Elections

Paolo Pasco and Sarah Sinclair deliver.Jump to: Today’s Theme | Tricky CluesNote to readers: In the past, Wordplay indicated crossword clues with quotation marks. In crossword construction and editing, though, clues are typically indicated by brackets, a practice Wordplay is now following.THURSDAY PUZZLE — I’m hungry. Are you hungry?Let’s sink our teeth into this crossword by Paolo Pasco and Sarah Sinclair. That should assuage our cravings for a fun puzzle. If you’re solving online, try not to get any pixels caught in your teeth; I’m all out of grid floss.And if you are tempted to give up on this one for some reason, don’t — there’s a nice surprise when you’ve had your fill.Today’s ThemeAt first, I thought that Mr. Pasco and Ms. Sinclair’s rounded grid represented a cell, with all its parts swirling around inside, and that the revealer was going to be something like “The mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell.”I was disabused of that notion when I got to the actual revealer, at 26A, which reads [Pepperoni, mushroom or green pepper … or what each cluster of black squares represents in this puzzle]. The answer is PIZZA TOPPING, but I had a problem: The answer, like many of this puzzle’s entries, didn’t fit in its slot.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

Court papers said the “youth development specialists” took more than $50,000 in bribes to allow in items like razor blades, marijuana, alcohol and prescription pills.Five current and former employees at a city-run juvenile detention center in Brooklyn were arrested by federal officials on Wednesday on charges that they had accepted bribes to smuggle in a tidal wave of illicit substances, razor blades and scalpels.All five were “youth development specialists” employed by the Administration for Children’s Services at Crossroads Juvenile Center in Brownsville, and were released on bail after an initial appearance before a judge in Brooklyn federal court on Wednesday afternoon.The employees were Da’Vante Bolton, 31, of Queens; Roger Francis, 58, of Brooklyn; Christopher Craig, 37, of Brooklyn; and Nigel King, 45, of Queens. One former employee, Octavia Napier, 26, of Brooklyn, had already been fired after it appeared that she had been involved in smuggling, according to a criminal complaint.None entered pleas at their court appearance on Wednesday. Mr. Francis declined to comment after the hearing, as did lawyers for Mr. Bolton, Mr. Craig and Mr. King. A lawyer for Ms. Napier did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The defendants “violated their duty to the city and the residents at Crossroads” and placed the center’s residents and staff members “at an alarming risk of serious harm,” Breon Peace, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, said in a statement.The facility, in Brownsville, houses about 120 young people ages 14 to 20. Prosecutors said that the authorities had found more than 340 scalpels or blades in the possession of residents in the past two years. They also found at least 75 banned cellphones, pills, alcohol and cigarettes.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

Debatir con el expresidente es como hacer malabarismo con disparates, divagaciones y fanfarroneríasLa semana pasada la pasé increíble en los premios Tony cuando presenté una canción de Suffs, el musical de Broadway que coproduje sobre las sufragistas que lograron que las mujeres tuviéramos derecho a votar. Me sentí emocionada cuando nuestra obra ganó los premios a la mejor partitura original y al mejor libreto.Desde Suffs hasta Hamilton, el teatro político me fascina. Pero no al revés. Con demasiada frecuencia analizamos momentos clave como el debate de esta semana entre el presidente Biden y Donald Trump como si fuéramos críticos de teatro. Pero elegiremos a un presidente; no al mejor actor.Yo soy la única persona que ha debatido con ambos (con Trump en 2016; con Biden en las primarias presidenciales demócratas de 2008). Conozco la insoportable presión que supone subir a ese escenario, y sé que, con Trump en la ecuación, es casi imposible centrarse en lo importante. En nuestros tres debates de 2016, dio rienda suelta a un torbellino de interrupciones, insultos y mentiras que abrumó a los moderadores y perjudicó a los millones de votantes que querían conocer nuestras visiones para el país (tan solo nuestro primer debate tuvo la cifra récord de 84 millones de espectadores).Tratar de refutar los argumentos de Trump como si se tratara de un debate normal es una pérdida de tiempo. Incluso descifrar sus argumentos es casi imposible. Comienza por decir disparates; luego divaga. Esto no ha hecho sino empeorar en los años que han pasado desde que debatimos. No me sorprendió enterarme de que, tras una reunión reciente, varios directores ejecutivos comentaran que Trump, en palabras de uno de los periodistas, “no podía seguir el hilo de la conversación” y “hablaba de todo y de nada”. Por otro lado, las expectativas puestas en él son tan bajas que si el jueves por la noche no se prende fuego –literalmente– habrá quienes digan que estuvo muy presidencial.Puede que Trump despotrique en parte para evitar dar respuestas directas sobre sus posturas impopulares, como las restricciones al aborto, las exenciones fiscales a los multimillonarios y la venta de nuestro planeta a las grandes petroleras a cambio de donaciones de campaña. Interrumpe y acosa (en cierto momento incluso me persiguió por el escenario) porque quiere parecer dominante y desequilibrar a su oponente.Estas estratagemas fracasarán si Biden es tan directo y contundente como lo fue cuando enfrentó a los republicanos que lo abuchearon durante su discurso sobre el Estado de la Unión en marzo. El presidente, además, tiene los hechos y la verdad de su parte. Él encabezó la recuperación de Estados Unidos tras una crisis sanitaria y económica histórica, con más de 15 millones de empleos creados hasta la fecha, aumentó los ingresos de las familias trabajadoras, frenó la inflación y elevó las inversiones en energías limpias y fabricación avanzada. Si logra transmitir todo eso, él ganará.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

