The Daily

On Saturday morning, the doctors treating President Trump for the coronavirus held a news conference outside Walter Reed National Military Medical Center — a show of strength, aimed at reassuring the American public that he was in capable hands.But instead of allaying concern, it raised questions, casting doubt on the timeline of the president’s illness and the seriousness of his condition. We speak to Maggie Haberman and Peter Baker, White House correspondents for The Times, about the efforts to control the narrative, and pick through what is known about the president’s condition a month before the election.Guest:Maggie Haberman and Peter Baker, White House correspondents for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: The president made a surprise outing from the hospital in an effort to show his improvement, but the murky and shifting narrative of his illness was rewritten again with grim new details.Dr. Sean P. Conley, who acknowledged that he

They came from Tel Aviv, Aleppo and a “small house by the river.” They were artists, whiskey drinkers and mbira players. They were also fathers, sisters and best friends.Today, we hear people from around the world reflect on those they’ve lost. For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

They came from Tel Aviv, Aleppo and a “small house by the river.” They were artists, whiskey drinkers and mbira players. They were also fathers, sisters and best friends.Today, we hear people from around the world reflect on those they’ve lost. For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

They came from Tel Aviv, Aleppo and a “small house by the river.” They were artists, whiskey drinkers and mbira players. They were also fathers, sisters and best friends.Today, we hear people from around the world reflect on those they’ve lost. For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

He assured the country the coronavirus would “disappear” soon. Then he tested positive. We explore how President Trump testing positive for the coronavirus could affect the last days of the 2020 race — and consider what might happen next.Guests: Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, White House correspondents for The Times.For more information about today's episode, visit: nytimes.com/thedaily. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

He assured the country the coronavirus would “disappear” soon. Then he tested positive. We explore how President Trump testing positive for the coronavirus could affect the last days of the 2020 race — and consider what might happen next.Guests: Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, White House correspondents for The Times.For more information about today's episode, visit: nytimes.com/thedaily. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

He assured the country the coronavirus would “disappear” soon. Then he tested positive. We explore how President Trump testing positive for the coronavirus could affect the last days of the 2020 race — and consider what might happen next.Guests: Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman, White House correspondents for The Times.For more information about today's episode, visit: nytimes.com/thedaily. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

This episode contains strong language. During much of this election cycle, Julius Irving of Gainesville, Fla., spent his days trying to get former felons registered to vote.He would tell them about Florida’s Amendment Four, a ballot initiative that extended the franchise to those who had, in the past, been convicted on felony charges — it added an estimated 1.5 million people to the electorate, the nation’s largest voting expansion in four decades.On today’s episode, Nicholas Casey, a national politics reporter, spends time with Mr. Irving in Gainesville and explores the voting rights battle in Florida.Guest: Nicholas Casey, a national politics reporter for The New York Times. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: Former prisoners can now go to the polls in Florida. But fines remain one obstacle. Believing anything will make a difference is another. That’s where Julius Irving comes in. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from p

This episode contains strong language. During much of this election cycle, Julius Irving of Gainesville, Fla., spent his days trying to get former felons registered to vote.He would tell them about Florida’s Amendment Four, a ballot initiative that extended the franchise to those who had, in the past, been convicted on felony charges — it added an estimated 1.5 million people to the electorate, the nation’s largest voting expansion in four decades.On today’s episode, Nicholas Casey, a national politics reporter, spends time with Mr. Irving in Gainesville and explores the voting rights battle in Florida.Guest: Nicholas Casey, a national politics reporter for The New York Times. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: Former prisoners can now go to the polls in Florida. But fines remain one obstacle. Believing anything will make a difference is another. That’s where Julius Irving comes in. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from p

