Парубій: депутати Мельничук та Онищенко вийшли з групи «Воля народу» у Раді
З групи «Воля народу» у Верховній Раді України вийшли два народних депутати – Сергій Мельничук та Олександр Онищенко. Про це на засіданні парламенту повідомив спікер Андрій Парубій.
«До мене звернулася група «Воля народу» з тим, що вони просили би іще одну особу виключити з їхнього складу. Я вимагав, щоб він прибув безпосередньо з цим питанням, але оскільки група звернулася, то я зачитаю іншу заяву — відповідно до частини 3 статті 60 Закону України «Про регламент Верховної Ради України» повідомляю про вихід із складу депутатської групи «Воля народу» народного депутата України Олександра Онищенка», – сказав Парубій.
Також він заявив, що відповідно до регламенту, інформує про вихід народного депутата Сергія Мельничука зі складу групи «Воля народу».
Після виходу Мельничука та Онищенка з групи у «Волі народу» залишається 17 народних депутатів.
Відповідно до регламенту Ради, «Воля народу» протягом 15 днів має поповнитися до щонайменше 19 народних обранців, оскільки кількість депутатів в групі має бути не меншою, ніж та, яка була на початку роботи парламенту поточного скликання у найменшій фракції.
У липні минулого року Верховна Рада позбавила Олександра Онищенка депутатської недоторканності, якраз перед цим він виїхав із України. Він проходить у так званій «газовій справі». Йому інкримінуються злочини через участь у злочинній організації з метою заволодіння майном ПАТ «Укргазвидобування», легалізації (відмивання) доходів, організації службового підроблення тощо.
China Bike-Share Revolution Brings Convenience, Headaches
Thanks to an explosion of bike share apps and providers, China is rediscovering its love of bicycles. In cities across the country and in the capital of Beijing, a colorful bike-share revolution is taking over on the streets, helping ease traffic snarls and keeping the air cleaner. It is also creating some problems.
China used to be called the “kingdom of bicycles,” and though cars have taken over in a major way, the growing popularity of bike-share apps seems to indicate two-wheelers are making a come back.
For drab and dusty Beijing, the bike-share color revolution of yellows, oranges and blues is a welcome sight. People of all ages are enjoying the convenience the bikes provide, which combines cell phone technology, and GPS tracking in some cases, to help users find a ride.
Traveling by car across the sprawling, densely populated city is often a nightmare. Even distances of a few kilometers can take up to an hour when traffic is snarling.
Cheng Li, a bike-share user, said he has been driving his car less and using the metro more since he started using the service about six months ago.
“After I get off the metro, I usually have to walk another kilometer or two, so I’ll grab a bike share and go. It’s less stressful,” Cheng said.
For many, the convenience of cycling is its biggest attraction. Beijing’s city government has long had a bike-share program in place, but many of its bike-share stations were inconveniently located. Getting registered for the smart phone based apps is also much easier.
For Zhang Jian, the bike-share revolution is not only convenient, but nostalgic.
“Now, when we’re riding home from work, especially in the evening, when it’s not as rushed, it feels like we’re reliving the past,” Zhang said.
Great Wall of bikes
But with a growing number of providers, competition is getting increasingly fierce. One key tactic of providers has been to flood the streets with bikes — so much so that sidewalks are almost blocked in some cases.
The surge of bikes has become a major headache for city governments. Users frequently leave bikes in the middle of the street or just dump them on the sidewalk blocking passageways in an already densely populated city.
In Beijing’s southern district of Daxing, authorities have been fighting the surge by seizing the illegally parked bikes that clog streets and metro exits, one transportation worker said.
“Bike sharing is really convenient, but no one is taking care of the problem of illegally parked bikes,” the worker said. Behind her are several thousand bikes that have been seized. It was unclear when or how they would be returned to the companies that made them.
“Since the Lunar New Year, the number of bikes has been growing rapidly. At least 10,000 bikes have been added to the streets (of Daxing) since then, and we’ve collected about a third of that total,” she said.