The stakes in this year’s presidential election are the greatest in my lifetime. So as a way to frame the choice before voters, I offer these foreign policy questions for President Biden and Donald Trump in the debate on Thursday:President Biden, for months you called on Israel to refrain from invading Rafah and to allow more food into Gaza. Yet Israel did invade Rafah, and half a million Gazans are reported starving. Haven’t you been ignored? And isn’t that because of your tendency to overestimate how much you can charm people — Senate Republicans, Xi Jinping, Benjamin Netanyahu — to cooperate with you? When will you move beyond charm and use serious leverage to try to achieve peace in the Middle East?Mr. Trump, the Abraham Accords you achieved among Israel and several Arab countries were a legitimate foreign policy success, but you largely bypassed Palestinians. Perhaps as a result, those accords may have been a reason Hamas undertook its terror attack on Israel on Oct. 7, to prevent Saudi Arabia from joining and recognizing Israel. So did the Abraham Accords bring peace or sow the seeds of war? Isn’t it a mistake to ignore Palestinians and to give Israel what it wants, such as moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, without getting anything in return?President Biden, you have been pushing a plan for Gaza that involves a cease-fire and a three-way deal with Saudi Arabia, America and Israel ending in a path to Palestinian statehood. Maybe it’ll come together, but if not, what’s your Plan B? If this war drags on, or expands to include Lebanon and perhaps Iran, how do you propose to deal with the Middle East more effectively than you’ve dealt with it so far?Mr. Trump, you’ve suggested that Israel is taking too long to finish the war in Gaza. So what precisely are you advocating? Are you saying that Israel should use more 2,000-pound bombs to level even more of Gaza and kill many more civilians? Or are you saying that Israel should cut a deal that leaves Hamas in place and then pull out?President Biden, Iran has enriched uranium to close to bomb-grade levels. In days or weeks, it could probably produce enough fuel for three nuclear weapons (though mastering a delivery system would take longer). Can we live with an Iran that is a quasi-nuclear power? What is the alternative?Mr. Trump, the reason Iran is so close to having nuclear weapons is that you pulled out of the international nuclear deal in 2018, leading Iran to greatly accelerate its nuclear program. Since you created this dangerous situation, how do you suggest we get out of it? If you are president again, do you contemplate solving this problem through a war with Iran — one that might now involve nuclear weapons? Or will you accept a nuclear Iran as the consequence of your historic mistake?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

He began handling dogs in his native Japan and then became a poodle specialist, leading Spice and Sage to Best in Show victories.Kaz Hosaka, a prominent Japanese-born dog handler who guided two miniature poodles to Best in Show victories at the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show — the second one just last month — died on Sunday in Langhorne, Pa. He was 65.His wife, Roxanne Wolf, said the cause was a traumatic brain injury as a result of a fall.Mr. Hosaka was a masterly handler for more than 40 years. Edge, a lifestyle magazine, recently said he was “to the poodle world what Michael Jordan is to basketball. Smooth, clever, elegant and nearly unbeatable.”In a profile in The New York Times in 2009, he was described as “an artist who tends his poodles’ poufs as if they were bonsai trees from his native Japan.”Mr. Hosaka radiated intensity, from the backstage grooming area to the green carpeted show rings, said David Frei, a former voice of the televised Westminster show and the club’s former communications director.“When he’d walk in someone’s ring, other handlers would say, ‘Oh,’” Mr. Frei said in an interview, “and judges would say that must be a pretty good dog if he’s handling it.”Mr. Hosaka was a poodle specialist who handled all three size varieties: miniatures, toys and standards. He showed the winningest toy poodle in breed history, Ch. Smash JP Win a Victory, also known as Vikki, to 108 Bests in Show and to the ranking of No. 1 dog in the country in 2007. The tiny exemplar of canine topiary also won the toy group at Westminster in 2007 and 2008, although she lost in the Best in Show competition each year.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

Rowlands, 94, played an older woman with dementia in the 2004 movie directed by her son, Nick Cassavetes.Gena Rowlands has Alzheimer’s disease, a late-life challenge for the Oscar-nominated actor who captivated Hollywood in the 1970s with her performance in “A Woman Under the Influence” and later portrayed a character with dementia in “The Notebook.”Rowlands’s son, Nick Cassavetes, the director of “The Notebook,” revealed the diagnosis in a recent interview with Entertainment Weekly, telling the magazine that she had been living with the disease for five years.“She’s in full dementia,” he said. “And it’s so crazy — we lived it, she acted it, and now it’s on us.”A former theater and television actress, Rowlands, 94, made 10 films across four decades with John Cassavetes, the independent film pioneer who was also her husband. She was nominated for the Academy Award for best actress for two of them: “A Woman Under the Influence” (1974), in which she plays a wife and mother who cracks under the burden of domestic harmony, and “Gloria” (1980), about a woman who helps a young boy escape the mob.When Rowlands received an honorary lifetime achievement Oscar in 2015, Laura Linney praised her as an actor who “smashed and destroyed the female stereotype of her time.”“Her work declares: You want to see a modern woman? Here is a modern woman,” Linney said.In 2004, a new generation of filmgoers came to know Rowlands for her portrayal of the older version of Allie in the romance drama “The Notebook.” (Rachel McAdams played the character in her younger years.)Rowlands’s tearful performance in a pivotal scene moved audiences and critics alike. Jessica Winter of The Village Voice credited Rowlands with “locating the terror and desolation wrought by the cruel betrayals of a failing mind.”In an interview with O magazine published the year “The Notebook” was released, Rowlands said her own mother had experienced Alzheimer’s.“I went through that with my mother, and if Nick hadn’t directed the film, I don’t think I would have gone for it — it’s just too hard,” she said.After “The Notebook,” Rowlands made several more appearances in films and television shows, including in “The Skeleton Key” and the detective series “Monk.” Her last appearance in a feature film was in 2014, when she played a retiree who befriends her gay dance instructor in “Six Dance Lessons in Six Weeks.” More

Also, a new poll on the eve of the debate. Here’s the latest at the end of Wednesday.The Supreme Court seems poised to temporarily allow emergency abortions in Idaho when a woman’s health is at risk, according to a copy of what appeared to be the court’s opinion that was posted today, and then removed, from the court’s website.The majority’s unsigned opinion said that the case was “dismissed as improvidently granted” — rather than decided on merits — according to the 22-page document, which was published this afternoon by Bloomberg News. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented.A spokeswoman for the Supreme Court said that the document had been “inadvertently” uploaded by its publications unit. She declined to confirm whether the decision was final, saying only that it “will be issued in due course.”If the document does reflect a final decision, it would reinstate a ruling by a lower federal court that had allowed hospitals in Idaho to perform emergency abortions if necessary to protect the health of the mother, effectively narrowing the state’s near-total ban. It would be the second time this term that the justices have deflected ruling on the merits of abortion.In related news, the Supreme Court officially released two opinions today. In the first, a significant win for the Biden administration, the justices rejected a Republican challenge that sought to prevent the government from contacting social media platforms to combat what it said was misinformation. In the second case, the court limited an anti-corruption law.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

I asked what you want moderators to ask Biden and Trump at the debate. You had many thoughts.Tomorrow night, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash of CNN have a big job: asking two unpopular men who have been president what they would do with a second term.The stakes could not be higher. President Biden and former President Donald Trump have starkly different visions for the presidency and the future of the country. This will be their first meeting since 2020, and they don’t have another planned until September.I don’t know if we’ll get the debate we want, or just the debate we deserve, but I do know that the questions Tapper and Bash choose to ask really matter. So we at On Politics would humbly and helpfully like to offer some ideas. Your ideas.Last week, I asked readers to tell me the questions you hope to hear at the debate, and I received hundreds of insightful and occasionally trollish responses. It’s clear you are hungry for a debate about issues that aren’t getting a lot of attention on the campaign trail. You’re also looking for Biden and Trump to convince you why, in their second go-round, you should get excited about them. And you want both of them to address their own ages, and not just each other’s.Below, I’ve laid out some of the questions that stood out to me most, with some small edits for clarity and style. Hope you’re reading, Jake and Dana. No need to thank us!Pressing two presidentsThe 2024 election is a contest between two men who have a cold, hard record of being president, which many of you hope the moderators will dig into. James Hall, an independent voter from Colorado, offered a question I liked for its directness.What have you done that makes you think you deserve to be the president of the United States again?Anne McKelvey, a lifelong Pennsylvanian, wants to know about both men’s regrets.What do you feel was your biggest mistake during your presidency?Trump and the future of democracyMany of you want the stakes for democracy to be clearly spelled out onstage — especially when it comes to Trump’s plans for a second term. You want him to be asked directly about his promise to be a “dictator” on Day 1, and about my colleagues’ reporting that he plans to use the government to seek revenge on his political opponents.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