This episode contains strong language. During much of this election cycle, Julius Irving of Gainesville, Fla., spent his days trying to get former felons registered to vote.He would tell them about Florida’s Amendment Four, a ballot initiative that extended the franchise to those who had, in the past, been convicted on felony charges — it added an estimated 1.5 million people to the electorate, the nation’s largest voting expansion in four decades.On today’s episode, Nicholas Casey, a national politics reporter, spends time with Mr. Irving in Gainesville and explores the voting rights battle in Florida.Guest: Nicholas Casey, a national politics reporter for The New York Times. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: Former prisoners can now go to the polls in Florida. But fines remain one obstacle. Believing anything will make a difference is another. That’s where Julius Irving comes in. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from p

The pandemic will mean that many more Americans vote by mail this year.All 50 states require people to register before they can cast a mail-in vote. But from there, the rules diverge wildly.And a lot could still change. Our correspondent Luke Broadwater, a reporter in Washington, says there are more than 300 challenges to voting-related rules winding through courts across the country.Americans should probably brace for a different kind of election night — it could be days or longer before the full picture of results emerges.Guest: Luke Broadwater, a congressional reporter for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: Republicans fear that President Trump’s messaging on voting by mail could depress turnout. But Democrats worry an overreliance on the mail could leave more of their votes uncounted.A New York Times Magazine investigation found that misleading and false claims about widespread voter fraud are part of a long disinformation effort — on

The pandemic will mean that many more Americans vote by mail this year.All 50 states require people to register before they can cast a mail-in vote. But from there, the rules diverge wildly.And a lot could still change. Our correspondent Luke Broadwater, a reporter in Washington, says there are more than 300 challenges to voting-related rules winding through courts across the country.Americans should probably brace for a different kind of election night — it could be days or longer before the full picture of results emerges.Guest: Luke Broadwater, a congressional reporter for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: Republicans fear that President Trump’s messaging on voting by mail could depress turnout. But Democrats worry an overreliance on the mail could leave more of their votes uncounted.A New York Times Magazine investigation found that misleading and false claims about widespread voter fraud are part of a long disinformation effort — on

The pandemic will mean that many more Americans vote by mail this year.All 50 states require people to register before they can cast a mail-in vote. But from there, the rules diverge wildly.And a lot could still change. Our correspondent Luke Broadwater, a reporter in Washington, says there are more than 300 challenges to voting-related rules winding through courts across the country.Americans should probably brace for a different kind of election night — it could be days or longer before the full picture of results emerges.Guest: Luke Broadwater, a congressional reporter for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: Republicans fear that President Trump’s messaging on voting by mail could depress turnout. But Democrats worry an overreliance on the mail could leave more of their votes uncounted.A New York Times Magazine investigation found that misleading and false claims about widespread voter fraud are part of a long disinformation effort — on

This episode contains strong language.Both presidential candidates had clear goals for their first debate on Tuesday.For Joseph R. Biden Jr., the contest was an opportunity to consolidate his lead in polls before Election Day. President Trump’s task was, politically, a taller order — to change the course of a race that he seems to be losing. His tactics for doing that emerged quickly: interrupt and destabilize.The result was a chaotic 90-minute back-and-forth, an often ugly melee in which the two major party nominees expressed levels of acrid contempt for each other.We speak to our correspondent Alexander Burns about the mood and themes of the debate and whether any of it moved the dial for the election.Guest: Alexander Burns, a national political correspondent for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: With cross talk, lies and mockery, President Trump made little attempt to reassure swing voters about his leadership. Mr. Biden hit back: “Th

This episode contains strong language.Both presidential candidates had clear goals for their first debate on Tuesday.For Joseph R. Biden Jr., the contest was an opportunity to consolidate his lead in polls before Election Day. President Trump’s task was, politically, a taller order — to change the course of a race that he seems to be losing. His tactics for doing that emerged quickly: interrupt and destabilize.The result was a chaotic 90-minute back-and-forth, an often ugly melee in which the two major party nominees expressed levels of acrid contempt for each other.We speak to our correspondent Alexander Burns about the mood and themes of the debate and whether any of it moved the dial for the election.Guest: Alexander Burns, a national political correspondent for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: With cross talk, lies and mockery, President Trump made little attempt to reassure swing voters about his leadership. Mr. Biden hit back: “Th

