• China's J-20 stealth fighter lacks a gun, something which the US's stealth fighters made a point to include.
• Dropping the gun from the J-20 likely means its not useful as a dogfighter, and that many older US jets could defeat it in head-on close range fights.
• But the lack of gun also indicates a new focus for the J-20 which may be more modern and relevant to real aerial combat than even the US's F-22 and F-35. 

China's J-20 stealth fighter jet represents a massive milestone for Beijing's armed forces and the first stealth aircraft ever fielded outside the US, but the impressive effort still falls noticeably short in some areas.

The J-20 doesn't have a cannon, and represents the only entry into the world of fifth-generation fighters that skips the gun, which has seen 100 years of aerial combat. 

Enemy aircraft can't jam a fighter jet's gun. Flares and chaff will never fool a gun, which needs no radar. Bullets rip out of the gun already above the speed of sound and need not wait for rocket boosters to kick in.

Read more:The F-35 was once trounced by F-16s in dogfights, but it just proved it can out-turn older jets

While the F-22, the US's fifth-generation stealth superiority fighter can hold just eight missiles, its 20mm rotary cannon holds 480 rounds it can expend in about five seconds of non-stop firing. 

The US's other fifth-generation stealth jet, the F-35, has already used its cannon in combat missions in Afghanistan.

But not every jet needs a gun, and not every jet needs to dogfight.

The J-20 doesn't even consider dogfights

The J-20's lack of a gun shows that the "Chinese recognize that being in a dogfight is not a mission that they’re building for," retired US Marine Corps Lt. Col. David Berke, a former F-22 pilot and F-35B squadron commander, told Business Insider. 

"They probably want to avoid a dogfight at all costs," he continued. 

Business Insider previously spoke to air combat experts who said that the J-20 likely couldn't compete with even older US jets like the F-15 in head-on dogfights, but that the J-20 likely didn't need to.

Read more: China revealed the J-20 stealth fighter's mission — and even the F-15 could likely wreck it

The Chinese jet, with powerful sensors, long-range missiles, and a stealth design, poses a serious threat to US Air Force refueling, early warning, and other support planes. Tactically, beating back these logistical planes with J-20s could allow China to keep the US operating at an arms length in a conflict.

But increasingly, it looks like the J-20 would lose handily to US fighter jets in outright combat, and that may be the point.

According to Berke, guns only work to around 800 feet to score aerial kills. 

"I’d rather have a missile that's good to 800 feet that goes out to 20 miles than a gun that goes to 800 feet and closer but nothing else. ... Once you start getting outside of 1,000 feet, you can start using missiles," said Berke. 

Because the J-20 wasn't meant as a close-in brawler, the Chinese ditched it. This will save room and weight on board the jet to allow for other technologies.

Read more:The real purpose behind China's mysterious J-20 combat jet

Also, the mission of the gun in air-to-air combat may be disappearing. 

The US started building the F-22 in the 1990s with a hangover from combat losses to air-to-air guns in Vietnam after fielding jets without guns and relying solely on missiles. The F-35 includes a gun because it has a broad set of missions which include close air support and air-to-ground fires. 

"In air-to-air, the cannon serves one very specific and limited purpose only useful in a very predictable phase of flight, which is a dogfight," said Berke. 

"The Chinese probably recognize that [dogfights are] not where they want the airframe to be and that's not the investment they want to make," he continued.

Read more:Trump's new Pentagon chief reportedly hates the F-35 — here's what the US could have made instead

"Utilizing a gun against a highly maneuverable platform is an incredibly challenging task," Berke said. In World War II, propeller-driven planes frequently engaged in turning fights where they attempted to get behind each other and let the guns rip and bombers flew with turret gunners covering the whole compass. 

But today's F-22s, J-20s, Su-35s, and other highly maneuverable jets give the guns an "extremely limited use" in combat, according to Berke. 

Berke pointed out that the US likely has not scored an air-to-air guns kill in decades.

A Business Insider review found that the last time a US plane shot down an enemy aircraft with guns, it was likely the Cold War-era tank buster the A-10 that downed an Iraqi helicopter in 1991— hardly applicable to the world of fifth-generation fighter aircraft. 

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside the Coast Guard's 8-week boot camp where recruits go through extreme physical tests and brutal 'smoke sessions'

• The New England Patriots will face the Los Angeles Rams in Super Bowl LIII on Sunday, February 3.
• Odds are already out for who will win Super Bowl MVP, with plenty of interesting long shot bets available on both the Patriots and Rams.
• Both quarterbacks are the heavy favorites to win the award, but surprises do happen — two of the past five Super Bowl MVPs have been defensive players.
• See the odds for Super Bowl MVP below and follow all of Business Insider's Super Bowl LIII coverage here.

The build to Super Bowl LIII is officially on, with the New England Patriots and Los Angeles Rams set to meet at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta on Sunday, February 3 to battle for the Lombardi Trophy.

No one knows how the game will shake out, but that hasn't stopped bookmakers from offering odds on which player will win Super Bowl MVP when the final whistle is blown.

There are a few recent trends in Super Bowl MVPs that one should be aware of before betting. First and foremost, quarterbacks are the most likely winners, having taken the award in nine of the past 12 championship games.

Beyond quarterbacks, game-changing wide receivers and defensive standouts usually have the best chance of having a big day and being recognized as the best player on the field.

While you might think that running backs would be a wise wager for Super Bowl MVP, none have won since Terrell Davis in 1998 — three linebackers and a safety have all won the award more recently.

This year, the Rams and Patriots present plenty of compelling candidates to take home the award. Both quarterbacks are the predictably heavy favorites, but the Rams and Patriots are both so stocked with potential breakout players that some interesting long shots emerge if you think the game might wind up getting a bit weird.

Below we break down the 15 players with the best odds to win Super Bowl MVP this year.

Odds come courtesy of bovada.lv, and are current as of 1/22/19.

READ MORE: Check out all of our Super Bowl LIII coverage here

Josh Reynolds (66/1)

NFC Championship stats: 4 receptions, 74 receiving yards, 1 carry, 16 rushing yards

One thing to know: Josh Reynolds has stepped up in the absence of injured wide receiver Cooper Kupp as an important pass-catcher for the Rams offense. He's also used in some rushing and semi-trick plays that Los Angeles likes to run in big spots. A few touchdowns and one or two big conversions on memorable plays, and it's not inconceivable he wins the award.

Dante Fowler Jr. (66/1)

NFC Championship stats: 5 total tackles, 2 tackles for loss, 0.5 sacks, 2 quarterback hits

One thing to know: Defensive players have won Super Bowl MVP twice in the past five years, but they need to have a huge game, and usually force some turnovers or even score to do it.

Aqib Talib (66/1)

NFC Championship stats: 2 solo tackles

One thing to know: As a former Patriot, Talib would certainly fit the MVP narrative if he had a big day that contributed to a Rams upset victory.

• Apple sees potential opportunities if climate change increases the amount of extreme weather or government regulation. 
• One possible effect named by Apple in a new report is that its safety features, including a flashlight, could increase the demand for iPhones.
• But there are a lot of risks for businesses created by climate change as well. 

The dangers of climate change — from rising sea levels to more frequent droughts — are expected to have a devastating impact on society. 

For Apple, a changing climate could also mean increased customer loyalty and demand for iPhones. 

That's one of the conclusions in a report Apple produced about its business, which was published on Tuesday by CDP, a nonprofit that collects information from companies about their environmental impact.

Apple is among numerous large companies, including Walt Disney Co and Bank of America, to provide similar reports to the organization identifying "climate-related" risks and opportunities with the potential to materially impact its business.

The surprisingly detailed report includes items about risks, opportunities, and the specific personnel at the company overseeing Apple's environmental program. Apple confirmed that the answers were submitted on behalf of Apple and that the report is voluntary and isn't required by a government regulator.  While the estimates are based on public information, the report offers an interesting assessment of how Apple views the impact of climate change on its business. 

For example, Apple said it would "more likely than not" benefit if various governments increased their rules about how power-efficient electronics need to be. "Apple would be well positioned to benefit from such regulations, due to our ongoing focus on the energy efficiency of our products," the company said in the report. 

The potential benefit? $2.3 billion, calculated by estimating a hypothetical increase in Apple's total sales. 

Another eye-opening opportunity that Apple identified in the report is that increased severe weather events could increase the demand for iPhones. 

"Mobile devices can serve as the backbone communication network in emergency and quasi-emergency situations," Apple wrote. "They can serve as a flashlight or a siren; they can provide first aid instructions; they can act as a radio; and they can be charged for many days via car batteries or even hand cranks. Over time, as people begin to experience severe weather events with greater frequency, we expect an increasing need for confidence and preparedness in the arena of personal safety and the well-being of loved ones."

