Elections

The war has torn apart old alliances and heightened the acrimony. A Ukrainian fencer is competing after her refusal to shake hands with a Russian rival got her barred from the world championships.Olha Kharlan of Ukraine shouted in celebration under the vaulted glass dome of the Grand Palais on Monday, after an early round victory in her pursuit of a fifth career Olympic medal in saber fencing.She had reached the semifinals by late afternoon. But just her mere presence confirmed that this niche sport, perhaps more than any other, illustrates the acrimony and caustic feuding that have resulted from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.Kharlan, 33, was disqualified from the world fencing championships last summer for refusing to shake hands with her Russian opponent. But Thomas Bach, the president of the International Olympic Committee and himself a 1976 Olympic fencing champion, gave Kharlan an exemption to participate in the Paris Games, citing her “unique situation.”There she was on Monday, competing in the Olympics, while Russia was absent from the biggest international event in fencing, a sport in which it has long been a power athletically and administratively.Ohla Kharlan, right, competing against Shihomi Fukushima of Japan in the Grand Palais on Monday.Andrew Medichini/Associated PressWith Russia banned from these Games because of its invasion, only 15 of its athletes are competing in Paris, all designated as neutral, without the accompaniment of the country’s flag or national anthem. There are none in fencing, a huge blow to the country’s Olympic prestige given that Russia and the former Soviet Union rank behind only Italy, France and Hungary in fencing’s overall medal count.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

Tesla says self-driving taxis will power its growth, but the company hasn’t said when such a service would be ready or how much it would increase profits.As sales of its electric cars have fallen, Tesla and its chief executive, Elon Musk, have sought to convince Wall Street that the company’s future lies not in the grinding business of making and selling cars but in the far more exciting world of artificial intelligence.In Mr. Musk’s telling, one of Tesla’s main A.I.-based businesses will be driverless taxis, or robotaxis, that can operate pretty much anywhere and in any condition. Tesla is very close to perfecting such vehicles and will easily secure regulatory approval to put them on roads, Mr. Musk said last week on a conference call to discuss the company’s second quarter results.Mr. Musk’s vision of autonomous vehicles, or A.V.s, is not limited to cars that drive themselves. He has also claimed that individuals who buy Teslas would be able to make money when they are asleep or at work by letting the company use their cars as robotaxis.The robotaxi service will, Mr. Musk has said, catapult Tesla’s stock market valuation, around $700 billion now, into the trillions of dollars.But first, a lot will have to go right.His idea would require major advances in technology and fundamental changes in the way people view cars. The experience of driverless taxi services like Waymo and Cruise in Phoenix, San Francisco and other cities raises questions about when such offerings will become profitable and how much money they will make.Tesla’s technology will face stiff competition from Waymo, a subsidiary of Alphabet, the parent company of Google; ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft; and Amazon’s self-driving business Zoox. Carmakers including General Motors, which owns Cruise, are also pursuing autonomous driving, along with Chinese tech and auto companies like Baidu and BYD.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

Welcome to Lit Trivia, the Book Review’s regular quiz about books, authors and literary culture. This week’s installment tests your knowledge of novels, poems and memoirs by writers connected to the Harlem Renaissance, a creative movement by Black authors, artists and musicians that crystallized into a cultural force a century ago. In the five multiple-choice questions below, tap or click on the answer you think is correct. After the last question, you’ll find links to the books and other information if you’d like to do some further reading.3 of 5In 1930, Langston Hughes collaborated on a play called “Mule Bone,” which was never finished but was published in a new edition and produced on Broadway in 1991, long after both authors were dead. His co-writer, who was also an anthropologist, was the author of several fiction and nonfiction books, including an autobiography titled “Dust Tracks on a Road.” Who was it? More

