be difficult. The United States conducts its own spying missions. America has carried out supply chain attacks, too, including against Iran’s nuclear centrifuges and its missile program. It has been running them against North Korea for years.“The U.S. government has no principled basis to complain about the Russia hack, much less retaliate for it with military means, since the U.S. government hacks foreign government networks on a huge scale every day,” Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor who worked in the Bush administration.“Indeed, a military response to the Russian hack would violate international law.” he added. “The United States does have options, but none are terribly attractive.”That is the core of Mr. Biden’s problem. In the first 16 days of his presidency he will have to deal with Mr. Putin to address the renewal of New START, the nuclear arms control treaty that expires on Feb. 5. Mr. Biden has said he favors a clean renewal of the agreement, which can be extended five years without having to return to the Senate for approval.But he will be conducting that negotiation while also dealing with the question of how to retaliate to an ongoing attack whose full extent is still unknown.“They had unfettered access for nine months,” said Stephen Boyer, an executive at BitSight, a cybersecurity firm. “We may never know what we lost.” Reporting was contributed by Steve Kenny, Eric Schmitt and Julian Barnes.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

@media (pointer: coarse) {
.nytslm_outerContainer {
overflow-x: scroll;
-webkit-overflow-scrolling: touch;
}
}

.nytslm_outerContainer {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
/* Fixes IE */
overflow-x: auto;
box-shadow: -6px 0 white, 6px 0 white, 1px 3px 6px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.15);
padding: 10px 1.25em 10px;
transition: all 250ms;
-ms-overflow-style: none;
/* IE 10+ */
scrollbar-width: none;
/* Firefox */
background: white;
margin-bottom: 20px;
z-index: 1000;
}

@media (min-width: 1024px) {
.nytslm_outerContainer {
margin-bottom: 0px;
padding: 13px 1.25em 10px;
}
}

.nytslm::-webkit-scrollbar {
display: none;
/* Safari and Chrome */
}

.nytslm_innerContainer {
margin: unset;
display: flex;
align-items: center;
}

@media (min-width: 600px) {
.nytslm_innerContainer {
margin: auto;
min-width: 600px;
}
}

.nytslm_title {
padding-right: 1em;
border-right: 1px solid #ccc;
}

@media (min-width: 740px) {
.nytslm_title {
max-width: none;
font-size: 1.0625rem;
line-height: 1.25rem;
}
}

.nytslm_spacer {
width: 0;
border-right: 1px solid #E2E2E2;
height: 45px;
margin: 0 1.4em;
}

.nytslm_list {
font-family: nyt-franklin, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
display: flex;
width: auto;
list-style: none;
padding-left: 1em;
flex-shrink: 0;
align-items: baseline;
justify-content: center;
}

.nytslm_li {
margin-right: 1.4em;
flex-shrink: 0;
font-size: 0.8125rem;
line-height: 0.8125rem;
font-weight: 600;
padding: 1em 0;
}

#nytslm .nytslm_li a {
color: #121212;
text-decoration: none;
}

#nytslm .nytsmenu_li_current,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:hover,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:active,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:focus {
color: #121212;
border-bottom: 2px solid #121212;
padding-bottom: 2px;
}

.nytslm_li_live_loud:after {
content: ‘LIVE’
}

.nytslm_li_live_loud {
background-color: #d0021b;
color: white;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 6px 2px 6px;
margin-right: 2px;
display: inline-block;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
font-weight: 700;
}

.nytslm_li_upcoming_loud {
border: 1px solid #d0021b;
color: #d0021b;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 6px 2px 6px;
margin-right: 2px;
display: inline-block;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
font-weight: 700;
}

.nytslm_li_upcoming_loud:before {
content: ‘Upcoming’
}

.nytslm_li_loud a:hover,
.nytslm_li_loud a:active,
.nytslm_li_loud a:focus {
border-bottom: 2px solid;
padding-bottom: 2px;
}

.nytslm_li_updated {
color: #777;
}

#masthead-bar-one {
display: none;
}

.electionNavbar__logoSvg {
width: 80px;
align-self: center;
display: flex;
}

@media(min-width: 600px) {
.electionNavbar__logoSvg {
width: 100px;
}
}

.nytslm_notification {
border-left: 1px solid #ccc;
font-family: nyt-franklin, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
padding-left: 1em;
}

.nytslm_notification_label {
color: #D0021B;
text-transform: uppercase;
font-weight: 700;
font-size: 0.6875rem;
margin-bottom: 0.2em;
letter-spacing: 0.02em;
}

.nytslm_notification_link {
font-weight: 600;
color: #121212;
display: flex;
align-items: center;
}

.nytslm_notification_headline {
font-size: 0.875rem;
line-height: 1.0625rem;
}

.nytslm_notification_image_wrapper {
position: relative;
max-width: 75px;
margin-left: 10px;
flex-shrink: 0;
}

.nytslm_notification_image {
max-width: 100%;
}

.nytslm_notification_image_live_bug {
position: absolute;
text-transform: uppercase;
bottom: 7px;
left: 2px;

font-size: 0.5rem;
background-color: #d0021b;
color: white;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 4px 2px 4px;
font-weight: 700;
margin-right: 2px;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
}

/* No hover state on in app */
.Hybrid .nytslm_li a:hover,
.Hybrid .nytslm_li_loud a:hover {
border-bottom: none;
padding-bottom: 0;
}