"This potential need reinforces a trend we believe is already in evidence following the events of 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, Superstorm Sandy, and Hurricane Harvey," it continued. 

Apple said that its features like "SOS," which enables iPhones and Apple Watches to contact emergency services easily, could lead to "increased customer loyalty and demand."

Apple said that the positive impact from climate change could be as large as $920 million, and it's "about as likely as not." That was calculated by adding an additional hypothetical 0.5% to its current brand value, as estimated by Interbrand. 

"Over the past few years, for example, we enabled iPhone to receive Wireless Emergency Alerts, including alerts from the National Weather Service and local law enforcement. These alerts also appear on Apple Watch. We also offer a free 'find friends' app, and a fast-access flashlight," Apple wrote. 

Apple also said that it could be successful in making products which are attractive to people who have concerns about climate change or rising electricity prices.

Addressing risks 

But in addition to opportunities, there are still severe risks to Apple's business that could be caused by climate change. 

For example, Apple said that severe weather events could "strain the infrastructure systems" it needs to manufacture and sell its products.

Potential cost? $300 million — a significant sum, though a fraction of Apple's 2017 operating expenses of $194 billion.

Apple also said that being environmentally conscious was important for its reputation. " For example, if Apple is not transparent and does not adequately explain its actions to its stakeholders, public misconception could create the perception that the Company is not environmentally responsible," Apple wrote. 

"Though any one incident is unlikely to affect the Company’s reputation, over time and cumulatively a perceived lack of transparency could detract from Apple’s brand value, and could reduce people’s inclination to purchase from, invest in, or work for Apple," it continued.

So far, according to the report, many aspects of Apple's business haven't been affected, but Apple is planning for the future. One example that it provides is that at its new headquarters, it has installed drought-resistant trees and built berms — an investment of about $60 million. 

Apple issues an environmental report every year and 100% of its stores, offices, and other operations are powered by renewable energy, the company proudly says. Leading Apple's internal environmental efforts is Lisa Jackson, a former head of the US Environmental Protection Agency, who reports directly to Apple CEO Tim Cook. 

"Today, we remain focused on three priorities where we and our stakeholders believe Apple can make the biggest difference," Jackson said in a letter published last April, citing climate change, conserving resources, and using safer materials as key priorities. 

Apple was among 30 U.S.-based companies to receive an "A" rating from CDP.

SEE ALSO: Apple is reportedly planning to change a key component of every iPhone lineup by 2020, and now one of its major suppliers is scrambling

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How Apple went from a $1 trillion company to losing over 20% of its share price

• The US consulate in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, has issued a warning about the area to US citizens.
• The alert came a day after a series of attacks on police in Juarez, believed to be the work of organized crime.
• Violence has risen throughout Mexico in recent years, and the US government has issued warnings about dangerous parts of the country.

After a series of attacks on police in Ciudad Juarez last week, the US Consulate General there issued an alert about potential violence the city, which borders El Paso, Texas.

In six attacks on January 17, gunmen wounded at least eight police officers, two critically, and torched a bus, according to the El Paso Times.

Just before 3 p.m. that day, gunmen opened fire on police in the eastern part of the city, wounding three. Minutes later, gunmen fired on other officers, including a policewoman who was hospitalized in critical condition.

A little before 4 p.m., police stopped an attack on an officer in downtown Juarez, but that was followed an hour later in the eastern part of the city by an attack that left four officers wounded and hospitalized in stable condition. Shots were fired at a police station after that.

Just before 8 p.m., several suspects were arrested after gunmen fired on a passing police patrol car in the eastern part of the city.

The driver of a public bus told local media that gunmen had forced their way onto the bus, robbing passengers and telling the driver to turn the bus to block the street. The assailants poured gas inside the bus and onto passengers, telling them to get off before torching the bus. No one was hurt.

On January 18, the US consulate in Juarez issued an alert for US citizens and personnel, saying it was aware of "a series of connected attacks" on police in Juarez and in Chihuahua City, the state capital.

"Authorities believe that members of organized criminal groups are carrying out these attacks, which are expected to continue," the alert said, adding that US personnel should avoid police stations "to the extent possible until further notice."

Read more: Here's how Mexican cartels actually operate in the United States

The alert advised US citizens to be aware of their surroundings, drive with doors locked and windows up, and be prepared to use alternative routes when traveling between frequent locations.

Attacks on US government personnel in Mexico are rare, but they have happened before. In 2010, at the height of a period of drug-related violence in Juarez, three people, including two US citizens, were gunned down after leaving a party at the consulate in what former gang members testified was a case of mistaken identity.

A 'virulent reaction'

The city public-security chief in Juarez has ordered police stations to reinforce security, patrolling and closing streets. Local newspaper El Diario also reported that streets had been closed to protect police guarding hospitalized gang members from retaliatory attacks.

The day after the attacks, the mayor of Juarez said they were a "virulent reaction" to recent drug and weapon seizures in the city.

Authorities said more than 120 pounds of crystal meth had been seized between late December and January, with the most recent seizure on the morning of January 16. Police have also arrested dozens of alleged members La Linea and Mexicles, gangs suspected of involvement in the attacks, including a suspected leader of the Mexicles gang.

La Linea is believed to be aligned with the Juarez cartel, and Mexicles has been linked to the Sinaloa cartel. The two gangs were rivals but have become partners, according to local authorities.

Juarez's location on the border — socially and culturally intertwined with El Paso — makes it valuable to drug traffickers. Between 2008 and 2012, the Juarez and Sinaloa cartels battled for control of smuggling routes through the city, leaving more than 10,000 dead and making it one of the most violent places in the world.

The violence declined significantly after 2012, but a local gang leader said in 2016 that trafficking had continued and warned that drug-related violence in the city would only increase.

Read more: Mexican troops are in the streets to fight the drug war, and the country's defense chief says legalization may be 'a way out'

And the past four years have seen an increase in killing. After 269 homicides in 2015, the city had 470 in 2016, followed by 636 in 2017 and 1,004 in 2018, according to government data. Through mid-January, the city reportedly had 46 homicides.

Since Gov. Javier Corral took office in October 2016, 66 officers have been killed in Chihuahua state — 29 of them in 2018 and two so far this year. Military police have been sent to Juarez as part of President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's national-security plan. About 70 arrived in early December.

As in much of Mexico, the violence in Juarez has been attributed in part to the ongoing fragmentation of and fighting between organized-crime groups. In Chihuahua state, as in other parts of the country, changes in government, which can jumble narco-politico alliances, has also been blamed for some violence.

The bloodshed in Juarez has also been stoked by growing competition over cross-border smuggling by major groups like the Sinaloa and Jalisco New Generation cartels, as well as by fighting for the burgeoning local drug market, particularly meth sales, led mainly by smaller gangs like La Linea, Mexicles, and Barrio Azteca.

Experts have said most of the recent fighting is mainly between the Juarez cartel and Barrio Azteca, one-time allies. The arrival of meth, pushed largely by the Jalisco New Generation cartel, has added to conflict, with members of Azteca seeing the drug as a threat to their business, according to University of Texas at El Paso professor Howard Campbell.

In 2015, the city had 1,647 cases of narcomenudeo, or street-level drug sales. That rose to 2,779 in 2016 and to 6,576 in 2017, declining only slightly to 6,394 in 2018.

"Most of the homicides ... are from a fight over the point of sale of drugs at [the retail level] or they are detentions of people who have a high rank inside the criminal structure, and in this manner they have fragmented ... some homicides have as cause that motive," Jorge Nava, prosecutor for the northern district of Chihuahua, said this month.

SEE ALSO: Homicides in Mexico rose 33% in 2018, setting a new record for the 2nd year in a row

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I spent a day with Border Patrol agents at the US-Mexico border

The Insider Picks team writes about stuff we think you'll like. Business Insider has affiliate partnerships, so we get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

• With society's growing reliance on technology, educators are putting a greater emphasis on learning STEM skills (science, tech, engineering, and math).
• LittleBits has emerged as one of the leaders in STEM learning resources for all genders at home and in the classroom.
• The Avengers Hero Inventor Kit pairs with your iOS or Android smart device and encourages creativity, teaches coding, and gives the basics of circuits and electrical engineering.
• Though the LittleBits Avengers Hero Inventor Kit is expensive (currently $150 on Amazon), there are more than 18 in-app activities, limitless customization, and you can use the kit with other LittleBits sets.

One of the biggest challenges in my house is limiting my sons' screen time. Jerome, who's 15, usually streams YouTube videos while playing first-person shooter games. And we had to block YouTube for Bucky, who's five, because there is just too much garbage on there that kids can get to. Now, he enjoys Peppa Pig, Paw Patrol, PJ Masks, and other kid favorites. New toys tend to divert their attention from screens for a short time, but they generally lose interest and are quickly back to zoning out in front of the tube.