Aya Nakamura, the French Malian singer, did more than open the Games. She redefined what it means to be French.A new France was consecrated Friday evening during the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games. When Aya Nakamura, a French Malian singer, came sashaying in a short fringed golden dress out of the august Académie Française, she redefined Frenchness.Adieu the stern edicts of the Académie, whose role has been to protect the French language from what one of its members once called “brainless Globish.” Bonjour to a France whose language is increasingly infused with expressions from its former African colonies that form the lyrical texture of Ms. Nakamura’s many blockbuster hits.France’s most popular singer at home and abroad gyrated as she strode forth over the Pont des Arts in her laced golden gladiator sandals. A Republican Guard band accompanied her slang-spiced lyrics. Her confidence bordered on insolence, as if to say, “This, too, is France.”Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader, had said that Ms. Nakamura sings in “who knows what” language. But her denunciation of the performance on the grounds that it would “humiliate” the French people failed to stop it.The backdrop to the ceremony was a political and cultural crisis in France broadly pitting tradition against modernity and an open view of society against a closed one. The country is politically deadlocked and culturally fractured, unable to form a new government or agree on what precisely Frenchness should be.In this context, the thrust of the ceremony, as conceived by its artistic director, Thomas Jolly, was to push the boundaries of what it means to be French in an attempt to bolster a more inclusive France and a less divided world. It was a political act wrapped in a pulsating show.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

Attorneys for the White House chief of staff during Donald Trump’s presidency, Mark Meadows, have asked the US supreme court to move the Georgia 2020 election interference case to federal court.The petition cites the recent supreme court ruling that granted Trump immunity for any acts deemed official – which came as part of a 2020 election subversion case in Washington DC’s federal courthouse. Meadows’s attorneys claimed that a federal forum was needed to address their client’s actions as the White House chief of staff.“It is hard to imagine a case in which the need for a federal forum is more pressing than one that requires resolving novel questions about the duties and powers of one of the most important federal offices in the nation,” the Meadows legal team’s petition argued.That filing is the most recent attempt by Meadows’s attorneys to move the Georgia election interference case from an Atlanta state court to US district court. In December 2023, a three-judge appeals court panel denied their effort to move the case to federal court, ruling that former federal officials are ineligible to move their charges.Meadows and his attorneys have undertaken that effort in hopes of asserting immunity from prosecution on charges related to unlawfully attempting to overturn Joe Biden’s electoral victory in Georgia in the 2020 presidential race. If successful, they would affect Fulton county, Georgia, district attorney Fani Willis’s prosecution of Trump, Meadows and other co-defendants.The judges on the appeals panel ruled that – even if the transfer process known as removal extended to former federal officials – Meadows did not demonstrate he was acting in his official role as White House chief of staff. The ruling blocked a path for Meadows to assert immunity and other federal defenses.And it prevented the jury pool from being broadened to areas of Georgia with lower percentages of Democrats while also getting case overseen by a member of the federal judiciary, which is appointed by presidents.Meadows is one of 19 defendants, including Trump, who were charged last August in the Georgia election racketeering case.The case’s proceedings have been televised in Georgia state court, and the plan is to do the same for the trial.“Simply put, whatever the precise contours of Meadows’s official authority, that authority did not extend to an alleged conspiracy to overturn valid election results,” the judge, William Pryor, an appointee of president George W Bush, wrote in the appellate court ruling.Attorneys for Meadows also requested the supreme court wipe away the appellate ruling and send the case back to the lower courts if they opt not to fully review his petition.Meadows faces charges that he allegedly entered a months-long conspiracy with Trump and other allies to overturn Biden’s victory in Georgia during his winning presidential run in 2020.Meadows also faces a second charge alleging he sought to persuade the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, to violate his oath of office. The charge references Meadows’s involvement in a phone call from Trump to Raffensperger – the top elections official in Georgia – asking him to find additional votes needed for the former president to win the state.The Georgia election interference case is halted for now as a state appeals court is scheduled to hear arguments in December over Trump’s efforts to remove Willis from the case.Meadows has also been charged in Arizona over his efforts to assist Trump to overturn election results, along with the former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and 16 others.Meadows has pleaded not guilty in both the Arizona and Georgia cases. More

They arrived at polling stations long before dawn, slept in the streets so they could be the first in line, and then cried as they cast their votes.On Sunday, millions of Venezuelans headed to the ballot box in an election that will determine the fate of the socialist movement that has governed oil-rich, crisis-laden Venezuela for 25 years. By 8 p.m., most polling stations had closed, and the nation waited with apprehension for the country’s electoral body, headed by an acolyte of the ruling party, to announce the result.For the first time in more than a decade, the country’s authoritarian president, Nicolás Maduro, faced a strong challenger, Edmundo González, a previously little-known former diplomat who has the backing of a popular leader, María Corina Machado.The vote represents an existential moment for Chavismo, the socialist movement that swept to power in Venezuela in 1999. Founded by former President Hugo Chávez, Mr. Maduro’s mentor, the movement promised to lift millions out of poverty.For a time, it did. But, over the course of a generation, the movement shattered the nation’s democracy, presided over an economic contraction unlike any seen outside of war and became the source of one of the largest migrant crises in the world.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