This episode contains strong language.Both presidential candidates had clear goals for their first debate on Tuesday.For Joseph R. Biden Jr., the contest was an opportunity to consolidate his lead in polls before Election Day. President Trump’s task was, politically, a taller order — to change the course of a race that he seems to be losing. His tactics for doing that emerged quickly: interrupt and destabilize.The result was a chaotic 90-minute back-and-forth, an often ugly melee in which the two major party nominees expressed levels of acrid contempt for each other.We speak to our correspondent Alexander Burns about the mood and themes of the debate and whether any of it moved the dial for the election.Guest: Alexander Burns, a national political correspondent for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: With cross talk, lies and mockery, President Trump made little attempt to reassure swing voters about his leadership. Mr. Biden hit back: “Th

Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig, investigative reporters for The Times, have pored over two decades and thousands of pages of documents on Donald J. Trump’s tax information, up to and including his time in the White House.What they found was an existential threat to the image he has constructed about his wealth and lifestyle. The tax documents consistently appeared to call into question the business acumen he has cited in his presidential campaign and throughout his public life.The records suggest that whenever Mr. Trump was closely involved in the creation and running of a business, it was more likely to fail. They show no payments of federal income taxes in 11 of 18 years that The Times examined, and reveal a decade-long audit by the Internal Revenue Service that questions the legitimacy of a $72.9 million tax refund. They also point to a reckoning on the horizon: The president appears to be personally on the hook for loans totaling $421 million, most of which is coming due within four years.We speak to Rus

Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig, investigative reporters for The Times, have pored over two decades and thousands of pages of documents on Donald J. Trump’s tax information, up to and including his time in the White House.What they found was an existential threat to the image he has constructed about his wealth and lifestyle. The tax documents consistently appeared to call into question the business acumen he has cited in his presidential campaign and throughout his public life.The records suggest that whenever Mr. Trump was closely involved in the creation and running of a business, it was more likely to fail. They show no payments of federal income taxes in 11 of 18 years that The Times examined, and reveal a decade-long audit by the Internal Revenue Service that questions the legitimacy of a $72.9 million tax refund. They also point to a reckoning on the horizon: The president appears to be personally on the hook for loans totaling $421 million, most of which is coming due within four years.We speak to Rus

Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig, investigative reporters for The Times, have pored over two decades and thousands of pages of documents on Donald J. Trump’s tax information, up to and including his time in the White House.What they found was an existential threat to the image he has constructed about his wealth and lifestyle. The tax documents consistently appeared to call into question the business acumen he has cited in his presidential campaign and throughout his public life.The records suggest that whenever Mr. Trump was closely involved in the creation and running of a business, it was more likely to fail. They show no payments of federal income taxes in 11 of 18 years that The Times examined, and reveal a decade-long audit by the Internal Revenue Service that questions the legitimacy of a $72.9 million tax refund. They also point to a reckoning on the horizon: The president appears to be personally on the hook for loans totaling $421 million, most of which is coming due within four years.We speak to Rus

Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s pick to fill the empty seat on the Supreme Court, is a product of the conservative legal movement of the 1980s. She clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia, a giant of conservative jurisprudence, and his influence is evident throughout her judicial career.Opponents of abortion, in particular, are hoping that her accession to the Supreme Court would be a crucial step forward for their movement.Her nomination ceremony in the Rose Garden this weekend appeared unremarkable. But it took place just weeks from a presidential election and barely eight days after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.Republicans have the votes in the Senate to confirm Judge Barrett and a timetable that suggests that they would be able to do so before Election Day. With her path seemingly clear, we reflect on Judge Barrett’s career and her judicial philosophy.Guest: Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court for The New York Times.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedail