The total value of Apple stock passed $1.5 trillion in trading on the NASDAQ Wednesday, smack in the middle of a global pandemic that’s affecting all of the company’s major markets.Apple is the first U.S. company to exceed $1.5 trillion in value. (Saudi Aramco is the only other company that has crossed this milestone; it was worth $2 trillion after its first day of trading post-IPO.)The company’s stock was trading at around $352 per share at the time its market cap exceeded $1.5 trillion. The stock hit a low of $229 back in March as the pandemic set in, but investor confidence in the company’s post-coronavirus prospects grew steadily during April and May, then pitched sharply upward this week.Some analysts believe investors may be feeling good about the revenue possibilities in Apple’s first 5G phone, which should be arriving later this year. They may also be optimistic about the Apple Watch, which, like Apple’s services business, seems well on its way to being a major revenue contributor as the iPhone business continues to level off. Apple doesn’t break out Watch sales, but Strategy Analytics believes the company sold 7.6 million smartwatches worldwide in the first quarter of 2020, up 23% from the 6.2 million it sold in the same quarter last year.Creative Strategies analyst Ben Bajarin argues that Apple’s strong stock price may reveal more about its investors than its products. He believes Apple’s stock value has sometimes been underestimated because the formulas used by institutional investors to evaluate consumer tech companies just don’t work with Apple.“One of the key arguments the short-sellers had with Apple was their customers would eventually leave to find something cheaper,” Bajarin writes in a research note today.“Apple’s products were treated like commodity consumer electronics, and the template they were using [was one for] traditional consumer electronics products that don’t typically see high degrees of customer loyalty,” Bajarin writes. “Apple’s brand was certainly something that was factored in, but that did not seem to have as much weight as it should have either, in my opinion.” Apple is once again the biggest company in the US stock market AAPL $1.53 trillion MSFT $1.49 trillion AMZN $1.32 trillion GOOG $1.00 trillion FB $679 billion pic.twitter.com/hv4uTNpMub — Ben Carlson (@awealthofcs) June 10, 2020While the title of “most valuable tech company” often switches hands between Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon, Apple beat the other Big Tech companies to the $1.5 trillion line. It’s likely the others will follow as technology continues to transform markets and industries.Meanwhile, competitive threats to the businesses of the Big Five tech companies—Apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Facebook—seem limited and manageable. As some have argued, we may well have entered an era where a few massive tech companies are unassailable, and where smaller innovators battle for what’s left or get swallowed up by the bigger fish.

Facebook said Kustomer’s software could help support millions of business conversations, making it easier for customer support representatives to view and service the interactions.In particular, Facebook’s WhatsApp messaging app, which has more than one billion users, has expanded to business messaging services. In recent months, WhatsApp built a special app for businesses as customers in Latin America, Southeast Asia and elsewhere increasingly conduct transactions through messaging apps. In India, where more people are buying smartphones and using WhatsApp, the messaging app sees an opportunity to expand its digital commerce offerings.“People have made the shift to messaging, with more than 100 billion messages sent per day on WhatsApp,” Mr. Idema, who is chief operating officer of the company, said in an interview. “And they’re starting to use modern channels like messaging to talk to businesses. It’s a better experience than waiting on hold, than not knowing if your email has been read.”The demand for managing digital relationships with customers has also grown because of the coronavirus pandemic. Millions of people, having gone into quarantine or sheltering at home, have migrated to buying goods and communicating with businesses virtually rather than in person. That has led to a boom in deals for the makers of customer relationship software and workplace collaboration tools.“It was going to happen naturally. It’s just been accelerated by Covid,” said Brad Birnbaum, a founder of Kustomer. “Instead of investing in expensive storefronts and retail locations, companies are investing more in digital tools and experiences.”Salesforce, another company that sells customer service software, for instance, has been in talks to acquire Slack, the workplace productivity software provider, said two people with knowledge of the situation. A deal could be announced as soon as Tuesday, they said.If that deal is completed, Slack will be Salesforce’s largest acquisition and among the biggest in the software industry. Slack was valued at more than $24 billion on Monday. Last year Salesforce acquired Tableau, a data analytics provider, for nearly $16 billion.Cecilia Kang and Erin Griffith contributed reporting.

Pete Buttigieg is fourth in a four-strong pack clear of the Democratic presidential field, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. But he thinks the final choice of who will challenge Donald Trump will be between him and Elizabeth Warren.In an interview to be broadcast on Showtime on Sunday, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, said the race is “getting to be a two-way” between him and the Massachusetts senator.“A world where we’re getting somewhere is that world,” he said, “where it’s coming down to the two of us”.According to the Post-ABC poll, former vice-president Joe Biden leads nationally among likely primary voters, with 28% support, from Warren in second on 23%, Vermont senator Bernie Sanders on 17% and Buttigieg on 9%.Asked on ABC’s This Week if this is really a two-way race, Buttigieg said: “Not yet, no. There is a tremendous amount of energy for a range of candidates who are extremely capable. I’m proud to be part of I think the most diverse field ever in Democratic politics and some formidable competition.“But what I will say is there is amazing energy behind our campaign right now. We’re seeing it on the ground here in Iowa, we’re seeing it pick up in a lot of places. And I think voters are really narrowing down their choices instead of just getting to know us.”Buttigieg has surged to second in Iowa, the first state to vote. According to the realclearpolitics.com average, Warren leads there with 22.3% from Buttigieg on 17%, Biden on 15.7% and Sanders on 15.3%.In New Hampshire, the second state to go to the polls, Warren leads the RCP average with 25%, from Biden on 21%, Sanders on 20% and Buttigieg at 8.7%.On Friday night in Des Moines, Iowa, the main candidates addressed the Liberty and Justice Celebration, a major party event. Speaking to ABC from the Hawkeye state on Sunday, Buttigieg was asked how he was different from Warren.He took a swipe, saying: “I think we can deliver major, meaningful, bold changes that move this country forward in a way that galvanises an American majority instead of polarising our country further.”“We’re going to need a president who can pick up the pieces and can bring the country together.”On Friday, Warren unveiled a $20.5tn Medicare for All plan which duly attracted criticism from Democrats as well as attacks from Republicans and President Trump. Buttigieg has proposed “Medicare for all who want it”, meaning a plan that would not end private insurance cover. He also says he will not raise taxes on the middle class to pay for healthcare reform.Asked about Warren’s contention that opponents of Medicare for All “are not going to win by repeating Republican talking points and by dusting off the points of view of the giant insurance companies and the giant drug companies”, Buttigieg said: “Well, the insurance companies are fighting my proposal, because they don’t want the competition.“What is just not true is that her’s is the only solution. This ‘my way or the highway’ idea, that either you’re for kicking everybody off their private plans in four years or you’re for business as usual, it’s just not true. I’m proposing Medicare for all who want it.”Medicare for All, he said “ could very well be the long-run destination”.Buttigieg was also asked about his struggle to attract support from black voters, a key constituency. The New York Times reported recently that his own focus groups had indicated such problems were in part due to the fact he is gay.Buttigieg said: “I think the biggest question on any voter’s mind when they’re sizing us candidates up and thinking about how they’re going to vote is this: how will my life be different if you’re president versus one of your competitors?”He did not entirely dodge the question, adding pointedly: “And when we have the best answer to that question, I think a lot of prejudices and a lot of those other considerations fall away, and it comes down to vision and results.”Elsewhere in the Democratic race, this week saw former congressman Beto O’Rourke drop out. Other notable recent moves include the California senator Kamala Harris slashing staff in New Hampshire to focus on Iowa and Biden acceding to the formation of a Super pac, making him open to corporate funding.In the Post-ABC poll, Harris, fellow senators Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker, representative Tulsi Gabbard and the tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang all polled 2%. Other candidates with national name recognition, including former Obama housing secretary Julián Castro, polled even lower.The Post-ABC poll also asked some sharp questions, given claims by opponents that Biden, 76, and Sanders, 78, may be too old to fight the Trump machine.On the question of which leading Democrat had “the sharpest mental ability”, Warren led with 24%, from Biden at 21%, Sanders at 17% and Buttigieg at 15%. Harris, a former California attorney general, placed fifth on 7%.Sanders recently suffered a heart attack. Poll respondents were split on whether he was healthy enough to be president, 48% saying he was and 45% saying he was not.

Miller was well positioned to validate that story line. As a former marine from the Appalachian South, he appealed to blue-collar voters who were reconsidering their hereditary fealty to a Democratic Party that, since the 1960s, had grown more dovish and more liberal. “What has happened to the party I’ve spent my life working in?” Miller thundered. “Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked together to ensure that freedom would not falter. But not today. Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today’s Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.” According to The New York Times, a focus group of undecided voters deemed Miller’s speech “a hit.” From 2000 to 2004, Bush’s share of the vote among working-class whites rose by 13 points.If Miller vouched for Bush’s patriotism (or jingoism), Kasich can vouch for Biden’s compassion. Biden has responded to the pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement with what Time’s Charlotte Alter recently called an “empathy offensive.” It’s based, in part, on his own pain. “My losses are not the same as the losses felt by so many,” Biden said last month in Philadelphia—obliquely referencing the car crash that killed his wife and daughter and the cancer that took his son—“but I know what it feels like when you think you can’t go on. I know what it means to have that black hole in your chest. But I also know that the best way to bear loss and pain is to turn that anger and anguish into purpose.”That’s the way Kasich speaks too. Like Biden, Kasich hails from blue-collar Pennsylvania. Like Biden, he’s a former Washington dealmaker. But, most important, Kasich has in recent years made empathy central to his political identity. As he declared during a 2016 GOP debate, “people have accused me of, at times, having too big a heart.”Like Biden, Kasich speaks about public policy in strikingly personal ways. In 2013, he defied Republican orthodoxy by accepting the money offered by the Affordable Care Act to expand Medicaid in Ohio. He justified that position by imagining an encounter with his Maker. “When you die and get to the meeting with Saint Peter, he’s probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small,” Kasich declared. “But he is going to ask you what you did for the poor.”In his race for the GOP nomination, Kasich often defended his Medicaid decision by citing his brother, who has received treatment for mental illness. “Do you know what it’s like for somebody to live with depression?” he asked a crowd before the New York primary. In New Hampshire, he urged listeners to “not forget the people in the shadows.”For progressives angry that the Biden campaign is giving Kasich a platform, the former governor’s hostility to abortion and labor rights belies this benevolent rhetoric. But cross-party appeals couched in the language of human decency fit the message of Biden’s campaign. In 2016, Trump used rage to try to prove to Americans (especially white ones) that he identified with their hardships. Now, as COVID-19 surges in state after state and the unemployment rate remains in the double digits, Biden is trying to take the same approach using his personal suffering. He’s offering his own wounded resilience as a model for the nation as a whole.That’s not likely to impress the left, which is less concerned with whether Biden can feel America’s pain than whether he has a transformational agenda to address it. But for some current and former Republicans—skeptical of socialism but disgusted by Trump’s pitiless narcissism—a message of bipartisan, ideologically flexible compassion has deep appeal. By asking Kasich to speak at the Democratic convention, Biden is making him his emissary to those voters. He couldn’t have made a better choice.

Another week, another opportunity to wonder if the country has slipped through a tear in the government-Covid continuum. It was back in March, you might recall, that Boris Johnson explained we would turn the tide on the coronavirus in 12 weeks, despite the fact that people as clinically clueless as even me could see that would not be the case. This was partly why so many Britons went into a deep psychiatric decline a fortnight ago, when Johnson suddenly dropped the “six months of restrictions” bomb. Given his history of hopelessly optimistic margins of error, that could mean we’ll be out of the woods as early as 2036.Apologies for jumping around the timeline. Having forecast the tide-turning, Johnson then explained of the virus that he was “absolutely confident” that we could “send it packing in this country”. Strangely, it still appears to be with us. Then again, perhaps we and Johnson understand different things by the phrase “sent packing”. For many years, Johnson’s experience of being “sent packing” meant he was readmitted to the family home in fairly short order, allowing him to make some more promises to break when he next felt like it. If it helps, think of the virus as the sexually incontinent husband in the nation’s spare room. “You have to believe me, love – I’ve CHANGED.”Anyhow, the prime minister’s next unforced decision to make himself a hostage to fortune came in July, when he announced we could be moving away from social-distancing measures by November, with “a more significant return to normality” possible in time for Christmas. And yet, as we approach the midpoint of October, and with apologies for sliding into epidemiological technicalese … are we bollocks.On Thursday, Nadine Dorries – an absolute primo candidate for being against all restrictions were she not greasy-poleing it as junior health minster – warned that ICUs risk being overwhelmed in 10 days time, while some Sage members cast our current situation as equivalent to the crucial (and squandered) mid-March moment. Nevertheless, the government dithers. Restrictions are coming, yet the restrictions have not quite come. We learn about the future from newspaper leaks, which is also where local mayors and authorities glean information as to what central government has decided for them. A totally self-defeating time-lag seems to be the government’s comfort zone. The decisive action that many believe is required is once again deferred, in order to manage aspects of the politics. Because of that, much more draconian measures than would otherwise have been necessary become unavoidable further down the line. Once again, we are behind the curve, falling between every stool.Why does this keep happening? Unfortunately, we won’t know, because despite the entreaties from political friends as well as those on the other side of the divide, Johnson’s administration resisted absolutely all suggestions that it should hold a brisk inquiry into how we handled the first wave of coronavirus, in order that we might be better prepared going into the second.This does seem a puzzle, given that it is supposed to be a highly sophisticated, data-driven government, at least according to that chief incel to the prime minister, Dominic Cummings. Indeed, without wishing to put the cat among the skunkworks, it’s almost as if the government can’t face any form of self-awareness. Analysis-wise, we’re on the level of the armchair football pundit whose verdict is that England just didn’t play with enough “passion” during the first wave. At the end of the day, the virus just wanted it more.The period we might have used to interrogate the first-wave response was instead lavished on such things as relitigating even the bits of Brexit they had agreed to, and deciding to reorganise the civil service.Perhaps displacement activities are cheaper by the dozen. Because the other topic of conversation in Westminster is the Tory succession – born of the fact that Johnson isn’t working out as some in his party had hoped. Remember: there is literally NO time the Conservative party would regard as “not really the moment, babe” for a discussion about who’s best placed to lead it next. There is honestly no horseman of the apocalypse who could be charging us down in a manner so ferocious it would preclude the discussion. A nuclear ash cloud could be falling and people would be going “in the tearoom, there is concern about whether Gove has that quality to reach beyond the nutter base”, or “Rishi gets it: he always returns calls and really seems to listen”.Or to put it another way, you could be staring down the barrel of a deadly pandemic winter and people would still be volunteering opinions like, “I actually think it’ll play well for her that Priti always looks like a firstborn toddler unable to conceal her delight at having finally done it in the potty.”At some level, you have to marvel at this Conservative unit’s regenerative capacity. No matter how badly it implodes, it somehow gets back up again and rebuilds itself while it’s walking back towards you, twice as pissed off as it was before. If only it applied the same urgency to protecting those it was elected to serve – but of course, one can’t have everything.

Jewher Ilham said she had not heard from her father since 2017.Her dad, Ilham Tohti, is an economics professor and prominent Uighur intellectual in Xinjiang, China. He ran a website, UighurOnline, that focused on issues pertaining to the Muslim ethnic minority group.Chinese authorities repeatedly shut down the website. Jewher says the family received death threats. Chinese authorities also disappeared her father multiple times before detaining him in 2014 and quickly finding him guilty on separatism charges. He was sentenced to life in prison. At first, Jewher told me, because her father was a political prisoner, the family could visit him every few months. But then the Chinese government cut off access entirely. Jewher is in the United States; she still has extended family in Xinjiang, the northwestern region in China where most Uighurs live. She does not talk with them, either. “If they talk to me or if they receive a phone call from me, I don’t think anything good will happen to them,” she told me over the phone in July.Researchers from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, using satellite imagery and other evidence, have documented more than 380 re-education camp detention centers and prisons in Xinjiang, with at least 61 having been expanded or updated within the last year.It is the largest mass internment of an ethnic-religious minority group since World War II.The concentration camps are the most extreme example of China’s inhumane policies against the Uighurs, but the entire population is subject to repressive policies. China has used mass surveillance to turn Xinjiang into a high-tech police state.Uighurs inside and outside the camps are exploited for cheap labor, forced to manufacture clothing and other products for sale both at home and abroad. The New York Times revealed in July that some Chinese-made face masks being sold in the United States and other countries were produced in factories that relied on Uighur labor. Another recent investigation found evidence that Chinese authorities subjected Uighur women to mass sterilization, forcing them to take birth control or have abortions and putting them in camps if they resist. Some have argued this attempt to control the Uighur population meets the United Nations’ definition of genocide. The Chinese government, however, claims that the camps are merely vocational and training centers, and that they’re teaching people job skills. It has justified the oppression in Xinjiang as an attempt to clamp down on terrorism and extremism emanating from the Uighur separatist movement. There have been incidents of violent unrest over the years, including a few deadly terrorist attacks, and at least one Uighur extremist group in the region, the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, has ties to al-Qaeda and the global jihadist movement. But most experts say Beijing’s repression and subjugation of millions of Uighurs is vastly disproportionate to the comparatively minor terror threat in the region. As more and more reports of the atrocities happening in Xinjiang are revealed, the international community is grappling with how to punish China for its abuses. The United States recently imposed sanctions on Chinese officials involved in persecuting the Uighurs and punished companies believed to be reliant on Uighur forced labor. Advocates and bipartisan groups of lawmakers are calling for more forceful action, and earlier this week the House of Representatives passed overwhelmingly bipartisan legislation that requires companies to prove products from the Xinjiang region are not made with coerced Uighur labor.Yet the persecution of the Uighurs continues and in full view of the world. Jewher is now herself an activist for Uighur rights. She says knowing what is happening to Uighurs makes her more determined to preserve her culture, her history, and her language. “I don’t think there’s any other words to put for this action,” she said. “I think it is genocide. It’s genocide, period.”Xinjiang, where about 11 million Uighurs and other Muslim minorities live, is an autonomous region in China’s northwest that borders Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Mongolia. It has been under Chinese control since 1949, when the People’s Republic of China was established.Uighurs speak their own language — an Asian Turkic language similar to Uzbek — and most practice a moderate form of Sunni Islam. Some activists, including those who seek independence from China, refer to the region as East Turkestan.Once situated along the ancient Silk Road trading route, Xinjiang is oil- and resource-rich. As it developed along with the rest of China, the region attracted more Han Chinese, a migration encouraged by the Chinese government.That demographic shift inflamed ethnic tensions, especially within some of the larger cities. In 2009, for example, riots broke out in Urumqi, the capital of Xinjiang, after Uighurs protested their treatment by the government and the Han majority. About 200 people were killed and hundreds injured during the unrest.The Chinese government blamed the protests on violent separatist groups, a tactic it would continue to use against the Uighurs and other religious and ethnic minorities across China. The Chinese government justifies its clampdown on the Uighurs and Muslim minorities by saying it’s trying to eradicate extremism and separatist groups. Attacks, some violent, by Uighur separatists have occurred in recent years, and some Uighurs have become foreign fighters, joining groups like ISIS. But there’s little evidence of any cohesive separatist movement — with jihadist roots or otherwise — that could challenge the Chinese government, some experts tell me. Xinjiang is also a major logistics hub of Beijing’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative, a trillion-dollar infrastructure project along the old Silk Road meant to boost China’s economic and political influence around the world. Xinjiang’s increasing importance to China’s global aspirations is a major reason Beijing is exerting its control in the region. “This region is critical to China’s future development and the Belt and Road initiative,” Dru C. Gladney, a professor of anthropology at Pomona College in Claremont, California, who studies the region, told me. “All those roads go through Xinjiang.”China’s crackdown on the Uighurs was initially part of a policy of “de-extremification.” Under this policy, Beijing imposed draconian restrictions in Xinjiang intended to erase the Uighurs’ Islamic religious and cultural identity, including imprisoning hundreds of thousands in so-called “reeducation” camps. China has a dark history with reeducation camps, combining hard labor with indoctrination to the party line. According to research by Adrian Zenz, a leading scholar on China’s policies toward the Uighurs and Senior Research Fellow in China Studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, Chinese officials began using dedicated camps in Xinjiang around 2014, around the same time that China blamed a series of terrorist attacks on radical Uighur separatists. In 2016, Xinjiang also got a new leader: a powerful Communist Party boss named Chen Quanguo, whose previous job was restoring order and control to the restive region of Tibet. Chen has a reputation as a strongman and is something of a specialist in ethnic crackdowns. The United States placed human rights sanctions on Chen and other Chinese officials in Xinjiang earlier this month. Chen “is responsible for the system that used technology to round up Uighurs at such a rapid pace — not only in Xinjiang, but also similar models of convenience-style police stations were sort of tested in the Tibet region prior to being deployed in the Xinjiang context,” said Olivia Enos, a senior policy analyst at the Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at the Heritage Foundation.Increased and aggressive mass surveillance and police presence accompanied his move to Xinjiang, including his “grid management” policing system. As the Economist reported, “authorities divide each city into squares, with about 500 people. Every square has a police station that keeps tabs on the inhabitants. So, in rural areas, does every village.”Security checkpoints where residents must scan identification cards were set up at train stations and on roads into and out of towns. Authorities have reportedly used facial recognition technology to track residents’ movements. Chinese officials also reportedly took blood and DNA samples, framed as mandatory check-ups. Police confiscate phones to download the information contained on them to scan through later or track Uighurs through their cellphones. Police have also confiscated passports to prevent Uighurs from traveling abroad. Uighurs abroad say their families are targeted by Chinese officials, part of a pressure campaign to keep the diaspora from speaking out.Some of the targeted “de-extremification” restrictions gained coverage in the West, including a ban on certain Muslim names for babies and another on long beards and veils. The government reportedly tried to promote drinking and smoking because people who didn’t drink or smoke — like devout Muslims — were deemed suspicious. In October 2019, Radio Free Asia, a news agency backed by the US government, also reported that Han Chinese men were being sent to check in on and sometimes sleep with Uighur women, including those whose husbands were detained in the camps. The “Pair Up and Become Family” program, as it is called, is designed to “promote ethnic unity,” one local official explained.Chinese officials have justified these policies as necessary to counter religious radicalization and extremism, but critics say they are explicitly meant to curtail Islamic traditions and practices. The Chinese government is “trying to expunge ethnonational characteristics from the people,” James Millward, a professor at Georgetown University, told me in 2018. “They’re not trying to drive them out of the country; they’re trying to hold them in.” “The ultimate goal, the ultimate issue that the Chinese state is targeting, [is] the cultural practices and beliefs of Muslim groups,” he added.At first, the Chinese government denied these camps even existed. China’s state-run media at one time dismissed the reports of detention camps as Western media “baselessly criticizing China’s human rights.”But China has since stopped pretending that the camps aren’t real. Instead, the government is trying to cast them as both lawful and innocuous. In October 2018, Chinese officials effectively legalized the “education camps” for the stated goal of eradicating extremism. Later that month, a government official in Xinjiang — who was himself an ethnic Uighur — compared the detention centers to “boarding schools” and its detainees to “students.” “Many trainees have said they were previously affected by extremist thought and had never participated in such kinds of arts and sports activities. Now they realize how colorful life can be,” Xinjiang Governor Shorat Zakir reportedly told Xinhua, China’s state-run news agency.What’s really going on in the camps is difficult to know because of China’s disinformation campaign and tight clampdown on information. But leaked official documents and chilling firsthand accounts from people detained in the camps have helped outside experts and researchers put together a disturbing portrait of the abuses that take place there.These camps are much more like prisons than so-called boarding schools. A 2018 report by Agence France-Presse described camps in which thousands of guards carry spiked clubs, tear gas, and stun guns to surveil detainees, who are held in buildings surrounded by razor wire and infrared cameras. AFP journalists also reviewed public documents showing that government agencies overseeing the camps purchased 2,768 police batons, 550 electric cattle prods, 1,367 pairs of handcuffs, and 2,792 cans of pepper spray.An investigation by Reuters in 2018 also found that, according to satellite imagery, 39 suspected camps almost tripled in size between April 2017 and August 2018. “Collectively, the built-up parts in these 39 facilities now cover an area roughly the size of 140 soccer fields,” the report said.In 2019, another set of leaked documents revealed how tightly controlled the camps are. According to the BBC, detainees were “never” allowed to escape, and their “behavioral violations” would face discipline and punishment. The documents ordered surveillance of dorm rooms and classrooms. Leaked drone footage, believed to be recorded last August, appears to show hundreds of Uighur prisoners, blindfolded and handcuffed, being transferred by train.And there is evidence that China is continuing to expand the detention of the Uighurs, even beyond the re-education camps. China has claimed since last year that detainees had graduated and been released, rejoining society because their indoctrination program worked. In August, Buzzfeed News used satellite imagery to document 2017 detention facilities built since 2017, one in every county in Xinjiang. According to Buzzfeed, as China sought to detain people, they repurposed government buildings, but, over time, these sites have become fortified, and more and more prison-like.A report released this month by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) also found China’s network of detention centers continues to grow. ASPI documented 380 centers that had been built or expanded since 2017, and at least 60 new facilities have been built or expanded between July 2019 and July 2020 alone; about half are more heavily securitized facilities — maximum security prisons, basically. ASPI also found evidence that some of the earlier re-education camps had been decommissioned. It’s a sign this is just arbitrary detention, without even the pretense China had used before.The Chinese government continues to target Uighurs outside the camps. In February 2020, a leaked 137-page spreadsheet from Karakax County in Xinjiang showed exactly how Uighur families were tracked by authorities. The spreadsheet contained 300 names of Uighur families, including the identities of people committed to concentration camps, and those whom officials were monitoring. Some of those being tracked were as young as 16. Among the things that caught the attention of authorities were obtaining a passport (whether or not they traveled), praying regularly, or even wearing a beard, according to the New York Times. Family members were monitored for participating in religious ceremonies like funerals or weddings. Uighurs were also sent to camps if they violated China’s birth restrictions.Additional research by Zenz and the Associated Press in June 2020 bolstered this finding, showing that Chinese officials were systematically trying to stop Uighur women from having children under the threat of internment if they violated the rules. According to the report: The state regularly subjects minority women to pregnancy checks, and forces intrauterine devices, sterilization and even abortion on hundreds of thousands, the interviews and data show. Even while the use of IUDs and sterilization has fallen nationwide, it is rising sharply in Xinjiang. The research backs up anecdotal reports from women detained in the camps, who say they were forced to undergo examinations and abortions. In December 2017, Gulzira Mogdyn, a 38-year-old ethnic Kazakh and Chinese citizen, was detained in Xinjiang and put under house arrest. She told the Washington Post in October 2019 that during her detention, she’d been forced to undergo a physical examination. She was 10 weeks pregnant; a month later, doctors terminated her pregnancy against her will. “Two humans were lost in this tragedy — my baby and me,” Mogdyn told the Post.Inside these camps, detainees are reportedly subjected to bizarre exercises aimed at “brainwashing” them, as well as physical torture, rape, and sleep deprivation. Millward, the Georgetown professor, said the Chinese authorities see the camps as “a kind of conversion therapy, and they talk about it that way.” A source also told Radio Free Asia in 2018 that a Chinese official had referred to the “reeducation” process as similar to “spraying chemicals on the crops. That is why it is general reeducation, not limited to a few people.” The Washington Post published an account from Kayrat Samarkand, who was detained in one of the camps for three months:The 30-year-old stayed in a dormitory with 14 other men. After the room was searched every morning, he said, the day began with two hours of study on subjects including “the spirit of the 19th Party Congress,” where Xi expounded his political dogma in a three-hour speech, and China’s policies on minorities and religion. Inmates would sing communist songs, chant “Long live Xi Jinping” and do military-style training in the afternoon before writing accounts of their day, he said.“Those who disobeyed the rules, refused to be on duty, engaged in fights or were late for studies were placed in handcuffs and ankle cuffs for up to 12 hours,” Samarkand told the Post. At a July 2018 hearing of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China — a special bipartisan committee set up by Congress to monitor human rights in China — Jessica Batke, a former research analyst at the State Department, testified that “in at least some of these facilities, detainees are subject to waterboarding, being kept in isolation without food and water, and being prevented from sleeping.” “They are interrogated about their religious practices and about having made trips abroad,” Batke continued. “They are forced to apologize for the clothes they wore or for praying in the wrong place at the wrong time.”Beyond the detention camps, there is now growing evidence that Uighurs are being forced to work in Chinese factories. Given the ubiquity of Chinese manufacturing, that almost certainly means that the exploitation of Uighurs is embedded within global supply chains. “It is becoming increasingly hard to ignore the fact that goods manufactured in East Turkestan have a high likelihood of being produced with forced labor,” Nury Turkel, chair of the board of the Uyghur Human Rights Project, told Congress in October 2019, using “East Turkestan” to refer to Xinjiang. The forced labor is happening both within Xinjiang and in other parts of China, according to recent reports. A March 2020 report from the Congressional-Executive Commission on China also found Uighur forced labor taking place within internment camps.According to a report from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), at least 80,000 Uighurs were taken from Xinjiang and transferred to various factories around China between 2017 and 2019, though it’s likely that’s a lowball estimate. Some Uighurs were taken directly from concentration camps to the factories, though the conditions mirrored those they faced in detention, according to that same study. Uighurs were under constant surveillance, forced to undergo Mandarin language instruction and other political teachings in their free time. Most critically, they cannot leave. In July 2019, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation reported a story of a Uighur woman, 38-year-old Dilnur, who was sent to an internment camp along with her husband. In May, Dilnur had contacted her sister in Australia to tell her she’d be taken from the camps and sent to work in a technology factory in Urumqi. “660 people are brought in shackled and handcuffed and it is big,” she wrote.Again, it’s hard to get full information out of China’s tightly controlled system, but leaked documents and testimony from some workers who’ve been forced into factories offer compelling evidence. The revelations raise serious questions for the global supply chain and anyone who buys goods that at one point passed through China.The ASPI found that at least 27 suspected factories are using laborers from Xinjiang, which potentially have connections to 83 major global brands. The Xinjiang region, specifically, is a major cotton hub for China, meaning Xinjiang cotton might end up in the final products of many clothing lines.The Washington Post and ASPI found that the South Korean-owned Qingdao Taekwang Shoes Co. in Laixi, China, a Nike supplier for decades, employs about 700 Uighur workers. Though they could not confirm that the Uighurs were forced to work, eyewitnesses told the Post that the workers weren’t allowed to leave freely. Nike has since said it’s in contact with suppliers to “assess potential risks” related to the employment of Uighurs. Other companies, like Apple, have said they found no evidence of forced labor but are monitoring their sources.Another recent investigation in the New York Times found that forced Uighur labor is being used to make personal protective equipment, specifically those disposable surgical face masks that are ubiquitous in the time of Covid-19.In July, more than 72 Uighur rights group and 100 civil society groups worldwide launched a campaign to end forced Uighur labor, demanding companies stop sourcing cotton, yarn, textiles, and finished products from Xinjiang, and for companies to cut ties with suppliers implicated in forced labor schemes. Zubayra Shamseden, the Chinese outreach coordinator with the Uyghur Human Rights Project, told me in July that Uighurs have faced discrimination for years in education and employment. “It just didn’t get the attention of the world,” she said. The recent headlines, including those about birth control and forced sterilization, have helped change that. But, she said, anyone who really tried to see what was happening in Xinjiang could see if they looked. “It’s clear it’s there. It’s just crystal clear,” she said, adding that China is still denying all of it.That the world is finally starting to pay attention is important, but it’s not nearly enough. Activists say governments and international institutions need to do more to pressure China.Uighurs in the diaspora are pushing for the International Criminal Court to investigate China for genocide and other atrocities. Naomi Kikoler, director of the Simon-­Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, said in March that “there are reasonable grounds to believe that China is responsible for crimes against humanity.” However, because China doesn’t recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction, that method might have its limits. Some US lawmakers have been pushing for the US to get tougher on China on the Uighur issue, and the State Department has advocated for the Uighurs as part of its religious freedom initiatives. And the Trump administration is finally beginning to take more forceful steps to punish China for its human rights abuses. President Donald Trump himself had been pretty quiet on the topic until recently, and it seems his desire to negotiate a trade deal with China was a big reason why. “Well, we were in the middle of a major trade deal,” Trump said in June, when asked why he hadn’t yet imposed US Treasury sanctions on Chinese officials involved in the repression of the Uighurs. Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton also alleged that Trump personally gave Xi Jinping the green light to keep building the camps, telling Xi at a meeting in June 2019 that it was “exactly the right thing to do.” (The meeting was attended by only the two leaders and their interpreters, so Bolton is relying on what the interpreter told him after the meeting. Other US officials have denied Bolton’s account.)In June, however, Trump signed into law the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2020, which imposes sanctions on foreign individuals and entities involved in abuses in Xinjiang and requires the president to periodically “send Congress a list identifying foreign individuals and entities responsible for such human rights abuses.” Since then, the US has sanctioned officials, including Chen Quanguo, who’s in charge of Xinjiang and the mastermind behind its surveillance policies. The US also placed sanctions on the Xinjiang Public Security Bureau and its director, Wang Mingshan, under the Global Magnitsky Act, which targets human rights abusers around the world. The US sanctions angered China, and Beijing retaliated by sanctioning US officials, including Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), who have been some of the most prominent voices in Congress in condemning China’s abuse of the Uighurs. Earlier in September, the Trump administration also put new restrictions on clothing, technology, and hair products from certain companies linked to forced Uighur labor. It’s already legal for Americans to import any goods made with forced labor, but the knottiness of supply chains has made this harder to detect. The administration is also considering a more sweeping ban on all cotton imports from Xinjiang.But the Trump administration’s tougher approach toward China on the Uighur issue also comes as the administration has sought to put increasing pressure on China over its handling of the coronavirus pandemic. Tensions between Washington and Beijing are escalating, and the tit for tat is sinking the relationship between the two superpowers. “I am concerned that once again the Uighurs are not being taken seriously, in and of themselves, rather than being used as kind of a pawn in a larger geopolitical strategy,” Gladney, of Pomona College, said. Pressure on China for its human rights abuses — both in Xinjiang and in Hong Kong — should be a priority for any US administration. “I definitely think that there’s an effort to squeeze China in any way that it can possibly be done,” Enos said of the United States. “But I think there’s also this broader recognition that what’s going on in Xinjiang is definitely among some of the worst human rights atrocities taking place, certainly in this decade, maybe even in our generation.”New details about atrocities inside the camps have added even more of a sense of urgency — though there’s still more to be done. Though Trump confronted China (virtually) at the United Nations this week for various misdeeds, he did not explicitly condemn China for its activities in Xinjiang. Bipartisan lawmakers in the House of Representatives passed the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act this week, which would require that companies prove any products sourced from Xinjiang did not involve forced labor and would compile of list of Chinese companies that relied on forced labor. (It still needs to go through the Senate.) Senators have also urged the Trump administration to make a formal declaration that atrocity crimes are happening in Xinjiang. Some advocates are also calling on consumers to boycott products that might have been made with Uighur labor. Economic pressure — especially if it forces major corporations to break ties with some Chinese suppliers — may be one of the most effective tools, though that is also increasingly challenging in a world that’s consumed by the coronavirus pandemic and an economic catastrophe.But the pandemic itself, Shamseden of the Uyghur Human Rights Project told me, is yet another reason for urgency. She saw it as another potential reason for China’s government to escalate its crackdown, under the guise of quarantine for Covid-19. “It’s going to be another good excuse to just detain people arbitrarily,” she said. Millions turn to Vox to understand what’s happening in the news. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower through understanding. Financial contributions from our readers are a critical part of supporting our resource-intensive work and help us keep our journalism free for all. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today from as little as $3.

Lawyers for Eric Trump on Thursday said he's willing to answer questions in the New York Attorney General's investigation of the Trump Organization — but only after the presidential election.Trump's lawyer said in a court filing that he needs the delay because of his "extreme travel schedule and related unavailability between now and the election and to avoid the use of his deposition attendance for political purposes."Attorney General Letitia James' office has been trying to get Trump to sit for an interview for months, but Trump refused to comply with a subpoena and accused her of engaging in "prosecutorial misconduct" last month.In a statement Thursday, James said, "While we cannot comment on the particular steps we're taking on specific litigation, we won't allow any entity or individual to dictate how our investigation will proceed or allow anyone to evade a lawful subpoena. No one is above the law, period."James' sprawling civil investigation is based in part on former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's testimony to Congress and seeks to learn whether the financial filings for President Donald Trump's business, the Trump Organization, were inflated or deflated to obtain loans or reduce potential taxes.Eric Trump, the company's executive vice president, has been running the company while his father's been in the White House.In a filing in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan, lawyers for Trump and the company argue that many of the documents the AG is seeking are protected by attorney-client privilege, and the subpoena to Trump was "premature" and "unnecessary."Among the conditions the company wanted was an agreement that the A.G. "will not provide any materials, information or transcripts developed or collected in the course of its investigation to any other law enforcement authority, agency or regulator."Despite the months-long delay in getting Trump's testimony, his lawyers contended there's no rush. "We note that the OAG investigation has been ongoing for approximately 18 months," their filing said.The Trump lawyers said they've proposed four dates for a deposition, with the first being "just two weeks" after the presidential election."Trump's lawyers also contended that, "It is well known that most, if not all, law enforcement and regulatory agencies studiously avoid certain actions within the 60-day period prior to a major election."Trump initially agreed to sit for an interview in July, but backed out just two days beforehand, according to the AG's office.A hearing in the case is scheduled for next week.

Putting aside the so-called lack of innovation (I rather think that their chip design counts, also their ecosystem integration), *stability* is something the stock market likes. Apple is good at making money. Innovation gives you a chance to make money, but stability is where people start investing because they believe that it will pay future dividends.Amazon was more innovative at the beginning than now, but now they're actually making money and their market cap is bigger than ever before. So too with Microsoft and Facebook.Innovation really isn't everything. We look for it because we like to see the world move forward. What will be the next big disruption? By definition, nobody will know until it happens. But if you're just looking at stock prices, steady, predictable income is where it's at. As long as Apple doesn't look like they're going to be disrupted themselves, this was the inevitable outcome.

Intel Corp. could see new business opportunities from a bifurcation of tech supply chains amid growing tensions between the U.S. and China, the chip maker’s Chief Executive Bob Swan said.The U.S. and several other countries have limited or blocked Chinese telecom giant Huawei Technologies Co. from providing equipment for their 5G infrastructure over concerns about security and potential espionage—claims Huawei denies. Those constraints leave gaps that others—including Intel—could fill by providing the chips that power the superfast networks.But Intel also illustrates how the intensifying battle between Washington and Beijing over tech dominance brings both risk and opportunity. The company is still a major supplier to customers in China, where its chips are used in personal computers, servers and a range of other devices.“China is a big market for us, but at the same time Intel playing a broader role in 5G infrastructure is also an opportunity for us,” Mr. Swan said at the WSJ Tech Live conference, which was held remotely on Tuesday. Overall, he said, the company and the industry would benefit from free global trade.Intel agreed Monday to sell its flash-memory manufacturing business to South Korea’s SK Hynix Inc. for $9 billion. That business has operations in Dalian, China, Intel’s only major chip-making facilities in the country.

Four men have been charged with the gang-rape and murder of a 19-year-old Dalit woman in India, a case that prompted nationwide protests and drew a fresh spotlight on India’s endemic problem of sexual violence.In September in Hathras, a small village in Uttar Pradesh, the 19-year-old woman was working in the fields when she was pounced on by four older men who dragged her to a field, attacked her and then tried to strangle her with her shawl.The charge sheet filed by the central bureau of investigation on Friday confirmed the girl was gang-raped and four men have been charged with her murder.The girl was a Dalit, India’s lowest caste, formerly known as “untouchables”, while her four alleged attackers were from a higher caste. Sexual violence against Dalit women is regularly used as a tool of oppression and around 10 Dalit women are raped every day in India.The 19-year-old was discovered by her family bleeding in the field, barely conscious and with her spine broken. The girl was taken to a local hospital and then transferred to a government hospital in Delhi, where she died from her injuries two weeks after the attack.Her case initially barely attracted any media attention. However, after the Uttar Pradesh police came under pressure for not properly registering her case as a rape and faced accusations of not investigating the case properly due to the low caste of the girl and her family, anger and protests exploded across India.Several policemen were later suspended for “negligence and lax supervision” in the case. The police deny any wrongdoing.The police also began to downplay and deny reports that the girl had been raped, and the rightwing firebrand chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, claimed that the rape allegations were an invented international conspiracy.The Uttar Pradesh police also came under fire after they allegedly cremated the girl’s body at night, against the wishes of the family. Officials said the cremation was done “as per the wishes of the family”. The police formed a blockade around Hathras village, preventing senior opposition politicians and journalists entering to report on the case.One journalist, Siddique Kappan, was arrested trying to reach the village and allegedly tortured by police before being charged with sedition under the draconian terrorism law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (Uapa). He remains in jail.The case once again exposed the widespread threat of sexual violence faced by women in India, the country which remains the most dangerous place for women in the world. Outcry over the brutal gang-rape of a student on a bus in Delhi in 2012 led to new anti-rape laws and harsher punishments, but rape cases remain rampant.

Rishi Sunak’s first budget reveals a politician who will not squander the opportunity presented by a crisis. The Conservative chancellor has acted to shore up confidence in the economy by rolling out a series of emergency spending measures to support households and businesses in the wake of the global coronavirus outbreak. But he has also signalled a new direction of government economic policy. Mr Sunak used his first of three fiscal events this year to talk up the government’s agenda and send a message that it would not hesitate to use the state. What Mr Sunak wanted voters to hear is that this is a big-spending, big-borrowing administration, which in terms of real spending per person aims to reverse a decade of cuts by the time of the next election.This change of attitude and the talk of strengthening the safety net to deal with an emergency is a refreshing change for the better. Mr Sunak is correct in sensing that the public won’t indulge Tory state-shrinking instincts. The chancellor is a welcome convert to the idea that the Treasury must borrow to invest with a view to lifting the growth rate of the economy. The cash injection is required to keep the economy expanding, not least because Brexit shrunk it by 2%. What once was seen as heresy is now a tenet of the Johnsonian faith. The impression, left by Mr Sunak, is that we are all Keynesians now. To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, never has the road to Damascus been so congested. Mrs Thatcher was crowing in 1996 after four Labour defeats. There can be little satisfaction for Labour in winning the economic argument, only to see the Tories stealing its ideas after four electoral losses. However, it would be churlish not to think that Mr Sunak’s extra £6bn on the NHS ought to be discounted just because he lifted the figure from Labour’s manifesto. The most troubling opposition to Mr Sunak about public spending may come from his own side. Many Conservatives have not changed their minds and may well view Mr Sunak as having lost his. Tory pulses are set racing by cutting taxes, slashing regulation and talking up wealth creation, not by extolling the virtues of government spending.Conservatives, however, are prepared to give up their principles for power. It is what makes the party such a formidable political force. On the surface the budget was one for drinkers and drivers. Like most Tories, Mr Sunak believes in clean tech, not hair-shirting. No doubt he thinks a Conservative can become the inaugural West Yorkshire mayor, which is why he is proposing one – and replicate the party’s breakthrough in the north-east of England in 2017. Mr Sunak might claim the Tories are “the real workers’ party” but there’s no sign the state will intervene on the side of labour or redistribute wealth. He conspicuously declined to act as the employer of last resort for the “gig economy” during this crisis.While Mr Sunak changed the path of policy, he did little to reveal where the Conservatives were going. Voters are in the dark about what he wants to splash the cash on. Under the rubric of “investing in excellent public services” and “levelling up”, the budget spreadsheet has about £60bn of unspecified spending in 2024. Mr Sunak has until the summer to outline how he will spend these sums. Higher government investment will increase the supply capacity of the economy. And higher spending will boost demand. Yet the extent to which these – and any social gains – are realised depends on the mix of the projects chosen. Even before coronavirus hit, Mr Sunak faced a slowing world economy and a Brexit that leaves the country poorer. The Bank of England has little conventional ammunition left and is already lining up £100bn in emergency credit lines. It will be months before we will know if the UK and the EU are to agree on a trade deal. He may strut around the dispatch box, but Mr Sunak is clearly anxious to keep his powder dry.

On Sunday morning, Nexta—the word means “somebody”—posted a red and white invitation to the march. “Ring the doorbells of your neighbors, call your friends and relatives, write to your colleagues,” the message instructed them: “We are going EXCLUSIVELY peacefully to the center of town to hold the authorities to account.” The invitation also contained a list of demands: the immediate freeing of political prisoners, the resignation of Lukashenko, the indictment of those responsible for a shocking series of political murders.People went to the Minsk march, and to dozens of smaller marches across the country, because they saw that message. On subsequent days, many went on strike because they saw another message on that channel and on channels like it. Over the past 10 days, people all across Belarus have marched, protested, carried red and white flags and banners, and gathered at factories and outside prisons because they trust what they read on Nexta. They trust Nexta even though Sviatlou is only 22 years old, even though he is an amateur blogger, and even though he is outside the country.Or to put it more accurately, they trust Nexta because Sviatlou is only 22, and because he is an amateur who lives outside the country. In Belarus, the government is a kind of presidential monarchy with no checks, no balances, and no rule of law. State media are grotesquely biased: Memo98, a media-monitoring group, reckons that Belarus state television devoted 97 percent of all political news programming to Lukashenko in May and June, with only 30 seconds devoted to opposition presidential candidates. Political leaders in Belarus are routinely repressed, and their voices are muffled: Tsikhanouskaya was running for president because her husband, Siarhei Tsikhanouski, was arrested before he could start his own presidential campaign. Other candidates and politicians were also arrested, along with their staff. Some are still in prison. Human-rights groups have evidence of torture.They don’t trust the government, they can’t hear the opposition—but more than 2 million people subscribe to the Nexta Live channel, and hundreds of thousands more follow Sviatlou on YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter, as well as his other Telegram channels, because they trust him. And no wonder: He shows them pictures of people like themselves. He shows them videos of places they recognize. His public persona is optimistic, idealistic, and patriotic. In photographs, he is usually smiling. Plus, he is in Poland, a place where police can’t get the data on his telephone, so it is safe to read what he writes and to send him information.Indeed, if Belarus is run by people who look like they belong in a movie about Cold War thugs, Sviatlou looks like your next-door neighbor, or rather your next-door neighbor’s clever son. I met him this week in Warsaw, and he was wearing sneakers, shorts, and a Nexta T-shirt. The graduate of an unusual, underground, countercultural school in Minsk—it was set up after the last Belarusian-language high school in the country was shut down—he is fluent in Polish as well as Russian. He was soft-spoken and a little nervous, partly, I am guessing, because he doesn’t do many interviews, partly because he really wanted to get back to work, and partly because on that particular day, the building where he does that work, the Białoruski Dom—the “Belarus House,” set up in Warsaw a decade ago, after a previous generation of political dissidents went into exile—had just received a series of bomb threats. While we were talking, Polish police were chatting in the hallway just outside.

Enlarge this image During the Sept. 29 presidential debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden in Cleveland, President Trump declined to denounce white supremacists. Days later he told Fox News that he condemned right-wing hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Proud Boys. Win McNamee/Getty Images hide caption toggle caption Win McNamee/Getty Images During the Sept. 29 presidential debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden in Cleveland, President Trump declined to denounce white supremacists. Days later he told Fox News that he condemned right-wing hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Proud Boys. Win McNamee/Getty Images Soon after being discharged from the hospital for treatment for COVID-19, President Trump tweeted the slur "Chinese virus" to refer to the coronavirus, something he's often repeated during the pandemic.It's the latest example of Trump's alarming language that critics charge is xenophobic, discriminatory and even white supremacist. While Trump denies those labels, he has increasingly returned to the issue of race in the runup to the November election. Last month he barred racial sensitivity training for federal workers and then expanded it to contractors in an executive order. At the first debate last month, to an international audience, he called the trainings — aimed at creating an inclusive work environment — "racist."He's also attacked The New York Times' 1619 Project — which some schools are adopting into their curriculum to center the consequences of slavery in U.S. history — as anti-American propaganda. Then he formed the "1776 Commission" for what he called a "patriotic" education. And Trump paints the largely peaceful protests for racial justice across the country as violent riots and tries to portray himself as the "law and order" candidate.Courtney Parella, a spokeswoman for the campaign, said in a statement that labeling the president racist is a "pathetic attempt to negate his incredible accomplishments for Black America." "Democrats, with the help of the mainstream media, try to label this President as something he's not," she said.She points to Trump's record on criminal justice reform, support for funding of HBCUs and unemployment numbers and accused Joe Biden of failing "minority communities." Trump has attacked Biden for his role in the 1994 crime bill and accused him of hurting the economy for Black Americans with his trade policies. The White House has repeatedly pointed to the record low Black unemployment rate before the coronavirus pandemic. But it shot up during the pandemic to 13 percent, above the national unemployment rate of about 8 percent.And the president's language and policy changes over the last month are less blips and more features of his reelection campaign, said Ange-Marie Hancock Alfaro, a professor of political science and gender studies at the University of Southern California. Race Trump Tells Agencies To End Trainings On 'White Privilege' And 'Critical Race Theory' "Part of the strategy is to create enough chaos and confusion and to create enough anger, frankly, in his base that they will make sure that they continue to kind of agitate during the electoral process," Alfaro said. "Based on what happened in 2016, he and his campaign see this as a successful strategy. I think what's different in 2020, though, is that you can't just do the same thing that you did four years ago. You actually have to amp it up."Alfaro said Trump is stoking racial tensions and playing on fears among some white voters to portray himself as the one who can save them from chaos.She pointed to a rally last month in Bemidji, Minn., where Trump falsely said former Vice President Joe Biden would flood the majority-white state with refugees from "Somalia and all over the planet."Then to the almost exclusively white crowd, he invoked the "racehorse theory.""You have good genes, you know that right? You have good genes. A lot of it's about the genes, isn't it? Don't you believe?" he told the crowd. "The racehorse theory you think was so different? You have good genes, Minnesota." Trump tells an almost exclusively white crowd in Minnesota they have "good genes." Bahram Ansari YouTube That theory is a discredited, discriminatory belief from the eugenics movement that some genes are superior to others. These are the theories that shaped Nazi Germany's policies. Eugenics was also behind the forced sterilization of women in the 1950s in North Carolina through the early 1970s in Puerto Rico. The pseudo-science led to the coerced sterilizations of Native American, Latina, African American and poor women."Then now, most recently, we started to hear reports of women in detention, in [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] detention, who were being sterilized without informed consent and certainly against their will," she said.Even if Trump loses to Biden in November, Alfaro said, his actions have normalized racist fringe ideologies and encouraged extremists."There's been this emboldening of violence, this emboldening of a certain kind of rhetoric that I think really could become a problem," she said. "So even if there is a peaceful transfer of power in January, we do have to be very concerned about the legacy of what we've seen over the past four years." National Whistleblower Alleges 'Medical Neglect,' Questionable Hysterectomies Of ICE Detainees There already appears to be a chilling effect as a result of Trump's executive order to "combat offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating."This week actor William Jackson Harper tweeted about his experience with a nonprofit he works with, Arts in the Armed Forces. He said the organization asked him to choose a film for cadets of all academies to screen virtually and discuss. They settled on the movie Malcolm X, but the executive order led some cadets to back out of the screening. In addition to barring racial sensitivity training, the order instructed federal and military institutions not to use material that promotes a "pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country; that some people, simply on account of their race or sex, are oppressors.""This executive order denies the very real experiences of so many minorities in this country. This executive order is rooted in the fictitious idea that the scourges of racism and sexism are essentially over, and that the poisonous fallout from centuries [of] discrimination isn't real," Harper wrote on Twitter. "But all of these things are real, and they remain to this day some of the most salient malignancies in our society."Harper called it "selective censorship.""It's no accident that all of these kinds of flagrant comments, which feel really spontaneous, they all cohere around a narrative of elevating white Americans as the real Americans and around excluding those who don't fit into that as unworthy or unequal," said Natalia Mehlman Petrzela, a New York-based historian of contemporary politics and culture. She points to what she calls the whitewashing of America's history through attacking efforts to teach about systemic racism."It's about dismissing the idea that racism is real," Petrzela said, calling it a strategic attack "on the idea that we must take seriously the experiences of people of color and the exclusion and racism that they have faced as a defining aspect of American society."Trump's not the first president to be accused of using dog whistles and race in his campaign. One example is Jimmy Carter, a Democrat. During his campaign in 1976, he warned about low-income housing in the suburbs and used terms such as "ethnic purity," and "Black intrusion," when discussing all-white neighborhoods. M.E. Hart is an attorney who's conducted hundreds of racial-sensitivity trainings for the federal government and American businesses. He said maligning efforts to create inclusive environments feels dangerous."The trainings are designed to help people understand and work better across cultures, to help people to create a culture of psychological safety and belonging so people can bring their best to work," he said. "They're not anti-American; they're pro-American, pro-business."Hart was diplomatic before the presidential debate last week. But after watching Trump choose not to condemn white supremacy and then again attack mail-in voting as fraudulent with zero evidence, he no longer uses that diplomatic tone."The president laid down the gauntlet, and I'm concerned for the safety of American citizens, regardless of race, of gender, ethnicity," Hart said. "Every American should be concerned when our president is using race to divide us."Days after the debate, Trump said on Fox News that he did, in fact, condemn white supremacy. "Let me be clear again: I condemn the KKK. I condemn all white supremacists," he said.

Ann-Marie has long enjoyed researching what believers might call alternative health theories. She is well-versed in articles tied to the anti-vaccination movement, and was interested in conspiracy theories about cancer and AIDS. But it wasn’t until COVID-19 became widespread in the United States that she came into contact with the wildest conspiracy theory of the Trump era.“If it wasn’t for COVID19, I would have been just continuing to tell my kids about the ‘stuff’ I was finding and wouldn’t have found out about QAnon,” the Pennsylvania resident, who declined to give her last name because she didn’t want her identity “out there,” told The Daily Beast.From virtually the moment COVID-19 came onto the scene late last year, conspiracy theories about the disastrous illness have also gone viral. COVID truthers pushed hoaxes claiming Bill Gates was behind the illness, and that a future vaccine would actually be part of a secret microchipping plot.But “Plandemic,” a debunked, documentary-style video, exploded in popularity shortly after its release this month, becoming nearly unavoidable on Facebook—at least until the platform took steps to remove it. The video, and others in its genre, first found popularity through a network of fringe social-media groups that promote ideas like QAnon, the bizarre conspiracy that accuses President Donald Trump’s foes of Satanic pedophilia and/or cannibalism. Grotesquely weird conspiracy theories like QAnon are probably off-putting to most people who stumble upon them. But the newly popular “Plandemic”-style videos are minting a new set of conspiracy-curious Americans amid the despair of coronavirus isolation, easing them into contact with the worst of the web.“Plandemic,” an error-ridden video starring oft-debunked scientist Dr. Judy Mikovits, racked up millions of views before it was banned by platforms like Facebook and YouTube earlier this month. (“Suggesting that wearing a mask can make you sick could lead to imminent harm, so we’re removing the video,” Facebook previously said in a statement.) But the bans are only partially effective. A cursory search on Monday turned up live links all over Facebook, and the video’s sudden surge to virality came thanks in part to a network of existing conspiracy pages. Facebook did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.Across several days in early May, links to the “Plandemic” video soared in large Facebook groups tied to QAnon, as well as pages that promoted conspiracy theories about chemtrails, lizard people, and vaccines, according to data published by Erin Gallagher, an independent researcher focusing on social media patterns. Some right-wing pages, like Facebook groups for fans of Fox News host Tucker Carlson and talk radio star Rush Limbaugh, were also major hubs for the video.“The central hubs were Qanon, antivax, general conspiracy groups,” Gallagher told The Daily Beast. “There is really a hodgepodge of all kinds of groups: antivax, 5G truthers, new age, flat earth, general pro-Trump groups, several of the ‘reopen’ Facebook groups, White rabbit/Qanon, and conronavirus-related groups. It's really a wide spectrum of truther-type Facebook groups, that are all 1 degree of separation away from each other.”High on traffic from these Facebook groups (several with more than 100,000 members), the video spread across the web, maybe landing on your own page via a former classmate or a relative you forgot you added.But “Plandemic” and other COVID-skeptical videos aren’t just bubbling up from the conspiratorial web with bogus suggestions that, for instance, protective masks are somehow dangerous. They’re also luring unsuspecting viewers into the depths of the far-right abyss.In a popular Facebook group for Rush Limbaugh, posts about “Plandemic” routinely attracted comments inviting readers to check out even more fringe conspiratorial content. One Plandemic post, alone, drew comments begging people to research a false conspiracy theory about a United Nations takeover, to watch videos about the so-called “New World Order,” and to read books by David Icke, a conspiracy theorist famous for raving about “reptilians.” (Icke also laces his work with hardcore anti-Semitism.)QAnon slogans were popular among the tie-ins dangled to other conspiracy theories. On Twitter, where Q followers were tweeting the term “plandemic” even before the clip’s release, multiple users described COVID-19 as their introduction to more extreme views.“This 'plandemic' WOKE ME UP and showed me the world wasn't what it seemed,” one tweeted, followed by hashtags for QAnon and its sister-conspiracy Pizzagate. The account, which referenced QAnon in its name, was registered in April.Health crises have long inspired conspiracy theories. When the Black Death ravaged Europe in the late 1340s, panicked villagers blamed the plague on a long-time scapegoat: Jews. A pernicious rumor claimed that a rabbi had ordered Jews across the continent to drop poison in cities’ wells. Never mind that the plague was a bacterial infection; locals rounded up Jews, tortured them, and in some cases extracted phony confessions, which were used as justification for pogroms that saw thousands slaughtered. During the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, truthers spread new conspiracy theories, accusing Germans of deliberately spreading the virus in rival countries. Even the disease’s name was a blame game. The Spanish Flu likely originated in the U.S., and other countries adopted new names for it in keeping with their rivals (Italy called it the “German Disease,” Germany called it the “Russian Plague,” and so on).Multiple new QAnon converts told The Daily Beast the onset of the coronavirus sent them looking for answers—and that they felt like they might have found them.“When COVID19 started, I had told my children ‘there is something MORE to this than a virus - coronavirus is essentially a cold,” Ann-Marie said. (The virus, which has killed more than 80,000 people in the U.S., is much more than a cold—or, for that matter, the flu.) “There is something deeper and darker going on..’ So I started doing some more research … I have spent 600+ hours doing my own research in the past two months.”For her part, Twitch streamer “ItsFlickaboo” told The Daily Beast she became a QAnon convert when her husband fell ill after a trip to Portugal in December, transmitting the sickness to her upon his return. At the time, they thought it was the flu. (It’s unclear how far coronavirus had spread in Europe in December. New research suggests the disease may have spread widely in late 2019, with at least one case in France that month.) When COVID-19 began to dominate headlines in 2020, the couple became convinced that they had contracted it, and that the U.S. military had been involved in a worldwide cover-up of the disease’s spread. (This is not the case.)“Once it became apparent that the Military was introduced, the Navy, Marines etc. I got curious and researched and that is when I found Q,” Flickaboo, who also would only provide a first name (Tanja), told The Daily Beast. She added that she has since become convinced Trump is communicating with QAnon followers in his public tweets.“I know for myself I have always been aware about things not right in the world,” she said. “So COVID truly just made me more aware of what is actually happening.What was actually happening, though, was the spread of COVID-truther videos like “Plandemic” from the explicit conspiracy world to more general interest groups, albeit those with a right-wing orientation. Video from a large “re-open” protest in California also raced around Facebook with a “Plandemic” hashtag, according to Gallagher, the social media researcher.“I saw a lot of shares of the protest video from Huntington Beach that carried the hashtag #Plandemic,” Gallagher said. “That video seems like it got a lot of traction early on.... It was posted by a ‘calm before the storm’ page.”“Calm before the storm” is a QAnon slogan.

Pete Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, officially launched his White House campaign on Sunday. If he is successful he will become the youngest and first openly gay president of the United States. In these nine clips, 'Mayor Pete' covers his religious beliefs, the seven languages he can speak and why running as a millennial candidate is a good thing 'They call me Mayor Pete': Buttigieg launches 2020 presidential run

closeVideoHow long can Joe Biden go without taking questions from the press?2020 Democrat hopeful Joe Biden once again avoids answering questions as he unveils more details of his economic plan; media reporter for The Hill Joe Concha reacts.Joe Biden’s campaign has clarified a statement from the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee that President Trump is the "first" racist president.“We’ve had racists, and they’ve existed, and they’ve tried to get elected president. But he’s the first one that has,” Biden said during a virtual town hall event on Wednesday.Biden campaign senior adviser Symone Sanders later issued a statement clarifying Biden’s comments.“There have been a number of racist American presidents, but Trump stands out -- especially in modern history -- because he made running on racism and division his calling card and won,” she said. “He deliberately foments both, intentionally causing indescribable pain because he thinks it advantages him politically. The George Wallaces of our country's history who have run on these hate-filled themes have lost."Setting aside Biden's assessment of Trump, his remark drew instant criticism, given the known histories of past presidents, a number of whom were slave owners. That history, in recent weeks, has driven controversial efforts to take down and deface statues and monuments dedicated to them.In addition to the known record of presidential slave ownership, including by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, early in the country’s history, other presidents from the last century also have come under fire. Princeton University decided just last month to remove President Woodrow Wilson’s name from its public policy school and a residential college, citing Wilson’s “racist views and policies” as the main factor in the decision.Wilson, who served in the early 20th century, supported segregation and imposed it on several federal agencies. During his presidency, the notoriously racist film “The Birth of a Nation,” which glorified the Ku Klux Klan, was screened at the White House.Former President Andrew Jackson refused to enforce a Supreme Court decision protecting Cherokee rights in Georgia, and the U.S. later forced Cherokees and other tribes to resettle further west in a migration known as the Trail of Tears, which resulted in thousands of deaths.The Trump campaign also hit back at Biden on Wednesday, calling the attack "outrageous" and noting the Democrat's own past controversies including warning in the 1970s about kids growing up in a "racial jungle" without an "orderly integration."“President Trump loves all people, works hard to empower all Americans, and is supported by more Black voters than any Republican presidential candidate in modern history," campaign senior adviser Katrina Pierson said in a statement. "No one should take lectures on racial justice from Joe Biden.”Fox News' Paul Steinhauser and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Apple announced its new iPhone 12 on Tuesday with access to 5G wireless networks, providing a preview of a faster wireless internet.But the company is ditching something else: charging cables, which will no longer come automatically with iPhones as Apple moves toward wireless charging by default. Headphones also won’t come in the box, in what the company described as part of an environmental push.CEO Tim Cook unveiled the new generation of iPhones in a virtual event, saying that all new phones from the company would have 5G capability.“Every decade, there’s a new generation of technology that provides a step change in what we can do with our iPhones,” Cook said. “This is a huge moment for all of us.”The company said the iPhone 12 would start at $799, with a mini version available starting at $699. The higher-end iPhone 12 Pro with advanced photo capabilities will start at $999 and larger iPhone 12 Pro Max at $1,099.Smartphones with 5G, or fifth generation, capability will eventually have stronger wireless connections, allowing for faster downloads and uploads and improved gaming and other features.Industry analysts expect the benefits of 5G to appear slowly, though, as phone carriers build out their networks. One expert has described 5G-enabled smartphones as the equivalent of driving a Ferrari on a village road.“We’re really right at the start of the 5G era. We’re seeing different U.S. carriers lead with one part of the 5G service,” Ian Fogg, vice president of analysis at analytics company Opensignal, told CNBC.Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg said at the Apple virtual event that consumers may first notice the 5G networks at spaces for large events such as sports stadiums. Apple said 5G speeds would vary by carrier and region.Apple played up the improved gaming capacity of iPhone 12 with 5G, announcing a new game from the League of Legends franchise — at the same time that Apple is currently locked in a fight with another gaming company over Apple's App Store rules.The removal of charging cables has long been predicted by Apple analysts. The company said Tuesday the change was driven by environmental concerns and the minerals needed to make charging cables.iPhone buyers will still get a USB-C cable to connect to other devices and potentially to charge their phones, but not a cable that can plug into an electrical socket.Apple likewise had foreshadowed the end of cable-based headphones, killing off the iPhone headphone jack and launching wireless-but-pricey AirPods in 2016.The annual launch of Apple’s latest smartphones is significant for gauging the thinking of one of America’s largest and most influential technology companies, as well as a sign of what consumers may be shopping for ahead of Christmas and other winter holidays.But the coronavirus pandemic altered Apple’s usual fall product rollout. The Cupertino, Calif.-based company unveiled a new subscription fitness service and updated versions of its watch and tablets at a virtual event in September, and then waited on its iPhone announcement until this month.Tuesday’s event, like the one in September, was entirely virtual, without the usual in-person crowd of cheering employees and curious analysts at Apple’s headquarters.The pandemic and economic slowdown led to a worldwide slowdown in smartphone sales this year, with Apple the lone exception to see a year-over-year increase, research firm Canalys said in a July report.Apple’s iPhones have about 47 percent of the U.S. smartphone market, according to a Canalys analysis of shipments in the second quarter of this year. That’s about double the share of No. 2 seller Samsung.Besides the new iPhones, Apple launched a new miniature version of its HomePod for managing electronics at home and playing music, starting at $99 and going on sale next month. That announcement came the same day that Amazon is pushing its rival Echo devices as part of its annual Prime Day event.

An Iranian conglomerate owned by the country’s military and tied to its missile program has established a retail foothold in Venezuela, according to officials and records detailing the move, deepening Tehran’s involvement with the Maduro government.The Iranian firm is working with the Maduro government’s troubled emergency food program, which is the subject of U.S. enforcement action as an alleged money-laundering operation, compounding U.S. concerns regarding the move.The arrival of the company, which also has ties to Iran’s elite military Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, designated by the U.S. as a terror organization, bolsters Tehran’s foothold in the Western Hemisphere and comes as Venezuela increasingly seeks assistance from U.S. foes, including petroleum from Iran and energy-industry assistance from Russia.The U.S. has imposed sanctions against the governments of the two countries, both of which lauded the new venture as part of a growing diplomatic, military and trade relationship.“Another success in friendly and fraternal relations between two countries,” Iran’s embassy in Caracas tweeted recently.

A millennial mayor with a difficult last name. [Mispronunciations of “Buttigieg.”] And, a knack for languages. [“Good morning, America” in several languages.] Pete Buttigieg is in the race for the White House. “I am running for president of the United States.” So, who is he? Buttigieg, also known as — “Mayor Pete” — is the mayor of South Bend, Ind. He got the job when he was just 29 and quickly moved to reverse the city’s economic decline. “Our hometown is not dead.” While serving as mayor, Buttigieg took a leave of absence for a tour of duty in Afghanistan. He came out as gay while seeking re-election, and he won. So, what are his priorities? Ideologically he’s a progressive, but he hasn’t unveiled specific policies just yet. Instead, Buttigieg is focusing on big ideas. “You know, our party has this tendency to lead with the policies. First, we’ve got to explain our values.” He wants to abolish the electoral college, establish single-payer health care and expand the Supreme Court. “Yeah, but it’s not just about throwing more justices on the court. What I think we need to do is some kind of structural reform that makes the court less political.” He’s also pushing for the religious left to make a comeback. “No one party has a monopoly on faith.” And, he thinks it’s time for a younger voice in politics. “I mean, my face is my message. A lot of this is simply the idea that we need generational change.” So, what’s his dynamic with President Trump? Buttigieg is no fan of the Trump administration, especially Vice President Mike Pence, an opponent of same-sex marriage and anti-discrimination laws. “And that’s the thing I wish the Mike Pences of the world would understand, that if you got a problem with who I am, your problem is not with me. Your quarrel, sir, is with my creator.” And Trump has yet to say or tweet anything about “Mayor Pete.” So, what are his chances? Buttigieg made a name for himself when this appearance on CNN went viral. “Do you think Vice President Pence would be a better or worse president than President Trump?” “Ugh.” And, it’s paying off. Buttigieg raised $7 million for his 2020 bid in the first quarter, enough to qualify for the first Democratic debates in June. But the question is whether this relative newcomer to the national stage can keep up his momentum throughout the long primary season.

The Trump administration has expelled at least 67 unaccompanied migrant children who arrived on the US-Mexico border since November 18, continuing to invoke Covid-19 as a rationale in defiance of a court order. US District Judge Emmet Sullivan blocked the administration on November 18 from turning unaccompanied migrant children away on the basis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention public health restrictions. President Donald Trump has used those restrictions to shut the door on virtually all asylum seekers arriving on the southern border, largely replacing other policy barriers he implemented prior to the pandemic. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement put 33 unaccompanied children on a flight to Guatemala on the day Sullivan issued the decision and decided not to bring them back to the US, BuzzFeed reported at the time. And on Saturday, the Justice Department admitted in a filing in Washington federal court that the administration had expelled 34 additional unaccompanied children in “contravention” of Sullivan’s ruling, saying that officials had “already begun taking steps to remedy those actions as well as to avoid future expulsions.”Border Patrol chief Rodney Scott said in a court filing Saturday that his agents had encountered more than 3,700 unaccompanied children from November 18 to December 10 who were processed in compliance with the court order and resulting agency guidance. But 26 children — ages 14 to 17 years old and mostly arriving in the Rio Grande Valley — had also been expelled. Nine of the children later tried to reenter and were processed in accordance with the court order. He said that his office has since reiterated the agency guidance to all of its field offices and sector chiefs and has contacted Mexican authorities in order to locate the affected children, but has not had success so far. He cited in-person training challenges due to the pandemic and said that “formal discipline is being actively considered” for the officials responsible, who were apparently “unaware of the guidance.” William Ferrara, a senior field operations official at US Customs and Border Protection, also reported in a court filing Saturday that his office had expelled eight unaccompanied children, ages 12 to 17, including one who was expelled a second time upon trying to reenter the US. The officers responsible had claimed that the children had “made a wrong turn and had no intention of entering the United States” or were unable to prove their identity or immigration status, he said. The Trump administration began expelling migrants to Mexico in March under Title 42, a section of the Public Health Safety Act, that allows the US government to temporarily block noncitizens from entering the US “when doing so is required in the interest of public health.” It resulted in the expulsions of more than 250,000 people from March through October and remains effective until the CDC director determines that the further spread of Covid-19 has “ceased to be a serious danger to public health.”By the time Sullivan prevented the administration from expelling unaccompanied children under the policy, at least 13,000 such children had already been deported, often with little if any notice to their parents or legal counsel and even if they showed no symptoms of the virus. Others had been held in hotels along the border for extended periods under the program.President-elect Joe Biden has left open the possibility of maintaining the Title 42 program at least temporarily. But it’s not clear that there remains a legitimate public health rationale for keeping the policy in place, given that the level of community transmission inside the US is already so high.Immigrant advocates have argued that the US can continue to protect vulnerable immigrants without adverse consequences to public health. Jennifer Podkul, the vice president of policy and advocacy at the legal aid group Kids in Need of Defense, said in a press call that the administration could at least create exceptions for particularly vulnerable classes of migrants.Still, the Biden administration might be weighing whether to maintain the Title 42 program as a means of stemming migration temporarily at a time when many Americans support such restrictions. An August NPR/Ipsos poll found that 58 percent of Americans support “banning the entry of asylum seekers and refugees into the US” to curb the spread of Covid-19.“They’re coming into office in January. It’s highly likely that Covid conditions will continue to be in an emergency state,” Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute who served as an immigration official under the Clinton administration, said in a press call. “So it is possible that we would see a new administration maintain the CDC guidance at the border, at least for some period of time, which would also then gain some time for putting changes into place that allow for a more functional system for granting asylum.” Millions turn to Vox to understand what’s happening in the news. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower through understanding. Financial contributions from our readers are a critical part of supporting our resource-intensive work and help us keep our journalism free for all. Help us keep our work free for all by making a financial contribution from as little as $3.