This is where STEM learning toys are helpful. The best STEM toys have open play, where your child can use their imagination to create their own experience. LittleBits is one of the top makers of kits that nurture science, tech, engineering, arts, and math. We had the opportunity to try out the new Avengers Hero Inventor Kit recently for free. Here are our experiences with it.

Getting started with the Avengers Hero Inventor Kit

The Avengers Hero Inventor Kit comes with an Iron Man arm and stand, a gauntlet, two sheets of decals, and nine "bits." Bits are circuitry building blocks that serve as the basis for each of LittleBits' kits. Your child can use the bits for various creations.

Everything you need comes in the box, except you will need a smart device that runs on iOS 10.0 or later or Android 5.0 or later. Once you download the app, your child can easily follow the step-by-step interactive tutorials to get started. For example, one of the first creations is connecting the power supply bit to the LED matrix bit to get the matrix to light up. The circuitry then slides into the gauntlet and can be worn on the forearm and hand of your young one.

Playing with the kit

As is his MO, Jerome immediately went to work on the basic setup: getting the gauntlet to light up and putting it on his brother's arm. Then, Jerome was done with the kit. He's advanced past the basic STEM learning toys, and his video games were calling.

On the other hand, Bucky kept coming back to the kit. The kit is designed for kids eight years and older. At 5, Bucky is a little too young to enjoy all that the kit has to offer, but there were still plenty of features he could enjoy with my help. I like toys that keep him busy when I'm trying to get work done, and this is not the toy for that. But, it did a great job of facilitating rewarding father-son time.

About once a week, he'd see the set sitting on the shelf and ask to play with it, and we'd spend about 30 to 60 minutes with it. When it came to self-directed playing, his favorite part was changing the colors and patterns on the LED matrix. He liked creating robot faces.

With the step-by-step instructions, videos, and tutorials, there's essentially no learning curve to this device. Your child just follows the directions, and they're on their way to superherodom. Or, in my case, I followed the instructions, and Bucky was on his way to superherodom.

I really like that the bits from the Avengers Kit can be used with other LittleBits toys, including the Droid Inventor Kit that we already have. Plus, there are dozens of other bits you can purchase à la carte on the LittleBits website.

I was also impressed by the seemingly limitless possibilities for play thanks to the block coding fundamentals it teaches. By following the simple in-app steps, we were able to create a gauntlet that made cool superhero sounds and displayed our custom designs with different movements.

I'm excited to watch Bucky grow into this toy. As he learns to read, he'll be able to follow the directions on his own and get into the coding aspect to make his own creations. This is in stark contrast to the toy cars that he's been into recently and will likely grow out of.

A few quirks to consider

I learned the hard way that Bucky needs to be supervised when playing with the Avengers Hero Inventor Kit. At some point, he damaged the LED matrix, and it would no longer light. He didn't mention it to me — probably because he thought he might get in trouble. I just noticed that he hadn't played with the kit in a while. Fortunately, LittleBits has excellent customer service. I contacted them, and without flashing any media credentials, they happily sent me a replacement.

There were times when the app would just crash on us. I was not able to pinpoint what was doing it, but I think it may have had something to do with the Bluetooth functionality. At one point, when I disconnected the Bluetooth bit, the app crashed. Fortunately, it never crashed at critical moments.

The bottom line

At its current price of $150, I would be unlikely to buy the Avengers Hero Inventor Kit over other kits that LittleBits offers. The price is a bit steep, and the company offers several other excellent alternatives at a more affordable price point. Fortunately, in the last few months, the price has dipped significantly lower, and I'd assume the price will decrease again in the future. If you find the kit offered at a lower price, I strongly recommend buying it if you have a child aged eight years or older in your life who is interested in the STEM disciplines.

Though your child will still utilize a screen to play with the Avengers Hero Inventor Kit, it will be positive screen time that will engage both sides of their brain. So, you can feel less guilt!

Buy the LittleBits Avengers Hero Inventor Kit on Amazon for $150

Join the conversation about this story »

This is a preview of a research report from Business Insider Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service. To learn more about Business Insider Intelligence, click here.

Regtech solutions seemed to offer the solution to financial institutions' (FIs) compliance woes when they first came to prominence around 24 months ago, gaining support from regulators and investors alike. 

However, many of the companies offering these solutions haven't scaled as might have been expected from the initial hype, and have failed to follow the trajectory of firms in other segments of fintech.

This unexpected inertia in the regtech industry is likely to resolve over the next 12-18 months as other factors come into play that shift FIs' approach to regtech solutions, and as the companies offering them evolve. External factors driving this change include regulatory support of regtech solutions, and consultancies offering more help to FIs wanting to sift through solutions. Startups offering regtech solutions will also play a part by partnering with each other, forming industry organizations, and taking advantage of new opportunities.

This report from Business Insider Intelligence, Business Insider's premium research service, provides a brief overview of the current global financial regulatory compliance landscape, and the regtech industry's position within it. It then details the major drivers that will shift the dial on FIs' adoption of regtech over the next 12-18 months, as well as those that will propel startups offering regtech solutions to new heights. Finally, it outlines what impact these drivers will have, and gives insight into what the global regtech industry will look like by 2020.

Here are some of the key takeaways:

• Regulatory compliance is still a significant issue faced by global FIs. In 2018 alone, EU regulations MiFID II and PSD2 have come into effect, bringing with them huge handbooks and gigantic reporting requirements. 
• Regtech startups boast solutions that can ease FIs' compliance burden — but they are struggling to scale. 
• Some changes expected to drive greater adoption of these solutions in the next 12 to 18 months are: the ongoing evolution of startups' business models, increasing numbers of partnerships, regulators' promotion of regtech, changing attitudes to the segment among FIs, and consultancies helping to facilitate adoption.
• FIs will actively be using solutions from regtech startups by 2020, and startups will be collaborating in an organized fashion with each other and with FIs. Global regulators will have adopted regtech themselves, while continuing to act as advocates for the industry.

In full, the report:

• Reviews the major changes expected to hit the regtech segment in the next 12 to 18 months.
• Examines the drivers behind these changes, and how the proliferation of regtech will improve compliance for FIs.
• Provides our view on what the future of the regtech industry looks like through 2020.
  Get The Regtech Revisited Report
  

   

Join the conversation about this story »

• CNN host Chris Cuomo jumped into a Twitter debate Tuesday on whether Sen. Kamala Harris of California, who was born in Oakland, California, is constitutionally eligible for the White House because her parents are immigrants.
• In a tweet, Cuomo suggested that Harris should "deal with the allegation" to avoid trouble later down the campaign road. His audience quickly hit back, saying it was an example of "birtherism."
• The phrase was used when former President Barack Obama was in office, during which time President Donald Trump publicly questioned whether Obama was born in the US.
• Cuomo removed his tweet and apologized, saying Harris "has no duty to justify any such accusation."

CNN host Chris Cuomo landed himself in a bit of trouble Tuesday after seemingly suggesting that California Sen. Kamala Harris, who on Monday announced her candidacy for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, should prove that she was born in the US in order to avoid trouble later down the campaign trail.

Cuomo made the comment on Twitter after an alt-right conspiracy theorist and provocateur falsely said that Harris is ineligible for the Oval Office because her father, a Jamaican immigrant, and her mother, an Indian immigrant, were not legal residents for five years before her birth.

The theory also suggested that Harris cannot run for president because she spent part of her childhood in Canada. Regardless of her parents' immigration status at the time of her birth, Harris has the right to run for president because she was born in the US (Oakland, California), a right protected by Article 2, Section 1, of the US Constitution.

However, in a tweet, Cuomo seemed to suggest that Harris should prove her citizenship in order to avoid trouble later.

"And hopefully there will be no games where the issue keeps changing for righty accusers…and…the legit info abt Harris comes out to deal with the allegation ASAP. The longer there is no proof either way, the deeper the effect," Cuomo's tweet read. The comment was quickly deleted after swift rebuke from Cuomo's audience.

The CNN host quickly apologized, saying his comments were taken "literally the opposite way" he intended.

Read more: Here's why the firestorm over Ted Cruz's Canadian birth is nothing like the Obama 'birther' controversy

Cuomo's original comment, the false conspiracy theory, and the reaction to it alluded to the infamous birtherism claim that President Barack Obama was not born in the US. President Donald Trump, who was a private citizen at the time, pushed that idea, which was later co-opted by conservative and right-wing figures. Obama is a US citizen and was born in Hawaii.

Trump later disavowed the assertion during his own presidential campaign in 2016.

SEE ALSO: Trump is reviving the attack that made him politically famous — this time against a new target

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: MSNBC host Chris Hayes thinks President Trump's stance on China is 'not at all crazy'

• Officials can have a huge impact on the outcome of games, as both NFL conference championship games proved this year.
• John Parry will serve as referee for Super Bowl LIII between the Los Angeles Rams and the New England Patriots.
• Since Parry became a referee in 2012, the Rams are 7-0 in games that he has officiated, while the Patriots are just 9-5.
• Check out all of Business Insider's Super Bowl LIII coverage here.

If the NFL conference championship games taught us anything, it's how crucial an official's decision can be to the outcome of a game.

In the NFC Championship, the Saints were robbed of a spot in the Super Bowl due to a controversial no-call on what looked like an obvious pass interference penalty in the game's final minutes. In the AFC Championship, a close-up, slow-motion review overturned what could have been a momentum-swinging turnover.

Read more:Saints head coach Sean Payton called the league office minutes after losing NFC Championship over blown call

It's a hard truth about sports, but sometimes, an official's decision can make all the difference.

Understandably then, those that are selected to officiate the Super Bowl are the best in the league, chosen based on their performance throughout the season and experience through their careers.

This year, John Parry will be the referee of Super Bowl LIII, his third time on a Super Bowl time and the second time in the lead position.

Parry's selection might not be major news to most NFL fans, but one stark trend in his history tells us that it might be good news for the Los Angeles Rams.

Since Parry became a referee in 2007, the Rams are 7-0 in games that he has officiated. The Patriots also have a winning record when playing in games called by Parry, but their 9-5 mark is dotted with important losses — including the last Super Bowl that Parry worked, the Giants' second win over the Patriots in 2012.

This is not a suggestion that Parry favors the Rams in any way, but a trend is a trend, and given how important the officials proved themselves to be in the conference championship games, this is a trend that Rams fans should certainly be happy is on their side.

• More Super Bowl LIII coverage:

The Patriots added 8 new plays they'd never practiced the morning of the AFC title game, and one played a huge role in the win

Food and concessions at this year's Super Bowl will be ridiculously cheap compared to other recent games

Here's how much Super Bowl tickets cost, less than 2 weeks from game day

There's a Chick-fil-A in Atlanta's Mercedes-Benz Stadium — but the chain is refusing to open it on Super Bowl Sunday

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I went on Beyoncé's 22-day diet — and I lost 15 pounds

• A Northern California family experienced "five minutes of sheer terror" after their Nest surveillance camera was hacked, warning them of a North Korea missile attack, according to The Mercury News. 
• The camera rang out the detailed message: "North Korean intercontinental ballistic missiles headed to Los Angeles, Chicago and Ohio," though the family saw no such warning on television. 
• It is not the first time Nest products have been susceptible to hacks. In December, a hacker took control of one couple's camera and announced he was in their child's room.

One Northern California family was thrown into a panic when their Nest surveillance camera began blaring out a detailed message about North Korean intercontinental ballistic missiles headed to three metropolitan US cities, according to the Mercury News. 

"It warned that the United States had retaliated against Pyongyang and that people in the affected areas had three hours to evacuate," Laura Lyons told the Bay Area newspaper on Monday. "It sounded completely legit, and it was loud and got our attention right off the bat. It was five minutes of sheer terror and another 30 minutes trying to figure out what was going on."

Lyons and her husband found no such warning when they turned on the television or when they called 911. Their 8-year-old son, however, was so scared that he hid underneath the rug.

After a phone call to Nest customer service, Lyons and her husband learned they were victims of an increasingly common hack — so common, in fact, that just last month, another couple ran to their child's bedroom after they heard a message saying "I'm in your baby's room,"according to NBC News.

One hacker even made it his mission to tell Nest owners just how unsecure their product was by broadcasting his voice to between five and 10 home security cameras. 

A spokesperson for Nest did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment on the latest incident, but told the Mercury News that recent incidents were the result of compromised passwords that were exposed through breaches on other websites.

Nest marks a variety of smart home products, including security cameras and thermostats. The startup, founded by Tony Fadell, was bought by Google for $3.2 billion in 2014. It was later a standalone company when Google reorganized to Alphabet in 2015, then was folded back into Google's hardware division early last year. 

SEE ALSO: The market for tech products for aging baby boomers is expected to balloon to $20 billion by 2020. Here are some of the best

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How Apple went from a $1 trillion company to losing over 20% of its share price

In an increasingly digitized world, brick-and-mortar retailers are facing immense pressure to understand and accommodate their customers’ changing needs, including at the point of sale (POS). 

More than two years after the EMV liability shift in October 2015, most large merchants globally have upgraded their payment systems. And beyond upgrading to meet new standards, many major retailers are adopting full-feature, “smart” devices — and supplementing them with valuable tools and services — to help them better engage customers and build loyalty.

But POS solutions aren’t “one size fits all.” Small- and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) don't usually have the same capabilities as larger merchants, which often have the resources and funds to adopt robust solutions or develop them in-house. That's where app marketplaces come in: POS app marketplaces are platforms, typically deployed by POS providers, where developers can host third-party business apps that offer back-office services, like accounting and inventory, and customer-retention tools, like loyalty programs and coupons.

SMBs' growing needs present a huge opportunity for POS terminal providers, software providers, and resellers. The US counts roughly 8 million SMBs, or 99.7% of all businesses. Until now, constraints such as time and budget have made it difficult for SMBs to implement value-added services that meet their unique needs. But app marketplaces enable providers to cater to SMBs with specialized solutions. 

App marketplaces also alleviate some of the issues associated with the overcrowded payments space. Relatively new players that have effectively leveraged the rise of the digital economy, like mPOS firm Square, are increasingly encroaching on the payments industry, putting pricing pressure on payment hardware and service giants. This has diminished client loyalty as merchants seek out the most affordable solution, and it's resulted in lost revenue for providers. However, app marketplaces can be used as tools not only to build client loyalty, but also as a revenue booster — Verifone, for instance, charges developers 30% of net revenue for each installed app and a distribution fee for each free app.

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence looks at the drivers of POS app marketplaces and the legacy and challenger firms that are supplying them. The report also highlights the strategies these providers are employing, and the ways that they can capitalize on the emergence of this new market. Finally, it looks to the future of POS app marketplaces, and how they may evolve moving forward.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

• SMBs are a massive force in the US, which makes understanding their needs a necessity for POS terminal providers, software providers, and resellers — the US counts roughly 8 million SMBs, or 99.7% of all businesses.
• The entrance of new challengers into the payment space has put pricing pressure on the entire industry, forcing all of the players in the industry to find new solutions to keep customers loyal while also gaining a new revenue source.
• Major firms in the industry, like Verifone and Ingenico, have turned to value-added services, specifically app marketplaces, to not only build loyalty but also giving them a new revenue source — Verifone charges developers 30% of net revenue for each installed app and a distribution fee for each free app.
• According to a recent survey by Intuit, 68% of SMBs stated that they use an average of four apps to run their businesses. As developers flock to the space to grab a piece of the pie, it's likely that increased competition will lead to robust, revenue-generating marketplaces.
• And there are plenty of opportunities to build out app marketplace capabilities, such as in-person training, to further engage with users — 66% of app users would hire someone to train and educate them on which apps are right for their businesses. 

In full, the report:

• Identifies the factors that have changed how SMBs are choosing payment providers.  
• Discusses why firms in the payments industry have started to introduce app marketplaces over the last four years.
• Analyzes some of the most popular app marketplaces in the industry and identifies the strengths of each.
• Breaks down the concerns merchants have relating to app marketplaces, and discusses how providers can solve these issues.
• Explores what app marketplace providers will have to do going forward in order to avoid being outperformed in an industry that's becoming increasingly saturated. 

Subscribe to an All-Access pass to Business Insider Intelligence and gain immediate access to:

	This report and more than 250 other expertly researched reports
	Access to all future reports and daily newsletters
	Forecasts of new and emerging technologies in your industry
	And more!

Learn More

Purchase & download the full report from our research store

Join the conversation about this story »

• Search crews found a body matching the description of a missing Ennis, Texas woman on Monday morning.
• The body is being taken to the Dallas County Medical Examiner's Office for positive identification.
• Emily Wade, 38, disappeared on January 5 after going to a male co-worker's house to watch a movie.

The search for a missing Texas mother appears to have ended in tragedy.

On Monday morning, search crews found a body matching the description of 38-year-old Emily Wade, who went missing on January 5 after going to a male co-worker's house to watch a movie.

The body was found in a creek bed that authorities knew was flooding the night that Wade disappeared, the Ennis Police Department said in a press release.

The body has been transported to the Dallas County Medical Examiner's Office where they will make the identification and determine the cause of death.

"The Ennis Police Department would like to share our appreciation for all of the volunteers and assisting agencies that have spent countless hours over the past two weeks searching for Emily Wade," the police statement reads. "Our thoughts and prayers go out to the family and friends of Emily Wade."

Ennis Police Lt. Mike Hopson told INSIDER last week that Wade had recently moved back to the area from Kentucky, to be closer to her ex-boyfriend, Jared Jones, who is the father of her 7-year-old daughter. He was watching their daughter the night Wade went missing.

Read more:A Texas woman, 38, has been missing since going to watch a movie at her male co-worker's house more than a week ago

Jones gave several interviews after his ex-girlfriend went missing, saying he was aiding in her search and understood why he had been questioned by police about her disappearance.

Wade moved to Ennis with her mother, Shirley, who said Jones wouldn't have hurt her daughter.

"He loved Emily, he loves Emily. They just didn't mesh together. But they love their daughter equally," she told an NBC reporter. "And I don't think Jared would ever hurt the mother of his child."

Hopson also told INSIDER that the co-worker who was the last to see Wade was cooperating with police and allowed them to search his home and vehicle.

Hopson said there was no indication of foul play. As of Tuesday afternoon, no one has been charged in her death.

Police continue to search for the car that Wade was driving the night she went missing. It's a 2012 silver Nissan Altima with the Kentucky license plate number 411 PAZ.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This tiny building in Wilmington, Delaware is home to 300,000 businesses

• Alaska Airlines launched a two-day flash sale on Tuesday with discount one-way flights going for as little as $39.
• Deals include $39 one-way or $78 round-trip flights between Los Angeles and San Francisco. Flights between Boston and Los Angeles or San Francisco are on sale for $99 one-way or $198 round trip. 
• All sale tickets must be purchased by 11:59 pm PST on Wednesday, January 23 for travel between February 12 and March 13, 2019. 

Alaska Airlines launched a two-day flash sale on Tuesday with one-way flights going for as little as $39. The Seattle-based airline offered similar sale prices earlier this month as well as in December. 

JetBlue and WOW Air have also held sales this month with flights for less than $50. 

Alaska Airlines will make discount tickets available in both its traditional Main fare economy cabin as well as in its recently launched Saver fare option, which is a less restrictive form of the basic-economy product offered by American, Delta, and United.

With the bulk of Alaska's routes out on the West Coast, that's also where you'll find the best deals. Saver fare tickets for flights between Los Angeles and San Francisco can be had for $39 one-way or $78 round-trip. Non-Saver fare tickets between the two cities can be had for $54 each way.

Read more: Delta can't put its new Airbus jets into service because FAA inspectors have been sent home during the government shutdown.

Saver fare tickets can for LA to Las Vegas start at $39 while San Francisco to Las Vegas is on sale for $49. 

There are also some great trans-con deals with Saver fare tickets between Boston and Los Angeles or San Francisco for $99 each way. 

Saver fare flights between New York's JFK International Airport and Seattle are on sale of $99 each way. 

There are some conditions that go along with the low prices. All sale tickets must be purchased by 11:59 p.m. PST on Wednesday, January 23, for travel between February 12 and March 13, 2019. 

In addition, tickets must be purchased 21 days ahead of travel.

Alaska's Saver fare and other basic economy tickets are discount fare classes within an airline's economy cabin. As a result, the in-flight service and experience will be the same for Saver fare as it will be for someone who purchased a pricier Main fare ticket. This means passengers who go the Saver route will sit in the same seats and enjoy the same in-flight perks and amenities as everyone else in coach.

Saver fare tickets are not changeable or cancelable, and they will not be eligible for upgrades. Those traveling on Saver fare tickets will also board last. And while you will be able to preselect your seat, it will have to be at the back of the plane.

SEE ALSO: Wow Air CEO reveals what went wrong with his airline after a tumultuous year when the company had to lay off 111 workers and dump half of its planes

FOLLOW US: On Facebook for more car and transportation content!

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What it's like to win the Gumball 3000 where drivers party until 2 am every night and drive 3,000 miles in 7 days

• The special counsel Robert Mueller is said to be interested in the relationship between President Donald Trump's campaign and the National Rifle Association.
• The FBI has long been investigating whether Russia used the NRA as a conduit to illegally funnel money into Trump's campaign during the 2016 election.
• But this is the first indication that Mueller, who is tasked with investigating whether the Trump team colluded with Moscow, is also interested in the connection between Trump, the NRA, and Russia.
• CNN reported that Mueller's team raised questions about the topic as recently as last month.
• Two figures — the Russian banker Alexander Torshin and his longtime assistant, Maria Butina — appear to be at the center of the investigation.

The special counsel Robert Mueller is investigating the relationship between President Donald Trump's campaign and the National Rifle Association, CNN reported Tuesday.

Mueller is said to be focused on the links between the two around the time of the 2016 election. The former Trump campaign aide Sam Nunberg told CNN prosecutors asked him about the campaign's "dealings with the NRA" when they interviewed him last year.

Nunberg added that prosecutors wanted to know more about how Trump and his associates first formed a relationship to the gun-rights group and how Trump was tapped to speak at the NRA's annual convention in 2015, just months before announcing his presidential bid.

Mueller's team interviewed Nunberg in February 2018, but CNN reported that prosecutors were asking questions about the topic as recently as last month.

The NRA has long been under heightened scrutiny for its Russia ties, particularly involving Alexander Torshin, a powerful Russian politician and banker, and Maria Butina, an accused Russian spy who pleaded guilty to conspiring against the US.

Torshin, whom the Spanish government has accused of money laundering and other financial crimes, is an avid gun-rights activist and a paid lifetime member of the NRA. Butina is his longtime assistant and close associate. She also spearheads the Russian gun-rights group A Right To Bear Arms, which is viewed as the NRA's Russian counterpart.

Last January, McClatchy reported that the FBI is investigating whether Torshin illegally funneled money to the NRA to help sway the 2016 US election in favor of then-candidate Trump. It also surfaced last year that the Spanish police had handed over surveillance tapes featuring Torshin to the FBI.

But CNN's report Tuesday is the first indication that Mueller is also interested in the links between the campaign, the NRA, and Russia-linked individuals like Torshin and Butina.

Read more: A bombshell report says Trump ordered Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about the Trump Tower Moscow deal

Trump has repeatedly said that neither he nor his campaign colluded with Moscow. The Trump administration also denied in 2017 that Trump had ever met Torshin.

But a number of tweets sent from Torshin's Twitter account, which NPR reviewed in depth, appear to indicate otherwise.

In one tweet sent on November 8, 2015, Torshin wrote, according to an English translation: "Comedian should make people laugh! Right? So he is trying! I know D. Trump (through NRA). A decent person." Torshin sent the tweet in response to when the comedian Larry David called Trump a racist on "Saturday Night Live."

Torshin later added that he saw Trump in Nashville, Tennessee, in April 2015, NPR reported. The NRA held its annual convention in Nashville that year, during which Trump gave a speech teasing his impending presidential bid.

"If I run, and people are going to be very surprised, and if I win, America will be great again," Trump told the approving crowd, which included Torshin and Butina.

Torshin attended the NRA's convention every year between 2012 and 2016, occasionally with Butina at his side, and has met every NRA president since 2012, according to NPR. When the NRA sent a delegation to Moscow in the winter of 2015, it was Torshin who received them on behalf of The Right to Bear Arms.

Read more:The NRA is at the center of a brewing controversy over its ties to conservatives' 'favorite Russian'

Butina, meanwhile, has been cultivating her own ties with American gun-rights activists, like Republican strategist Paul Erickson, whom she has been acquainted with since at least 2013.

Erickson invited scrutiny last year, when The New York Times reported that he emailed Trump campaign aide Rick Dearborn in May 2016, with the subject line "Kremlin Connection," telling him that he could arrange a backdoor meeting between Trump and Putin.

Butina made a similar request through Rick Clay, a conservative Christian advocate. Dearborn forwarded Clay's email to then-senior adviser Jared Kushner, who reportedly rebuffed the offer.

Torshin was the individual designated to make "first contact" with Trump from Russia's side. Erickson described him in his email as "President Putin's emissary on this front."

Erickson wrote that Torshin would make "first contact" with the campaign at a dinner honoring wounded veterans that was organized by Clay, the report said. Neither Trump nor his campaign advisers attended the reception. Trump Jr. and Torshin did, however, attend a separate NRA dinner the same night.

About six months later, Butina had a birthday party on November 12, 2016, four days after Trump won the US election in a shocking upset. The gathering featured several top Trump campaign advisers, according to The Daily Beast. Erickson, who was also in attendance, reportedly told guests Butina was on the Trump transition team.

Two months later, Butina was one of several Putin-allied Russians who attended Trump's inaugural celebrations.