[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]Llegaron a los centros de votación mucho antes del amanecer, durmieron en la calle para poder ser los primeros en fila, y lloraron mientras emitían sus votos.El domingo, millones de venezolanos se dirigieron a las urnas en unas elecciones que determinarán el destino del movimiento socialista que ha gobernado a Venezuela, un país rico en petróleo y colmado de crisis, por 25 años.A las 8 p. m., la mayoría de los centros de votación habían cerrado, y el país esperaba con recelo que el organismo electoral nacional, dirigido por un discípulo del partido gobernante, anunciara el resultado.Por primera vez en más de una década, el presidente autoritario del país, Nicolás Maduro, se ha enfrentado a un fuerte contrincante, Edmundo González, un antiguo diplomático poco conocido que ha contado con el apoyo de la popular líder, María Corina Machado.La votación representa un momento existencial para el chavismo, el movimiento socialista que tomó el poder en Venezuela en 1999. Fundado por el presidente Hugo Chávez, el mentor de Maduro, el partido prometió sacar a millones de personas de la pobreza.Durante un tiempo, lo hizo. Pero, en el transcurso de una generación, el chavismo ha destrozado la democracia del país, ha presidido un extraordinario desplome económico, como en ningún otro territorio sin guerra, y se ha convertido en la fuente de una de las mayores crisis migratorias del mundo.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

Not everyone gets to have a dragon. But maybe more people get to have dragons than everyone thought?Season 2, Episode 7: ‘The Red Sowing’Sometimes, in politics, a bold gamble in unprecedented times pays off. This is as true for the world of Westeros as it is for our own. The woman who wants to rule the realm staked it all on a long-odds play, and her odds came in.For several episodes, Queen Rhaenyra has been down one dragon. The formidable beast Meleys and her equally impressive rider, Princess Rhaenys, are dead. Prince Daemon’s war-hardened “Blood Wyrm,” Caraxes, is mired in his master’s endless quest to subdue the Riverlands. None of the mounts available to Team Black can possibly match Prince-Regent Aemond and his colossal creature, Vhagar, in battle, even when combined.On the advice of her counselor (with benefits?) Mysaria, Rhaenyra expands her search for potential dragon riders to the unrecognized descendants of her sprawling royal family — those born as commoners, outside of marriage. In a face-to-face meeting with the young shipwright Addam of Hull, revealed to be the new rider of the dragon Seasmoke, Rhaenyra has already learned that even those not of fully noble birth can ride a dragon. She doesn’t know that Addam is the son of Lord Corlys Velaryon, whose house has frequently intermarried with the Targaryens — and neither Addam nor Corlys tells her so — but since the young man’s mother was a commoner regardless, the point stands.When word of the search gets to King’s Landing through the usual back channels, Ulf and Hugh, two of the commoners we’ve been following all season, take the fateful trip to Dragonstone to test their mettle against monsters widely considered more god than animal. There, they learn the hard way that gambling is easier when you’re betting with someone else’s money.True, Rhaenyra talks about needing dragon riders to avoid bloodshed, not cause it. And she pushes back against her son Prince Jacaerys’s furious tirade against elevating lowborn part-Targaryen “mongrels” to the level of dragon rider. (In fairness to Jace, his shame about his own parentage, and his fear of becoming just another Targaryen-blooded bastard with a dragon and thus no more a claim to the throne than any other, play as much of a role as snobbery does here.)What Rhaenyra does not do is ask her potential dragon riders to proceed onto the barbecue grill — I’m sorry, the viewing platform — beneath Dragonstone to approach the mighty dragon Vermithor one at time. So what if the dragon keepers have gone on strike in protest of this “blasphemous” move? Surely the Black Queen is aware of best practices when it comes to large groups and hungry fire-breathing dinosaurs by this point in her life. I would call this a flaw in the writing, but the reckless disregard of even “good” Targaryens like Rhaenyra and Rhaenys for civilians caught in the crossfire of their boldness has been a through line of the series.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