.Hybrid #TOP_BANNER_REGION {
display: none;
}

.nytslm_st0 {
fill: #f4564a;
}

.nytslm_st1 {
fill: #ffffff;
}

.nytslm_st2 {
fill: #2b8ad8;
}

Electoral College Results

Election Disinformation

Full Results

Biden Transition Updates

“),e+=””+b+””,e+=””,d&&(e+=””,e+=””,e+=”Live”,e+=””),e+=””,e}function getVariant(){var a=window.NYTD&&window.NYTD.Abra&&window.NYTD.Abra.getAbraSync&&window.NYTD.Abra.getAbraSync(“STYLN_elections_notifications”);// Only actually have control situation in prd and stg
return[“www.nytimes.com”,”www.stg.nytimes.com”].includes(window.location.hostname)||(a=”STYLN_elections_notifications”),a||”0_control”}function reportData(){if(window.dataLayer){var a;try{a=dataLayer.find(function(a){return!!a.user}).user}catch(a){}var b={abtest:{test:”styln-elections-notifications”,variant:getVariant()},module:{name:”styln-elections-notifications”,label:getVariant(),region:”TOP_BANNER”},user:a};window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”ab-alloc”})),window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”ab-expose”})),window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”impression”}))}}function insertNotification(a,b){// Bail here if the user is in control
if(reportData(),”0_control”!==getVariant()){// Remove menu bar items or previous notification
var c=document.querySelector(“.nytslm_innerContainer”);if(c&&1 30 * 60 * 1000) return restoreMenuIfNecessary();
// Do not update DOM if the content won’t change
if(currentNotificationContents!==a.text&&window.localStorage.getItem(“stylnelecs”)!==a.timestamp)// Do not show if user has interacted with this link
// if (Cookie.get(‘stylnelecs’) === data.timestamp) return;
{expireLocalStorage(“stylnelecs”),currentNotificationContents=a.text;// Construct URL for tracking
var b=a.link.split(“#”),c=b[0]+”?action=click&pgtype=Article&state=default&module=styln-elections-notifications&variant=1_election_notifications&region=TOP_BANNER&context=Menu#”+b[1],d=formatNotification(c,a.text,a.kicker,a.image);insertNotification(d,function(){var b=document.querySelector(“.nytslm_notification_link”);return b?void(b.onclick=function(){window.localStorage.setItem(“stylnelecs”,a.timestamp)}):null})}})}(function(){navigator.userAgent.includes(“nytios”)||navigator.userAgent.includes(“nyt_android”)||window.stylnelecsHasLoaded||(// setInterval(getUpdate, 5000);
window.stylnelecsHasLoaded=!0)})(),function(){try{if(navigator.userAgent.includes(“nytios”)||navigator.userAgent.includes(“nyt_android”)){var a=document.getElementsByClassName(“nytslm_title”)[0];a.style.pointerEvents=”none”}}catch(a){}}(); More

AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyPompeo Says Russia Was Behind Cyberattack on U.S.Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is the first member of the Trump administration to publicly link the Kremlin to the hacking of dozens of government and private systems.Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at the White House last week. In an interview on the Mark Levin Show, Mr. Pompeo called the attack a “very significant effort.”Credit…Oliver Contreras for The New York TimesDec. 19, 2020Updated 8:12 a.m. ETSecretary of State Mike Pompeo said Friday it was clear that Russia was behind the widespread hacking of government systems that officials this week called “a grave risk” to the United States.Mr. Pompeo is the first member of the Trump administration to publicly link the Kremlin to the cyberattack, which used a variety of sophisticated tools to infiltrate dozens of government and private systems, including nuclear laboratories, the Pentagon, and the Treasury and Commerce Departments.“I think it’s the case that now we can say pretty clearly that it was the Russians that engaged in this activity,” Mr. Pompeo said in an interview on “The Mark Levin Show.”“This was a very significant effort,” he said, adding that “we’re still unpacking precisely what it is.”President Trump has yet to address the attack, which has been underway since spring and was detected by the private sector only a few weeks ago. Until Friday, Mr. Pompeo had played down the episode as one of the many daily attacks on the federal government.But intelligence agencies have told Congress that they believe it was carried out by the S.V.R., an elite Russian intelligence agency. As evidence of the attack’s scope piled up this week, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency sent out an urgent warning on Thursday that the hackers had “demonstrated an ability to exploit software supply chains and shown significant knowledge of Windows networks.”The agency added that it was likely that some of the attackers’ tactics, techniques and procedures had “not yet been discovered.” Investigators say it could take months to unravel the extent to which American networks and the technology supply chain have been compromised.Microsoft said it had identified 40 companies, government agencies and think tanks that the hackers had infiltrated. Nearly half are private technology firms, Microsoft said, many of them cybersecurity firms, like FireEye, that are charged with securing vast sections of the public and private sector.“There are more nongovernmental victims than there are governmental victims, with a big focus on I.T. companies, especially in the security industry,” Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president, said in an interview on Thursday.FireEye was the first to inform the government that the hackers had infected the periodic software updates issued by a company called SolarWinds since at least March. SolarWinds makes critical network monitoring software used by the government, hundreds of Fortune 500 companies and firms that oversee critical infrastructure, including the power grid.The national security adviser, Robert C. O’Brien, cut short a trip to the Middle East and Europe on Tuesday and returned to Washington to run crisis meetings to assess the situation. The F.B.I., the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence formed an urgent response group, the Cyber Unified Coordination Group, to coordinate the government’s responses to what the agencies called a “significant and ongoing cybersecurity campaign.”The Russians have denied any involvement. The Russian ambassador to the United States, Anatoly I. Antonov, said Wednesday that there were “unfounded attempts by the U.S. media to blame Russia” for the recent cyberattacks.According to a person briefed on the attack, the S.V.R. hackers sought to hide their tracks by using American internet addresses that allowed them to conduct attacks from computers in the very city — or appearing so — in which their victims were based. They created special bits of code intended to avoid detection by American warning systems and timed their intrusions not to raise suspicions.The attacks, said the person briefed on the matter, shows that the weak point for the American government computer networks remains administrative systems, particularly ones that have a number of private companies working under contract.President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. said Thursday that his administration would impose “substantial costs” on those responsible.“A good defense isn’t enough; we need to disrupt and deter our adversaries from undertaking significant cyberattacks in the first place,” Mr. Biden said, adding, “I will not stand idly by in the face of cyberassaults on our nation.”Investigators and other officials say they believe the goal of the Russian attack was traditional espionage, the sort the National Security Agency and other agencies regularly conduct on foreign networks. But the extent and depth of the hacking raise concerns that hackers could ultimately use their access to shutter American systems, corrupt or destroy data, or take command of computer systems that run industrial processes. So far, though, there has been no evidence of that happening.Across federal agencies, the private sector and the utility companies that oversee the power grid, forensic investigators were still trying to unravel the extent of the compromise. But security teams say the relief some felt that they did not use the compromised systems turned to panic on Thursday, as they learned other third-party applications may have been compromised.Inside federal agencies and the private sector, investigators say they have been stymied by classifications and a siloed approach to information sharing.“We have forgotten the lessons of 9/11,” Mr. Smith said. “It has not been a great week for information sharing and it turns companies like Microsoft into a sheep dog trying to get these federal agencies to come together into a single place and share what they know.”Reporting was contributed by David E. Sanger, Nicole Perlroth, Eric Schmitt and Julian Barnes.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

#masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Covid-19 VaccinesVaccine QuestionsDoses Per StateHow the Moderna Vaccine WorksWhy You’ll Still Need a MaskPost-Vaccine OutlookAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyTrump Claims Credit for Vaccines. Some of His Backers Don’t Want to Take Them.A deep distrust of the government is fueling vaccine hesitancy among Republicans, who are more likely than Democrats to resist being inoculated against Covid-19.A pharmacist preparing a dose of the Pfizer vaccine for the coronavirus on Wednesday. The “anti-vaxxer movement” is not new, and it typically cuts across political parties. But partisanship plays a major role in how people view the coronavirus vaccine.Credit…Michael A. McCoy for The New York TimesDec. 18, 2020Updated 9:43 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — Elizabeth Graves, an ardent supporter of President Trump, is not opposed to vaccines. She said she had taken flu shots and pneumonia shots and, having just turned 50, was interested in being vaccinated against shingles.But Ms. Graves, a legal transcriptionist in Starkville, Miss., said she would not be taking a coronavirus vaccine — and the sight of Vice President Mike Pence rolling up his sleeve to get vaccinated on live television on Friday, she added, would not change her mind.Lawrence Palmer, 51, a field service engineer in Boiling Springs, Pa., and Brandon Lofgren, 25, who works in his family’s trucking and construction business in rural Wisconsin, said they felt the same way. All are fans of Mr. Trump, and echoed Ms. Graves, who said she was “suspicious” of government and that Mr. Pence’s vaccination “doesn’t mean a thing to me.”It is a paradox of the pandemic: Helping speed the development of a coronavirus vaccine may be one of Mr. Trump’s proudest accomplishments, but at least in the early stages of the vaccine rollout, there is evidence that a substantial number of his supporters say they do not want to get it.Until the past week, their objections were largely hypothetical. But with a second vaccine about to become available in the United States — the Food and Drug Administration on Friday authorized emergency use of the vaccine developed by Moderna, a week after the version developed by Pfizer and BioNTech won the same approval — more people will confront the choice of getting inoculated or not. The authorization will clear the way for the shipment of 5.9 million doses over the weekend and tens of millions more in coming months, greatly expanding the reach of the vaccination campaign as the nation grapples with the uncontrolled spread of the disease.For the most part, public opinion has been swinging in favor of vaccination. Seventy-one percent of Americans are willing to be vaccinated, up from 63 percent in September, according to a survey released this week by the Kaiser Family Foundation.Still, the survey found that Republicans were the most likely to be hesitant, with 42 percent saying they would probably not or definitely not be vaccinated, as compared with 12 percent of Democrats.Experts say that vaccine hesitancy may diminish over time if people see friends and relatives getting vaccinated without incident. Sheri Simms, 62, a retired businesswoman in Northeast Texas who describes herself as a “moderate conservative” supporter of the president, said that while she did not intend to get vaccinated now, that could change.“As more information comes out, and things appear to work better, then I will weigh the risks of the vaccine against the risk of the coronavirus and make a judgment,” she said.The “anti-vaxxer movement” is not new, and it typically cuts across political parties. But the coronavirus vaccine, developed against the backdrop of a bitterly fought presidential election and championed by an especially polarizing figure in Mr. Trump, has become especially associated with partisanship.During the campaign, while Mr. Trump was promising a vaccine by Election Day, some Democrats expressed concern about whether safety would be sacrificed in the rush to deliver a vaccine in time to help the president at the polls.Political leaders in both parties worked on Friday to dispel concerns about the vaccine.Mr. Pence, who took the Pfizer vaccine on Friday in a ceremony at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, was not the only prominent public official to get vaccinated. On Capitol Hill, congressional leaders including Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, and Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, were also inoculated against Covid-19. President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his wife, Jill Biden, are to be vaccinated on Monday..css-fk3g7a{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:1.125rem;color:#121212 !important;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-fk3g7a{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;}}.css-1sjr751{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}.css-1sjr751 a:hover{border-bottom:1px solid #dcdcdc;}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-zs9392{margin:10px auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-zs9392{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-zs9392{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.75rem;margin-bottom:20px;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-zs9392{font-size:1.5rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}.css-121grtr{margin:0 auto 10px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-qmg6q8{background-color:white;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;max-width:600px;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-qmg6q8{padding:0;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin-right:auto;margin-left:auto;}.css-qmg6q8 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qmg6q8 em{font-style:italic;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-qmg6q8{margin:40px auto;}}.css-qmg6q8:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}.css-qmg6q8 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-qmg6q8 a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-qmg6q8 a:hover{border-bottom:none;}.css-qmg6q8[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-qmg6q8[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-qmg6q8[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-qmg6q8[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-11uwurf{border:1px solid #e2e2e2;padding:15px;border-radius:0;margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}@media (min-width:600px){.css-11uwurf{padding:20px;}}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-11uwurf{border-top:1px solid #121212;border-bottom:none;}Covid-19 Vaccines ›Answers to Your Vaccine QuestionsWith distribution of a coronavirus vaccine beginning in the U.S., here are answers to some questions you may be wondering about:If I live in the U.S., when can I get the vaccine? While the exact order of vaccine recipients may vary by state, most will likely put medical workers and residents of long-term care facilities first. If you want to understand how this decision is getting made, this article will help.When can I return to normal life after being vaccinated? Life will return to normal only when society as a whole gains enough protection against the coronavirus. Once countries authorize a vaccine, they’ll only be able to vaccinate a few percent of their citizens at most in the first couple months. The unvaccinated majority will still remain vulnerable to getting infected. A growing number of coronavirus vaccines are showing robust protection against becoming sick. But it’s also possible for people to spread the virus without even knowing they’re infected because they experience only mild symptoms or none at all. Scientists don’t yet know if the vaccines also block the transmission of the coronavirus. So for the time being, even vaccinated people will need to wear masks, avoid indoor crowds, and so on. Once enough people get vaccinated, it will become very difficult for the coronavirus to find vulnerable people to infect. Depending on how quickly we as a society achieve that goal, life might start approaching something like normal by the fall 2021.If I’ve been vaccinated, do I still need to wear a mask? Yes, but not forever. Here’s why. The coronavirus vaccines are injected deep into the muscles and stimulate the immune system to produce antibodies. This appears to be enough protection to keep the vaccinated person from getting ill. But what’s not clear is whether it’s possible for the virus to bloom in the nose — and be sneezed or breathed out to infect others — even as antibodies elsewhere in the body have mobilized to prevent the vaccinated person from getting sick. The vaccine clinical trials were designed to determine whether vaccinated people are protected from illness — not to find out whether they could still spread the coronavirus. Based on studies of flu vaccine and even patients infected with Covid-19, researchers have reason to be hopeful that vaccinated people won’t spread the virus, but more research is needed. In the meantime, everyone — even vaccinated people — will need to think of themselves as possible silent spreaders and keep wearing a mask. Read more here.Will it hurt? What are the side effects? The Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine is delivered as a shot in the arm, like other typical vaccines. The injection into your arm won’t feel different than any other vaccine, but the rate of short-lived side effects does appear higher than a flu shot. Tens of thousands of people have already received the vaccines, and none of them have reported any serious health problems. The side effects, which can resemble the symptoms of Covid-19, last about a day and appear more likely after the second dose. Early reports from vaccine trials suggest some people might need to take a day off from work because they feel lousy after receiving the second dose. In the Pfizer study, about half developed fatigue. Other side effects occurred in at least 25 to 33 percent of patients, sometimes more, including headaches, chills and muscle pain. While these experiences aren’t pleasant, they are a good sign that your own immune system is mounting a potent response to the vaccine that will provide long-lasting immunity.Will mRNA vaccines change my genes? No. The vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer use a genetic molecule to prime the immune system. That molecule, known as mRNA, is eventually destroyed by the body. The mRNA is packaged in an oily bubble that can fuse to a cell, allowing the molecule to slip in. The cell uses the mRNA to make proteins from the coronavirus, which can stimulate the immune system. At any moment, each of our cells may contain hundreds of thousands of mRNA molecules, which they produce in order to make proteins of their own. Once those proteins are made, our cells then shred the mRNA with special enzymes. The mRNA molecules our cells make can only survive a matter of minutes. The mRNA in vaccines is engineered to withstand the cell’s enzymes a bit longer, so that the cells can make extra virus proteins and prompt a stronger immune response. But the mRNA can only last for a few days at most before they are destroyed.In any other era, Mr. Pence’s vaccination, administered by a technician from the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., in images beamed across the country, would have been a moment to bring the nation together. He took the shot in front of a giant blue poster declaring in white block letters: “SAFE and EFFECTIVE.”His wife, Karen Pence, and Surgeon General Jerome Adams were also vaccinated.Vice President Mike Pence received the Pfizer vaccine on Friday in a ceremony at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington.Credit…Doug Mills/The New York Times“I didn’t feel a thing — well done,” the vice president said afterward, adding that he wanted to “assure the American people that while we cut red tape, we cut no corners.”But Mr. Trump was notably absent. One reason for the partisan divide over vaccination, experts said, is the president himself. His repeated denigration of scientists and insistence that the pandemic is not a threat, they said, have contributed to a sense among his followers that the vaccine is either not safe or not worth taking.“I just don’t feel there’s been enough research on it. I think it was sped up too fast,” said Mark Davis, 42, a disabled worker in Michigan. “You don’t even really know the side effects, what’s in it.”Mr. Lofgren agreed. “The jury’s out on whether it’s going to work,” he said, despite studies showing that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were more than 94 percent effective.Experts say that “herd immunity” — the point at which so many people are immune that the spread of a virus is diminished — can be achieved when roughly 75 percent of the population is vaccinated. While the Trump administration is rolling out a public relations campaign to encourage people to get vaccinated, the reluctance among even a minority of Republicans is deeply troubling to public health experts.Mr. Trump has been quick to claim credit for the manufacturing and distribution of the vaccine. “Distribution to start immediately,” he said Friday on Twitter, a day after an F.D.A. expert advisory panel recommended approval of Moderna’s vaccine.Although the president has recovered from Covid-19, he remains vulnerable to reinfection. Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the government’s top infectious disease scientist, has recommended that Mr. Trump be vaccinated. But he has given no indication that he will actually do so, and he has said little, if anything, to encourage Americans to get vaccinated.“We need him taking a proactive role,” said Matthew Motta, a political scientist at Oklahoma State University who studies politics and vaccine views, adding, “The single best person to convince you to change your mind about something is somebody who agrees with you, somebody who you trust on other issues.”Mr. Trump’s own flirtations with vaccine skepticism are well known. He repeated the debunked theory that vaccines cause autism as far back as 2007, when he said he had slowed his son Barron’s vaccination schedule, and as recently as 2015 while first running for president.“Trump helped re-energize the anti-vaccine movement,” said Dr. Peter Hotez, an expert on vaccines, “and now he wants to pivot and make this his greatest accomplishment.”Helping speed the development of a coronavirus vaccine may be one of President Trump’s proudest accomplishments, but at least in the early stages of the vaccine rollout, there is evidence that a substantial number of his supporters say they do not want to get it.Credit…Samuel Corum for The New York TimesSome conservative news media outlets are reinforcing the skepticism, tapping into suspicion of government by raising questions about whether officials are leveling with the public about the risks of the vaccines.Tucker Carlson, the Fox News commentator, railed on Thursday against the “corporate image campaign” promoting vaccination, suggesting incorrectly that isolated instances of allergic reactions to the vaccine were being censored.In interviews, Trump supporters said they felt the pandemic had been blown out of proportion. Mr. Lofgren said several of his co-workers had recovered from Covid-19, “with really no more than just cold symptoms.” Mr. Palmer said that if he “had an issue with breathing or a heart issue or a lung issue,” he might consider it, but does not want to take a chance.Conspiracy theories — including the notion that the virus was created by the Chinese and Democrats to hurt Mr. Trump politically, or that the vaccine contains a microchip allowing the government to track people — cropped up in several conversations. Ms. Graves, who has diabetes, a risk factor for Covid-19, and has a master’s degree in library science, said such thoughts were creating doubts in the back of her mind.“There’s no, quote, evidence that there’s a microchip or that here’s something nefarious about the whole thing,” she said. “But I have a gut check about all of it, and the government pushing it, and they’re finding all these popular people to take the vaccine. And it’s weird, like why are we pushing it so hard?”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyWhat Is 13-3? Why a Debate Over the Fed Is Holding Up Stimulus TalksThe Fed’s emergency lending authorities are a key part of its job. Republicans want to curb them. Democrats are pushing back.Senate Republicans are trying to make sure that emergency programs backed by the Federal Reserve cannot be restarted after they expire on December 31.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesDec. 18, 2020Updated 7:49 p.m. ETAs markets melted down in March, the Federal Reserve unveiled novel programs meant to keep credit flowing to states, medium-sized businesses and big companies — and Congress handed Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin $454 billion to back up the effort.Nine months later, Senate Republicans are trying to make sure that those same programs cannot be restarted after Mr. Mnuchin lets them end on Dec. 31. Beyond preventing their reincarnation under the Biden administration, Republicans are seeking to insert language into a pandemic stimulus package that would limit the Fed’s powers going forward, potentially keeping it from lending to businesses and municipalities in future crises.The last-minute move has drawn Democratic ire, and it has imperiled the fate of relief legislation that economists say is sorely needed as households and businesses stare down a dark pandemic winter. Here is a rundown of how the Fed’s lending powers work and how Republicans are seeking to change them.The Fed can keep credit flowing when conditions are really bad.The Fed’s main and best-known job is setting interest rates to guide the economy. But the central bank was set up in 1913 in large part to stave off bank problems and financial panics — when people become nervous about the future and rush to withdraw their money from bank accounts and sell off stocks, bonds and other investments. Congress dramatically expanded the Fed’s powers to fight panics during the Great Depression, adding Section 13-3 to the Federal Reserve Act.The section allows the Fed to act as a lender of last resort during “unusual and exigent” circumstances — in short, when markets are not working normally because investors are exceptionally worried. The central bank used those powers extensively during the 2008 crisis, including to support politically unpopular bailouts of financial firms. Congress subsequently amended the Fed’s powers so that it would need Treasury’s blessing to roll out new emergency loan programs or to materially change existing ones.The programs provide confidence as much as credit.During the 2008 crisis, the Fed served primarily as a true lender of last resort — it mostly backed up the various financial markets by offering to step in if conditions got really bad. The 2020 emergency loan programs have been way more expansive. Last time, the Fed concentrated on parts of Wall Street most Americans know little about like the commercial paper market and primary dealers. This time, it reintroduced those measures, but it also unveiled new programs that have kept credit available in virtually every part of the economy. It has offered to buy municipal bonds, supported bank lending to small and medium-sized businesses, and bought up corporate debt.The sweeping package was a response to a real problem: Many markets were crashing in March. And the new programs generally worked. While the terms weren’t super generous and relatively few companies and state and local borrowers have taken advantage of these new programs, their existence gave investors confidence that the central bank would prevent a financial collapse.But things started getting messy in mid-November.Most lawmakers agreed that the Fed and Treasury had done a good job reopening credit markets and protecting the economy. But Senator Patrick J. Toomey, a Pennsylvania Republican, started to ask questions this summer about when the programs would end. He said he was worried that the Fed might overstep its boundaries and replace private lenders.After the election, other Republicans joined Mr. Toomey’s push to end the programs. Mr. Mnuchin announced on Nov. 19 that he believed Congress had intended for the five programs backed by the $454 billion Congress authorized to stop lending and buying bonds on Dec. 31. He closed them — while leaving a handful of mostly older programs open — and asked the Fed to return the money he had lent to the central bank.Business & EconomyLatest UpdatesUpdated Dec. 18, 2020, 12:25 p.m. ETLee Raymond, a former Exxon chief, will step down from JPMorgan Chase’s board.U.S. adds chip maker S.M.I.C. and drone maker DJI to its entity list.Volkswagen says semiconductor shortages will cause production delays.The Fed issued a statement saying it was dissatisfied with his choice, but agreed to give the money back.Democrats criticized the move as designed to limit the incoming Biden administration’s options. They began to discuss whether they could reclaim the funds and restart the programs once Mr. Biden took office and his Treasury secretary was confirmed, since Mr. Mnuchin’s decision to close them and claw back the funds rested on dubious legal ground.The new Republican move would cut off that option. Legislative language circulating early Friday suggested that it would prevent “any program or facility that is similar to any program or facility established” using the 2020 appropriation. While that would still allow the Fed to provide liquidity to Wall Street during a crisis, it could seriously limit the central bank’s freedom to lend to businesses, states and localities well into the future.In a statement, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, called it an attempt to “to sabotage President Biden and our nation’s economy.”Mr. Toomey has defended his proposal as an effort to protect the Fed from politicization. For example, he said Democrats might try to make the Fed’s programs much more generous to states and local governments.The Treasury secretary would need to have the Fed’s approval to improve the terms to help favored borrowers. But the central bank might not readily agree, as it has generally approached its powers cautiously to avoid attracting political scrutiny and to maintain its status as a nonpartisan institution.Fed officials have avoided weighing in on the congressional showdown underway.“I won’t have anything to say on that beyond what we have already said — that Secretary Mnuchin, as Treasury secretary, would like for the programs to end as of Dec. 31” and that the Fed will give back the money as asked, Richard H. Clarida, the vice chairman of the Fed, said Friday on CNBC.More generally, he added that “we do believe that the 13-3 facilities” have been “very valuable.”Emily Cochrane More

AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyBarr Says C.I.A. ‘Stayed in Its Lane’ in Examining Russian Election InterferenceIn an interview with a Wall Street Journal columnist, the attorney general defended his legacy and criticized the special counsel’s investigation.Attorney General William P. Barr will depart the Justice Department next week.Credit…Oliver Contreras for The New York TimesDec. 18, 2020, 7:15 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — The Justice Department’s examination of the investigations into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election has cleared the C.I.A. of suspicions that it targeted President Trump and his associates, Attorney General William P. Barr said in an interview published on Friday.“The C.I.A. stayed in its lane” and he did not “see any sign of improper C.I.A. activity,” Mr. Barr told the conservative Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley A. Strassel. His comments made more explicit his disclosure this month that the investigation by John H. Durham, a prosecutor whom Mr. Barr appointed as a special counsel in the case, had narrowed to focus on the F.B.I.Mr. Barr stopped short of fully absolving the C.I.A.; he confirmed that Mr. Durham was reviewing the early 2017 assessment by the agency and other parts of the intelligence community that concluded that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had favored Mr. Trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.Mr. Barr has drawn criticism for his previous uses of the term “spying” to describe investigative activities, though he has applied it more generally to the F.B.I.’s Russia investigation than to the C.I.A.’s scrutiny of the Kremlin’s 2016 election interference campaign. Mr. Barr reserved harsh judgment for the F.B.I.’s investigation, calling parts of it “outrageous.”Mr. Barr, who will depart office next week, sought to burnish his legacy in the interview. He has been widely criticized for his interventions in cases involving Mr. Trump’s associates, his portrayal of the Mueller report that a judge called “distorted” and “misleading” and other efforts to advance the president’s political agenda, but he insisted he was an impartial arbiter of justice who stopped the Justice Department from being used as a “political weapon.”Mr. Barr said he had planned to stay on as attorney general if Mr. Trump had won re-election but his relationship with the mercurial president had frayed at times, making his continued role as the nation’s top law enforcement officer tenuous.Mr. Barr did not assert that election fraud had played a role in Mr. Trump’s election loss and brushed off the president’s repeated criticisms that he should have disclosed a federal investigation into President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s son Hunter, which would have violated Justice Department guidelines.While apparently clearing the C.I.A. of any wrongdoing, Mr. Barr has been deeply skeptical of the F.B.I.’s reasoning for opening a counterintelligence investigation in July 2016 into whether any Trump campaign associates were secretly conspiring with Russia to tip the election in Mr. Trump’s favor.The investigation should never have been opened, Mr. Barr said. “The idea that this was done with the collusion of the Trump campaign — there was never any evidence. It was entirely made up.”The investigation, known as Crossfire Hurricane, has fueled similar unfounded accusations that a so-called deep state of government officials were working together to hobble Mr. Trump’s campaign and the administration.But an independent review by the Justice Department’s inspector general determined that officials had sufficient reason to open the investigation and found no evidence that agents acted with political bias. But agents also made serious mistakes in parts of the investigation, including some involving documents related to a wiretap of a former Trump campaign adviser, which have been amplified by right-wing media and wielded as proof that the F.B.I. was on a witch hunt.Mr. Barr told The Journal that the F.B.I.’s use “of confidential human sources and wiretapping to investigate people connected to a campaign was outrageous.”The inspector general concluded that the use of informants and undercover agents complied with Justice Department and F.B.I. policies but suggested those steps lacked oversight.Mr. Barr’s appointment of Mr. Durham as a special counsel grants Mr. Durham the kind of authorities given to Robert S. Mueller III, the former special counsel who eventually oversaw the Russia investigation. That should ensure that any report written by Mr. Durham is made public, Mr. Barr said.Mr. Barr said that Mr. Durham was focused on a “small group at the F.B.I.” — an apparent reference to the former senior officials who played a role in authorizing Crossfire Hurricane.Mr. Barr said Mr. Durham was also looking at “the activities of certain private actors,” a possible reference to Christopher Steele, a British former spy who helped assemble a dossier of anti-Trump material that was passed to the F.B.I. and used as part of the application to wiretap the former Trump adviser, Carter Page.Mr. Durham has spent significant time examining the dossier, including the actions of F.B.I. officials who came later to understand that it had significant problems but failed to convey that to the secret court that approves the highly classified wiretaps, people familiar with Mr. Durham’s investigation said.As part of his investigation, Mr. Durham prosecuted a former F.B.I. lawyer who pleaded guilty to altering an email that an agent relied on to renew one of the Page wiretap applications. The inspector general had found the document and referred it to prosecutors.In the interview, Mr. Barr also criticized the appointment of Mr. Mueller, the former F.B.I. director whom Mr. Barr once closely worked with in the early 1990s when he first ran the Justice Department.Mr. Barr said Mr. Mueller should have looked at the information the F.B.I. provided him more critically. “The Mueller team seems to have been ready to blindly accept anything fed to it by the system,” he said.The attorney general derided Mr. Mueller’s prosecution of Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, who pleaded guilty twice to lying to the F.B.I. about his conversations with the then Russian ambassador in late 2016 and admitted to illegally lobbying for Turkey.After a federal judge had dismissed Mr. Flynn’s many claims of prosecutorial wrongdoing and F.B.I. abuses in late 2019, Mr. Barr then appointed a U.S. attorney to review the case.Prosecutors then sought to drop the criminal case against Mr. Flynn but before a judge could rule on the matter, Mr. Trump pardoned Mr. Flynn, ensuring the Justice Department under the Biden administration could not prosecute him for violating the lobbying laws too.Mr. Barr said the case against Mr. Flynn was “entirely bogus.”The judge overseeing the Flynn case, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, disagreed with Mr. Barr’s sweeping conclusion. In an opinion this month, Judge Sullivan said that the Justice Department’s arguments for dropping the case were dubious and that he likely would have rejected them.The judge also rejected evidence that the department had supplied to the court in an attempt to show that the F.B.I. had tried to entrap Mr. Flynn.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

@media (pointer: coarse) {
.nytslm_outerContainer {
overflow-x: scroll;
-webkit-overflow-scrolling: touch;
}
}

.nytslm_outerContainer {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
/* Fixes IE */
overflow-x: auto;
box-shadow: -6px 0 white, 6px 0 white, 1px 3px 6px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.15);
padding: 10px 1.25em 10px;
transition: all 250ms;
-ms-overflow-style: none;
/* IE 10+ */
scrollbar-width: none;
/* Firefox */
background: white;
margin-bottom: 20px;
z-index: 1000;
}

@media (min-width: 1024px) {
.nytslm_outerContainer {
margin-bottom: 0px;
padding: 13px 1.25em 10px;
}
}

.nytslm::-webkit-scrollbar {
display: none;
/* Safari and Chrome */
}

.nytslm_innerContainer {
margin: unset;
display: flex;
align-items: center;
}

@media (min-width: 600px) {
.nytslm_innerContainer {
margin: auto;
min-width: 600px;
}
}

.nytslm_title {
padding-right: 1em;
border-right: 1px solid #ccc;
}

@media (min-width: 740px) {
.nytslm_title {
max-width: none;
font-size: 1.0625rem;
line-height: 1.25rem;
}
}

.nytslm_spacer {
width: 0;
border-right: 1px solid #E2E2E2;
height: 45px;
margin: 0 1.4em;
}

.nytslm_list {
font-family: nyt-franklin, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
display: flex;
width: auto;
list-style: none;
padding-left: 1em;
flex-shrink: 0;
align-items: baseline;
justify-content: center;
}

.nytslm_li {
margin-right: 1.4em;
flex-shrink: 0;
font-size: 0.8125rem;
line-height: 0.8125rem;
font-weight: 600;
padding: 1em 0;
}

#nytslm .nytslm_li a {
color: #121212;
text-decoration: none;
}

#nytslm .nytsmenu_li_current,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:hover,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:active,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:focus {
color: #121212;
border-bottom: 2px solid #121212;
padding-bottom: 2px;
}

.nytslm_li_live_loud:after {
content: ‘LIVE’
}

.nytslm_li_live_loud {
background-color: #d0021b;
color: white;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 6px 2px 6px;
margin-right: 2px;
display: inline-block;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
font-weight: 700;
}

.nytslm_li_upcoming_loud {
border: 1px solid #d0021b;
color: #d0021b;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 6px 2px 6px;
margin-right: 2px;
display: inline-block;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
font-weight: 700;
}

.nytslm_li_upcoming_loud:before {
content: ‘Upcoming’
}

.nytslm_li_loud a:hover,
.nytslm_li_loud a:active,
.nytslm_li_loud a:focus {
border-bottom: 2px solid;
padding-bottom: 2px;
}

.nytslm_li_updated {
color: #777;
}

#masthead-bar-one {
display: none;
}

.electionNavbar__logoSvg {
width: 80px;
align-self: center;
display: flex;
}

@media(min-width: 600px) {
.electionNavbar__logoSvg {
width: 100px;
}
}

.nytslm_notification {
border-left: 1px solid #ccc;
font-family: nyt-franklin, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
padding-left: 1em;
}

.nytslm_notification_label {
color: #D0021B;
text-transform: uppercase;
font-weight: 700;
font-size: 0.6875rem;
margin-bottom: 0.2em;
letter-spacing: 0.02em;
}

.nytslm_notification_link {
font-weight: 600;
color: #121212;
display: flex;
align-items: center;
}

.nytslm_notification_headline {
font-size: 0.875rem;
line-height: 1.0625rem;
}

.nytslm_notification_image_wrapper {
position: relative;
max-width: 75px;
margin-left: 10px;
flex-shrink: 0;
}

.nytslm_notification_image {
max-width: 100%;
}

.nytslm_notification_image_live_bug {
position: absolute;
text-transform: uppercase;
bottom: 7px;
left: 2px;

font-size: 0.5rem;
background-color: #d0021b;
color: white;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 4px 2px 4px;
font-weight: 700;
margin-right: 2px;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
}

/* No hover state on in app */
.Hybrid .nytslm_li a:hover,
.Hybrid .nytslm_li_loud a:hover {
border-bottom: none;
padding-bottom: 0;
}

.Hybrid #TOP_BANNER_REGION {
display: none;
}

.nytslm_st0 {
fill: #f4564a;
}

.nytslm_st1 {
fill: #ffffff;
}

.nytslm_st2 {
fill: #2b8ad8;
}

Electoral College Results

Election Disinformation

Full Results

Biden Transition Updates

“),e+=””+b+””,e+=””,d&&(e+=””,e+=””,e+=”Live”,e+=””),e+=””,e}function getVariant(){var a=window.NYTD&&window.NYTD.Abra&&window.NYTD.Abra.getAbraSync&&window.NYTD.Abra.getAbraSync(“STYLN_elections_notifications”);// Only actually have control situation in prd and stg
return[“www.nytimes.com”,”www.stg.nytimes.com”].includes(window.location.hostname)||(a=”STYLN_elections_notifications”),a||”0_control”}function reportData(){if(window.dataLayer){var a;try{a=dataLayer.find(function(a){return!!a.user}).user}catch(a){}var b={abtest:{test:”styln-elections-notifications”,variant:getVariant()},module:{name:”styln-elections-notifications”,label:getVariant(),region:”TOP_BANNER”},user:a};window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”ab-alloc”})),window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”ab-expose”})),window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”impression”}))}}function insertNotification(a,b){// Bail here if the user is in control
if(reportData(),”0_control”!==getVariant()){// Remove menu bar items or previous notification
var c=document.querySelector(“.nytslm_innerContainer”);if(c&&1 30 * 60 * 1000) return restoreMenuIfNecessary();
// Do not update DOM if the content won’t change
if(currentNotificationContents!==a.text&&window.localStorage.getItem(“stylnelecs”)!==a.timestamp)// Do not show if user has interacted with this link
// if (Cookie.get(‘stylnelecs’) === data.timestamp) return;
{expireLocalStorage(“stylnelecs”),currentNotificationContents=a.text;// Construct URL for tracking
var b=a.link.split(“#”),c=b[0]+”?action=click&pgtype=Article&state=default&module=styln-elections-notifications&variant=1_election_notifications&region=TOP_BANNER&context=Menu#”+b[1],d=formatNotification(c,a.text,a.kicker,a.image);insertNotification(d,function(){var b=document.querySelector(“.nytslm_notification_link”);return b?void(b.onclick=function(){window.localStorage.setItem(“stylnelecs”,a.timestamp)}):null})}})}(function(){navigator.userAgent.includes(“nytios”)||navigator.userAgent.includes(“nyt_android”)||window.stylnelecsHasLoaded||(// setInterval(getUpdate, 5000);
window.stylnelecsHasLoaded=!0)})(),function(){try{if(navigator.userAgent.includes(“nytios”)||navigator.userAgent.includes(“nyt_android”)){var a=document.getElementsByClassName(“nytslm_title”)[0];a.style.pointerEvents=”none”}}catch(a){}}(); More