Elections

How the Olympic drug testing system is supposed to function — and why it may not be working.When you sit down to watch the Olympics, you expect that you’re seeing the world’s best athletes competing on a level playing field.The organization that runs the Olympics prides itself on that promise, and it presents the Games as being tougher on dopers than any other sporting competition. It claims to have the most rigorous drug testing. Those who test positive face serious punishments, including multiyear bans. And an independent entity — known as the World Anti-Doping Agency — has global authority to enforce a strict antidoping code.But that system’s shortcomings have been on display at the Paris Games.Over the past few months, my Times colleagues and I have uncovered a troubling pattern of positive doping tests in the Chinese swimming program. Twelve members of the Chinese Olympic team tested positive in recent years for powerful performance-enhancing drugs but were cleared to keep competing. Until our stories, none of the positive tests had been publicly disclosed, as required by the rules.Concerns have spilled over to the pool deck in Paris, where some swimmers said the antidoping authorities had failed to ensure that these Games were fair. “I don’t really think they’ve given us enough evidence to support them with how this case was handled,” said Caeleb Dressel, one of the senior leaders on the U.S. team.In today’s newsletter, I’ll explain how the Olympic drug testing system is supposed to function, and why, in some of the most high-profile cases, like this one involving the Chinese swimmers, it may not be working. And now the Justice Department and F.B.I. are investigating.How it’s supposed to workEach country is in charge of policing its own athletes. That means that the United States Anti-Doping Agency takes the lead in testing and investigating American athletes, the China Anti-Doping Agency does the same in its country, and so on.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

Adrienne Hurst and Sophia Lanman and Listen and follow The DailyApple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTubeWhen Maggie Jones’s marriage collapsed after 23 years, she was devastated and overwhelmed. She was in her 50s, with two jobs, two teenage daughters and one dog. She didn’t consider dating. She had no time, no emotional energy. But then a year passed. One daughter was off at college, the other increasingly independent. After several more months went by, she started to feel a sliver of curiosity about what kind of men were out there and how it would feel to date again. The last time she dated was 25 years ago, and even then, she fell into relationships mostly with guys from high school, college, parties, work. Now every man she knew was either married, too young, too old or otherwise not a good fit.That meant online dating — the default mode not just for the young but also for people Ms. Jones’s age. Her only exposure had been watching her oldest daughter, home from college one summer, as she sat on her bed rapidly swiping through guy after guy — spending no more than a second or two on each.Ms. Jones tells her story of online dating in later adulthood, and what she learned.There are a lot of ways to listen to ‘The Daily.’ Here’s how.We want to hear from you. Tune in, and tell us what you think. Email us at [email protected]. Follow Michael Barbaro on X: @mikiebarb. And if you’re interested in advertising with The Daily, write to us at [email protected] production for The Sunday Read was contributed by Isabella Anderson, Anna Diamond, Sarah Diamond, Elena Hecht, Emma Kehlbeck, Tanya Pérez, Frannie Carr Toth and Krish Seenivasan. More

Scroll down for hints and conversation about the puzzle for Monday, Aug. 5, 2024.Good morning, dear connectors. Welcome to today’s Connections forum, where you can give and receive puzzle — and emotional — support.Be warned: This article includes hints and comments that may contain spoilers for today’s puzzle. Solve Connections first, or scroll at your own risk.Connections is released at midnight in your time zone. In order to accommodate all time zones, there will be two Connections Companions live every day, dated based on Eastern Standard Time.If you find yourself on the wrong companion, check the number of your puzzle, and go to this page to find the corresponding companion.Post your solve grid in the comments and see how your score compares with the editor’s rating, and one another’s.Today’s difficultyThe difficulty of each puzzle is determined by averaging the ratings provided by a panel of testers who are paid to solve each puzzle in advance to help us catch bugs, inconsistencies and other issues. A higher rating means the puzzle is more difficult.Today’s difficulty is 2.6 out of 5.Need a hint?In Connections, each category has a different difficulty level. Yellow is the simplest, and purple is the most difficult. Click or tap each level to reveal one of the words in that category. 🟨 StraightforwardMAKE DO🟩 ⬇️BIRTHDAY🟦 ⬇️CAPISCE🟪 TrickyCANDYFurther ReadingWant to give us feedback? Email us: [email protected] to go back to Connections?Want to learn more about how the game is made?Leave any thoughts you have in the comments! Please follow community guidelines:Be kind. Comments are moderated for civility.Having a technical issue? Use the Help button in the Settings menu of the Games app.Want to talk about Wordle or Spelling Bee? Check out Wordle Review and the Spelling Bee Forum.See our Tips and Tricks for more useful information on Connections.Join us here to solve Crosswords, The Mini, and other games by The New York Times. More