In February 2017, Torshin was invited, through his NRA ties, to a national prayer breakfast with the newly-inaugurated President Trump. According to Yahoo News, Torshin was supposed to have a personal meeting with Trump before the event, but his invitation was rescinded after a White House aide spotted his name on the guest list and alerted others to Torshin's alleged illicit activities.

The GOP's ideological progression toward Putin's Russia is not a new phenomenon. Over the last several years in particular, self-identified conservatives and members of the alt-right have openly embraced Russia's stance on key issues — such as gun rights, religion, and same-sex marriage — that make up the bedrock of the Republican platform, and cultivated relationships with prominent Russians whose views align with their own.

This was, perhaps, part of why the gun-rights activist Kline Preston asked Torshin to come to the US and be an international election observer as President Barack Obama faced off against former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in November 2012, according to The Washington Post.

Preston, a conservative lawyer with a long history of doing business in Russia, also introduced Torshin to NRA president David Keene in 2011.

Torshin later hinted that his NRA credentials had played a role in his participation in the 2012 election.

"I was there at Obama's last election!" Torshin tweeted in 2015, according to NPR. "The NRA card, to me as an observer from Russia, opened access to any [polling] station."

SEE ALSO: Here's why Mueller's team reportedly made its unprecedented move to dispute a bombshell story on Trump and Cohen

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: MSNBC host Chris Hayes thinks President Trump's stance on China is 'not at all crazy'

• A ground stop was issued for Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) on Tuesday due to drone activity. 
• According to ABC News, the FAA confirmed that two drones were spotted in the path of planes landing at Newark Airport.
• A ground stop for incoming flights has been issued. During a ground stop, flights headed for Newark are held at their point of departure. 

A ground stop has been issued for Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR) on Tuesday due to drone activity. 

A Federal Aviation Administration spokesman confirmed to ABC News that two drones were spotted around 3,500 feet above Teterboro, New Jersey which is directly in the path of planes headed for landing at Newark. 

As a result, a ground stop was issued at around 5:30 pm for EWR. During a ground stop, flights headed for Newark are held at their point of departure. 

This is to prevent aircraft on final approach from colliding with the drones that can cause substantial damage to an airliner. 

The ground stop lasted roughly an hour and has since been lifted.

Read more: Wow Air CEO reveals what went wrong with his airline after a tumultuous year when the company had to lay off 111 workers and dump half of its planes.

Representatives from neither the FAA nor from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the organization that operates the airport, were not immediately available for comment. 

Newark Liberty International Airport is located roughly 10 miles west of New York City and is one of the main airports serving the Big Apple. 

In recent months a series of drone sightings paralyzed the two largest airports in the UK. London Gatwick Airport was shut down for more than a day due to the drone activity December. Earlier this month, London Heathrow Airport was shut down for part of an afternoon due to the potential presence of a drone. 

SEE ALSO: Delta can't put its new Airbus jets into service because FAA inspectors have been sent home during the government shutdown

FOLLOW US: On Facebook for more car and transportation content!

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what it's like to drive trains on London's Tube — one of the most complicated subway systems in the world

The Insider Picks team writes about stuff we think you'll like. Business Insider has affiliate partnerships, so we get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

If you've stepped into any drugstore recently, you've probably been reminded — by way of chocolate gift boxes and teddy bears — that Valentine's Day is quickly approaching. That also means you've probably started thinking about finding the perfect gift for your loved ones. 

To take the stress out of the search, we rounded up 30 great Valentine's Day gifts that your special someone will love. From classics like a floral bouquet to fun experiences like a DIY chocolate making kit, we have something for every kind of Valentine. The best part is all of these options are affordable, too — everything is under $50. 

A classic floral bouquet

Shop all bouquets at The Bouqs, from $38

An intoxicating, fresh scent and bright colors make floral bouquets a wonderful gift that they'll love to keep on display. 

A candle that smells just like home

Homesick Scented Candle, available at Amazon, $29.95

Homesick candles make great gifts for just about every occasion. With unique scents inspired by cities, states, and even experiences, these candles are sure to conjure up memories of wherever they call home. 

A trendy take on a bag of candy hearts

Sub Urban Riot Candy Hearts Tee, available at Nordstrom, $34

If she thinks candy hearts are passé, wow her with a gift that takes the classic Valentine's Day treat to a new level. This slouchy white T-shirt emblazoned with candy hearts and sweet mantras is something she'll want to wear all year round. 

This is a preview of The Digital Media Forecast Book from Business Insider Intelligence. Current subscribers can read the report here.

Media consumption has changed rapidly over the past decade, with digital increasingly claiming a larger share of the daily time spent with media. Increased mobile usage is driving much of the growth in digital time spent, as smartphones become more powerful and capable of handling tasks otherwise completed on desktop.

Meanwhile, cord-cutting and cord-shaving will continue as consumers seek more affordable alternatives to traditional pay-TV. Marketers need to understand the underlying consumer trends that are driving billions of dollars in global advertising, and how those behaviors are likely to play out in the near term.

In this three-part forecast book, Business Insider Intelligence forecasts how much time users spend consuming each format as we approach peak media, and how those changes reflect how advertising dollars are spent globally and in the US.

Join the conversation about this story »

• Former Vice President Joe Biden on Monday apologized for his past stances on criminal justice.
• Biden is considering running for president in 2020, and his hardline positions on crime as a senator could come back to haunt him.
• "I haven't always been right. I know we haven't always gotten things right, but I've always tried," Biden said in remarks commemorating Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

As former Vice President Joe Biden mulls a potential 2020 presidential run, he's apologizing for his past stances on criminal-justice issues.

In a speech on Martin Luther King Jr. Day in Washington, the former vice president acknowledged the detrimental impact of his approach to crime in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

"You know I've been in this fight for a long time. It goes not just to voting rights. It goes to the criminal justice system,"Biden said at the National Action Network's Martin Luther King Jr. breakfast. "I haven't always been right. I know we haven't always gotten things right, but I've always tried."

Read more:Here's what everyone is getting wrong about Bill Clinton's 1994 crime reforms

Biden helped write an infamous 1994 crime bill – the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. That bill is widely pointed to as one of the driving factors of mass incarceration in the US, as well as the disproportionate number of people of color who've ended up behind bars for drug-related crimes.

Some experts contend the impact of the bill, which was signed into the law by former President Bill Clinton, is overblown. But Biden's involvement on criminal justice issues goes well beyond the bill, which already represents an easy point of attack if he runs for president.

Without specifically naming the 1994 bill on Monday, Biden said the decisions that were made in that era "trapped an entire generation."

"It was a big mistake when it was made," Biden said.

In an apparent reference to sentencing disparities between crack cocaine and powder cocaine, he added, "We were told by the experts that 'crack, you never go back,' that the two were somehow fundamentally different. It's not. But it's trapped an entire generation."

The vice president went on to say that "white America" needs to do more to address and recognize systemic racism.

"There's something we have to admit – not you – we, white America, has to admit, there's still a systematic racism and it goes almost unnoticed by so many of us," Biden said.

Read more:Joe Biden gave his strongest hint yet he's leaning toward running in 2020

Biden was less conciliatory about the 1994 crime bill in his 2017 memoir, "Promise Me, Dad," in which the former vice president contended the legislation helped put 100,000 police officers out on the streets and drove down escalating rates of violent crime across the country.

Similarly, in a 2016 interview with CNBC, Biden said he was "not at all" ashamed of his role in supporting the bill and said it "restored American cities."

"In fact, I drafted the bill," Biden said at the time. "And by the way, we talk about this mostly in terms of Black Lives Matter. Black lives really do matter, but the problem is institutionalized racism in America."

"There are things I would change,” he added on the 1994 bill. "But, by and large, what it really did: It restored American cities."

Despite his efforts and involvement in criminal justice reform with the Obama administration, Biden's past statements on this bill and his overall record on criminal justice could haunt him if he ends up running in 2020.

As a senator, Biden spearheaded the Democratic Party's war on crime and drugs. He drafted or co-sponsored legislation that created the federal "drug czar," mandatory minimum sentencing for marijuana, and the sentencing disparity for crack and powder cocaine.

In a 2015 interview with Time, Biden said, "I am not only the guy who did the crime bill and the drug czar, but I'm also the guy who spent years when I was chairman of the Judiciary Committee and chairman of [the Senate Foreign Relations Committee] trying to change drug policy relative to cocaine, for example, crack and powder."

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's husband's record on crime as president was damaging to her 2016 campaign for president, despite efforts to apologize. Biden, if he runs, is poised to face just as much criticism if not more so on this issue.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: MSNBC host Chris Hayes thinks President Trump's stance on China is 'not at all crazy'

This is a preview of a research report from Business Insider Intelligence,  Business Insider's premium research service. To learn more about Business Insider Intelligence, click here.

In recent years, we've seen a ballooning of activity in fintech — an expansive term applied to technology-driven disruptions in financial services. And 2018 has been no different, with fintechs' staggering influence on the market evidenced by record funding levels for the industry — by Q3 2018, overall funding was already up 82% from 2017’s total figure, according to CB Insights.

Additionally, this year marked a watershed moment for the industry, with the once clear distinction between fintechs and financial services proper now blurred significantly. Virtually every incumbent financial institution (FI) is now looking inward and engaging in an innovation drive, spurred on by competition from fintechs. As such, incumbents are now actively investing in, acquiring, and collaborating with their fintech rivals.

In this report, Business Insider Intelligence details recent developments in fintech funding and regulation that are defining the environment these startups operate in. We also examine the business model changes being employed among different categories of fintechs as they strive to embed themselves further in mainstream finance and prove sustainability. Finally, we consider which elements of the fintech industry are rapidly rubbing off on incumbent financial services providers, and what the future of fintech will look like.

The companies mentioned in this report are: Funding Circle, GreenSky, Transferwise, Ant Financial, Nubank, Cellulant, Oscar Health, Stripe, One97, UiPath, LianLian Pay, Wacai.com, Gusto, Toast, PingPong, Flywire, Deposit Solutions, Root, Robinhood, Atom, N26, Revolut, OneConnect, PolicyBazaar, WeCash, Zurich, OneDegree, Dinghy, Vouch Insurance, Laka, Cleo, Ernit, Monzo, Moneybox, Bud, Tandem, Starling, Varo Money, Square, ING, Chase, AmEx, Amazon, Monese, Betterment, Tiller Investments, West Hill Capital, Square, Ameritrade, JPMorgan, eToro, Lendy, OnDeck, Ripple, Quorom, Chain, Coinbase, Fidelity, Samsung Pay, Google Pay, Apple Pay, Bank of America, TransferGo, Klarna, Western Union, Veriff, Royal Bank of Scotland, Royal Bank of Canada, Facebook, ThreatMetrix, Relx, Entersekt, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, Gemalto, Lloyd's of London, Kingdom Trust, Aviva, Symbility LINK, eTrade, Allianz, AXA, Broadridge, TD Bank, First Republic Bank, BBVA Compass, Capital One, Silicon Valley Bank, Credit Suisse, Ally, Goldman Sachs.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the report:

• Fintech funding has already reached new highs globally in 2018, with overall funding hitting $32.6 billion at the end of Q3.
• Some new regions, including South America and Africa, are emerging on the fintech scene.
• We've seen considerable scaling in older corners of the fintech ecosystem, including among neobanks and alt lenders.
• Some fintechs, including a number of insurtechs, have dipped into new markets to escape heightened competition.
• Emergent areas like blockchain and distributed ledger technology (DLT), as well as digital identity, are gaining traction.
• Many incumbents are undertaking business transformations that aim to reimagine everything from products and services to front-end systems and back-end processes.

 In full, the report:

• Details the funding and regulatory landscape in the US, Europe, and Asia.
• Gives an overview into a number of fintech segments and how they've changed over the past year.
• Discusses how incumbents are reacting to fintechs in order to stay relevant in the changing financial services sector.
• Evaluates what the future of fintech will look like and what trends to look out for in the coming year.
  

Subscribe to a Premium pass to Business Insider Intelligence and gain immediate access to:

	This report and more than 250 other expertly researched reports
	Access to all future reports and daily newsletters
	Forecasts of new and emerging technologies in your industry
	And more!

Learn More

Purchase & download the full report from our research store

SEE ALSO: How the largest US financial institutions rank on offering the mobile banking features customers value most

Join the conversation about this story »

• A Supreme Court decision Tuesday let the Trump administration begin implementing its transgender military ban.
• The Department of Defense issued a statement reiterating its long-held stance that its new policy regarding transgender troops is "NOT a ban."
• The policy does allow transgender troops to serve but only if they do so in their biological sex, do not have a history or diagnosis of gender dysphoria, or can show a 36-month period of "stability" prior to military service.
• Advocates maintain the administration's justifications, including potential negative impacts to unit readiness and cohesion and medical costs, have mostly been debunked.

On Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to go forward in implementing its transgender military ban, meaning that the ban can go into effect while it is being challenged in court.

Although the administration's policy, shaped after a report from former Defense Secretary James Mattis, is widely viewed as a bar against transgender troops, the Department of Defense has long held that its policy on military service by transgender persons is not a universal ban.

"As always, we treat all transgender persons with respect and dignity. DoD's proposed policy is NOT a ban on service by transgender persons," DoD spokeswoman Lt. Col. Carla Gleason said in a statement Tuesday. "It is critical that DoD be permitted to implement personnel policies that it determines are necessary to ensure the most lethal and combat effective fighting force in the world."

The policy currently in effect is based on a memorandum filed by former Secretary Mattis at the end of his review of the previous administration's decision to open the ranks. It does not outright ban transgender persons from service, but there are caveats that make military service difficult for members of the transgender community.

The Defense Department maintains its policy is not a universal ban.

The policy differentiates between transgender persons and those with a history or diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is the medical diagnosis for someone who experiences emotional distress with one's biological sex. Not all people who identify as transgender have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, The National Center for Transgender Equality explains.

For those who identify as transgender, but have not been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, the policy outright disqualifies any transgender person who has already transitioned — or a person living as the gender they identify as not the gender assigned at birth — or requires transition.

The policy also disqualifies those who may require a medical transition based on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Citing "considerable scientific uncertainty" and blurred lines "that demarcate male and female standards," the defense department maintains that the requirements of transition-related treatment come at too high a cost for taxpayers and could result in impairments to unit cohesion and readiness (how soon they could deploy).

Transgender persons with a history or diagnosis of gender dysphoria are generally disqualified, although there are some exceptions. Anyone who has previously been diagnosed with gender dysphoria must demonstrate "36 consecutive months of stability (i.e., absence of gender dysphoria)" immediately prior to military service. This would require a transgender person to prove they have not experienced discomfort with their biological sex for three years before joining. They must also agree not to transition during service and adhere to the standards of their biological sex.

Essentially, if persons identify as transgender, they can serve in the military — but only if they do so in their biological sex not as the gender they may identify with.

For those who identify as transgender who are already serving the the military, persons diagnosed with gender dysphoria before the policy's date, can still go through with transition. Those who join the military and then are diagnosed with gender dysphoria, can stay in the military if they do not transition.

According to CNN, waivers may be granted by the Department of Defense "on a case-by-case basis."

The DoD's justifications have been debunked by its own officers

Under former Secretary Mattis, the DoD upended a milestone policy change that allowed a path for transgender people to serve in their preferred gender versus their biological sex.  According to a report released in February 2018, a panel of military experts found that former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter's 2016 policy, implemented towards the end of the Obama administration created a financial burden and carried potential risks to unit cohesion and readiness.

But other experts — and the service chiefs from each branch of the military — have highlighted that these claims are largely without evidence.

In independent hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee in early 2018, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand asked all four service branch chiefs whether they had received any reports of lowered morale, unit cohesion, or disciplinary issues rising due to transgender troops serving openly.

All four stated that there were no known issues or reports.

The other DoD justification concerns medical costs and deployability of transitioning service members.

According to Radha Iyengar, one of the authors of a RAND Corp study that influenced the decision to allow open transgender service, those justifications are also misguided. 

In an interview with the Washington Post, Iyengar explained that the actual costs of medical care for transgender troops — which would amount to about $2.4 to $8.4 million — would comprise only one-tenth of 1% of the military's annual medical spending.

Iyengar also told the Post that the 10 to 130 troops who would be unable to deploy would have negligible impact on the military.

"In 2015, about 50,000 soldiers alone were not deployable due to medical reasons in the active component. So the scale of the effects here are relatively small," she told Post reporter Alex Horton. 

Advocacy groups maintain that in light of these factors, the administration's policy is, in effect, a ban against transgender people serving openly. Four lawsuits have been filed on behalf of transgender plaintiffs who are actively serving. Tuesday's Supreme Court decision allows the Trump administration to implement the ban temporarily while those lawsuits continue through the courts.

The fate of transgender service members, including those serving openly, remains unclear. The DoD statement did not clarify how the ban would be implemented in the immediate aftermath of the decision. 

Kristin Beck, retired Navy SEAL and transgender civil rights activist, called the ban "bulls---" but said transgender troops would still find a way to serve.

"We're going to do whatever we have to to live our life. Life always finds a way, and we're going to find a way," she told Business Insider. "We're not going to be told we can't do this." 

Alex Lockie contributed to this story.

SEE ALSO: Transgender Navy SEAL calls 'bulls---' on Trump admin saying transgender troops aren't as lethal or effective

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside the Coast Guard's 8-week boot camp where recruits go through extreme physical tests and brutal 'smoke sessions'

• Rudy Giuliani's media blitz over the last week has prompted former White House officials and Justice Department veterans to ask one overarching question: What is he thinking?
• Last Wednesday, Giuliani refused to say no one on President Donald Trump's campaign colluded with Moscow. Then he said that "if the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago."
• A few days later, Giuliani scuttled over a year of messaging from Trump and his associates when he quoted Trump as saying that talks to build a Trump Tower Moscow were "going on from the day I announced to the day I won."
• On Sunday, Giuliani suggested during a CNN interview that Trump spoke with Michael Cohen about his false testimony to Congress. The statement represented another departure from the Trump team's claim that Trump never discussed Cohen's testimony with him or instructed him to lie.
• The next day, Giuliani threw another curveball when he told The New Yorker he had listened to "tapes" that proved Trump never told Cohen to lie. When pressed on the comment, Giuliani hastily walked it back and said there were "no tapes."
• "How on Earth is he still representing the president?" one former White House official familiar with the legal team's thought process told INSIDER. "This is a s---show."

It's been a roller-coaster week for Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's lead defense lawyer in the ongoing Russia probe.

Following a series of bizarre and potentially legally problematic public remarks, the biggest question in people's minds is this: What is Giuliani thinking?

"How on Earth is he still representing the president?" one former White House official familiar with the legal team's thought process told INSIDER. "This is a s---show."

Giuliani has been stoking controversy since he first joined Trump's defense team last year after the resignation of white-collar defense attorney John Dowd.

Though he first struck a conciliatory tone toward the special counsel Robert Mueller, Giuliani quickly turned his legal strategy into a PR strategy centered around discrediting Mueller and the Russia investigation.

But in recent days, Giuliani has embarked on a media tour that legal scholars say likely did more to damage Trump's case than helped it.

Read more: What Mueller's extraordinarily unprecedented move to dispute BuzzFeed's story on the record tells us

'If the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago'

It started last week, when Giuliani moved the goalposts on Trump-Russia collusion in a big way, telling CNN, "I never said there was no collusion between the campaign — or between people in the campaign — [and Russia]."

"Yes, you have," CNN host Chris Cuomo interjected.

"I have no idea if — I have not," Giuliani replied. "I said the President of the United States [did not collude]. There is not a single bit of evidence the President of the United States committed the only crime you can commit here: conspired with the Russians to hack the [Democratic National Committee]."

The statement represented a remarkable shift in the Trump team's narrative on whether there was collusion between the campaign and Russia.

Trump "didn't say nobody [colluded]," Giuliani told CNN last Wednesday. "He said he didn't. He said he didn't. He didn't say nobody."

Later in the interview, he tacked on another caveat.

"If the collusion happened, it happened a long time ago," Giuliani said.

After the interview sparked a firestorm, Giuliani qualified his comments and said he represents Trump, not the campaign.

Giuliani revealed that Trump Tower Moscow talks continued until Election Day 2016

The day after the CNN interview, BuzzFeed News dropped a big, controversial story that said Trump instructed his former lawyer and longtime fixer, Michael Cohen, to lie to Congress about the Trump Tower Moscow project in 2017.

BuzzFeed News reported that Mueller learned about Trump's alleged instruction to Cohen through "multiple witnesses," documents, internal emails, and text messages from members of the Trump Organization, and then from Cohen.

On Friday, less than a day after BuzzFeed's story was published, Mueller's office released an unprecedented statement disputing the story on the record.

Giuliani, who has made headlines over the last year questioning Mueller's reputation and accusing the special counsel of lying, applauded Mueller for disputing the story.

Read more: Here's why Mueller's team reportedly made its unprecedented move to dispute a bombshell story on Trump and Cohen

But on Sunday, Giuliani added fuel to the fire when, in an interview with The New York Times, he quoted Trump as saying the Trump Tower Moscow discussions were "going on from the day I announced to the day I won."

The comment represented a significant departure from Trump's and his aides' previous denials that the project ever moved beyond its earliest stages. When Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, prosecutors revealed in a charging document that discussions about the project — many of which involved senior Trump Organization executives and Trump family members — continued until June 2016.

Giuliani's statement to The Times indicated that those talks went on for far longer than previously disclosed, until at least November 2016.

Around that time period, Trump was pushing for closer ties to Russia and cooler relations with NATO, a key foe of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Shortly after Trump won, his incoming national-security adviser, Michael Flynn, also secretly discussed US sanctions on Russia with Russia's ambassador to the US. At the time, the Trump transition team was also considering a Ukraine-Russia "peace plan" that favored Moscow and called for lifting sanctions on Russia.

Shortly after the interview was published, Giuliani walked back his statements, saying they were a "hypothetical" and "not based on conversations I had with the President."

'Rudy is the gift that keeps on creating issues'

The same day that The Times interview was published, Giuliani made another explosive comment, this time on CNN's "State of the Union" with host Jake Tapper.

Initially, Giuliani told Tapper, "As far as I know, President Trump did not have discussions with [Cohen], certainly had no discussions with him in which he told him or counseled him to lie."

Then, he appeared to acknowledge that Trump may have discussed Cohen’s false testimony with him.

If it happened, Giuliani said, it "would be perfectly normal, which the president believed was true."

"So it’s possible that that happened, that President Trump talked to Michael Cohen about his testimony?" Tapper asked.

"I don’t know if it happened or didn’t happen," Giuliani replied. "And it might be attorney-client privileged if it happened, where I can’t acknowledge it. But I have no knowledge that he spoke to him. But I’m telling you, I wasn’t there then."

In a sentencing memorandum Cohen's lawyers filed on his behalf in December, they said he was in "close and regular contact" with White House staff and Trump's lawyers as he was drafting his false congressional testimony in 2017. They added that he was "fully aware" of Trump's repeated disavowals of ties to Russia, as well as his and his allies' claims that any contacts with Russians by Trump, his campaign, or the Trump Organization ended before February 2016.

One former senior Justice Department official who worked closely with Mueller at the FBI told INSIDER they were flummoxed by Giuliani's interview with Tapper.

"There is no discernible legal strategy here," they said. "What was the purpose of this interview? How did Rudy think him going on national television and saying all these things would benefit the president? This is a goldmine for prosecutors."

Another prominent criminal defense lawyer who is active in the Mueller investigation echoed that sentiment, telling Axios, "Rudy is the gift that keeps on creating issues that do not otherwise exist. He should have taken the Mueller statement [denying the BuzzFeed News story], embraced it and not said another word."

A cryptic allusion to 'tapes' and a hasty walk back

On Monday evening, The New Yorker jumped into the fray with a new interview in which Giuliani told the magazine that even if Trump did collude with Russia, "it wouldn't be a crime."

Perhaps the most perplexing part of the interview came when the former New York mayor said he had listened to "tapes" that proved Trump never instructed Cohen to lie to Congress.

When pressed on his revelation, Giuliani hastily walked back his previous comments.

"I can tell you, from the moment I read the story, I knew the story was false," Giuliani said of BuzzFeed News' report. "I have been through all the tapes, I have been through all the texts, I have been through all the e-mails, and I knew none existed."

"Wait, what tapes have you gone through?" asked New Yorker staff writer Isaac Chotiner.

"I shouldn’t have said tapes," Giuliani said. "They alleged there were texts and e-mails that corroborated that Cohen was saying the President told him to lie. There were no texts, there were no e-mails, and the President never told him to lie."

"So, there were no tapes you listened to, though?" Chotiner asked.

"No tapes," Giuliani said. "Well, I have listened to tapes, but none of them concern this."

Giuliani did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this story.

It's "impossible to find a consistent position with Rudy over the past few weeks," Jeffrey Cramer, a former federal prosecutor who spent 12 years at the Justice Department, told INSIDER.

It's possible "he honestly doesn't have a clue as to the truth about Trump and his Moscow connections, relevant dates, business opportunities, lies," and more, Cramer said. It's also possible "he's a confused man who just spouts off what comes to mind and then walks it back when he sees the reaction."

A third, less likely possibility, Cramer added, is that Giuliani has "been fully briefed by Trump as to the truth and is lining up various defenses depending upon any potential charges: 'Trump didn't talk to Cohen before the congressional hearing. Even if he did, it isn't a crime. Even if it is a crime, you can't indict the president.'"

At a minimum, Giuliani's comments indicate that "Trump was trying to line up a Trump Tower Moscow with the Russians to line his pockets while running to be the President of the United States," Cramer said. "It also seems at a minimum that Trump is taking actions that benefit the Russian government."

SEE ALSO: What Mueller's extraordinarily unprecedented move to dispute BuzzFeed's story on the record tells us

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: MSNBC host Chris Hayes thinks President Trump's stance on China is 'not at all crazy'