Richardson’s slow start put her behind, a position she had been able to overcome in the past. But not on Saturday, as she rarely matched Alfred’s speed during any part of the race. Women’s 100-meter final results 1 Alfred 10.72s 23.15mph 25.50mph 2 Richardson 10.87s 22.84mph 25.18mph 3 Jefferson 10.92s 22.64mph 25.03mph 4 Neita 10.96s […] More

Former President Donald J. Trump suggested without evidence on Saturday that Georgia’s Republican governor was hampering his efforts to win the battleground state in November, a claim that carried echoes of Mr. Trump’s attempt to overturn his defeat to President Biden there in 2020.“In my opinion, they want us to lose,” Mr. Trump said, accusing the state’s governor, Brian Kemp, and its secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, who is also a Republican, of being disloyal and trying to make life difficult for him.At a rally at the Georgia State University Convocation Center in Atlanta, in a speech that lasted more than 90 minutes and that was peppered with grievances about his loss four years ago, Mr. Trump falsely claimed, “I won this state twice,” referring to the 2016 and 2020 elections.Mr. Trump lost to Mr. Biden by roughly 12,000 votes in Georgia in 2020. Last year, the former president was indicted by an Atlanta grand jury on charges related to his efforts to subvert the results of that election in that state. On Saturday, he complained that he might not have ended up in legal jeopardy if Mr. Kemp and Mr. Raffensperger had cooperated with his attempts to reverse the 2020 results.Mr. Trump added that he thought Georgia had slipped under Mr. Kemp’s leadership. “The state has gone to hell,” he said.Representatives for Mr. Kemp, who indicated in June that he had not voted for Mr. Trump in the Republican primary this year, and Mr. Raffensperger did not immediately respond to requests for comment.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

Debby was a tropical storm in the Gulf of Mexico late Saturday Eastern time, the National Hurricane Center said in its latest advisory. The tropical storm had sustained wind speeds of 45 miles per hour. Debby is the fourth named storm to form in the Atlantic in 2024.  All times on the map are Eastern. […] More

If it feels like the same countries are winning most of the Olympic medals every two years, that’s because it’s largely true.Even though more than 150 countries and territories have claimed a medal since the modern Games began in 1896, the list of winners is top-heavy. Entering the Paris Summer Games, the United States has the most, by far, with 2,975 medals, according to the International Olympic Committee’s research wing. A group of usual suspects follow: the former Soviet Union (1,204), Germany (1,058), Great Britain (955), France (898).Nearly 70 countries and territories, though — roughly a third of the parade of nations — cannot boast an Olympic medalist in any discipline, summer or winter. Some, like South Sudan, which sent its first team to the Olympics in 2016, have only just begun trying. Others, like Monaco, have been at it for more than a century.“It’s frustrating, definitely,” said Marco Luque, a member of the Bolivian Olympic Committee’s board and the president of his country’s track and field federation. “And you feel impotence, of not being able to do better.”Every once in a while, though, a nation breaks its maiden. On Saturday night at the Stade de France, Thea LaFond-Gadson, 30, of the Caribbean island of Dominica, won the gold medal in women’s triple jump. And soon after, Julien Alfred, 23, of St. Lucia, also in the Caribbean, won the gold medal in the women’s 100-meter sprint.“It means a lot to the small islands,” she said. “And seeing how we can come from a small place but also be on the biggest stage of our career.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

Doug Emhoff, the husband of Vice President Kamala Harris, said on Saturday that he had an extramarital affair during his first marriage, years before he met Ms. Harris.The acknowledgment, which was released in a statement, came hours after a British tabloid reported that Mr. Emhoff had a previously undisclosed relationship with a teacher who worked at the elementary school his children attended in Culver City, Calif., approximately 15 years ago.At the time, Mr. Emhoff, an entertainment lawyer, was married to Kerstin Emhoff, a film producer, with whom he had two children. The couple filed for divorce in 2009. Mr. Emhoff met Ms. Harris in 2013, and they married the following year.“During my first marriage, Kerstin and I went through some tough times on account of my actions,” Mr. Emhoff said in the statement. “I took responsibility, and in the years since, we worked through things as a family and have come out stronger on the other side.”The Biden campaign was aware of the affair before it decided to tap Ms. Harris as vice president in 2020, according to a person familiar with the vetting process, who spoke on condition of anonymity. In addition, this person said that Ms. Harris knew of the affair before she married Mr. Emhoff in 2014.According to an article published by The Daily Mail on Saturday, Mr. Emhoff had the relationship with a woman who at the time worked as a teacher at The Willows Community School, a private school in west Los Angeles.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More