China’s two biggest operators, Ofo and Mobike, have deployed more than 3 million bikes in scores of cities across the country. And the numbers continue to grow.
Mobike aims to expand to 100 cities at home and abroad by the end of this year.
While many complain the bike-share revolution has taken over city streets, some like Gao Xiaochao are taking matters into their own hands.
Gao is one of many who call themselves bike-share hunters. Bike-share hunters find and report stolen and vandalized bikes that users deliberately park outside their homes or inside gated communities. With some bike-share apps, riders can report illegally parked bikes or other problems the two-wheelers may have.
Gao uses his lunchtime to find, report and move illegally parked bikes.
“Bike hunting is like a game, a hobby, a way to get some exercise. It’s like a new way of living,” Gao said. “Sometimes, I spend two to three hours looking for illegally parked bikes and it’s just like talking a walk.”
Many like Gao are passionate about bike sharing and what it is doing to help transportation and the city’s notoriously smoggy air.
However, as complaints grow and competition gets increasingly cut-throat, they hope companies will do more to improve their service and not just focus on flooding the streets with bikes to edge out competitors.
Ivanka Trump’s Brand Distances Itself From China Shoemaker
Ivanka Trump’s fashion brand sought to distance itself from a Chinese manufacturer that has come under scrutiny after activists investigating labor conditions there were detained, saying the company last made its products three months ago.
In a statement released Wednesday, the brand’s president, Abigail Klem, said Ivanka Trump shoes, which are made by licensing partner Mark Fisher, have not been produced since March at the Huajian Group factory where alleged labor abuses occurred. She added “our licensee works with many footwear production factories and all factories are required to operate within strict social compliance regulations.”
But it is unclear whether that was really the end of the relationship.
China Labor Watch, a New York nonprofit, began scrutinizing Ivanka Trump supply chains more than a year ago, according to Li Qiang, the group’s executive director. Three China Labor Watch investigators went into Huajian Group factories undercover posing as workers in March, April and May of this year and found Ivanka Trump merchandise inside, Li said.
He said the investigators also found evidence of planned production, namely an April production schedule indicating pending orders for nearly 1,000 pairs of Ivanka Trump shoes due by the end of last month.
Now all three men are in jail, accused of using illegal recording devices to disrupt Huajian’s business. The U.S. State Department and Amnesty International have spoken out against the arrests. So far, Ivanka Trump and her brand have not.
Two days off a month?
China Labor Watch laid out its initial allegations in an April letter to Ivanka Trump. It said workers regularly put in more than 15 hours a day, with just two days off a month. It said most were paid by the piece, taking home just $363 a month for 300 hours of work, and that managers verbally abuse workers.
“China Labor Watch expects you, as an assistant to the president and an advocate for women’s rights, to urge your brand’s supplier factories to improve their conditions,” Li wrote in the letter. “Your words and deeds can make a difference in these factory workers’ lives.”
The Huajian Group says the undercover activists were out to steal trade secrets and denies the allegations of poor working conditions.
Global companies take a hit
Some argue that the arrest of independent monitors threatens to hamper the ability of global companies to adequately monitor their Chinese suppliers. China has rebuffed the State Department’s request to release the activists, saying the men will be dealt with under China’s own sovereign laws.
China has swept up hundreds of human rights lawyers and labor activists in recent years and has scrutinized groups with foreign ties, like China Labor Watch, much more closely.
Alicia Edwards, a State Department spokeswoman, said this week that the U.S. is concerned by “the pattern of arrests and detentions.” Labor activists, she added, are instrumental in helping American companies understand conditions in their supply chains and holding Chinese manufacturers accountable under Chinese law.
$10B Chinese Project in Myanmar Stirs Local Concern
Days before the first supertanker carrying 140,000 tons of Chinese-bound crude oil arrived in Myanmar’s Kyauk Pyu port, local officials confiscated Nyein Aye’s fishing nets.
The 36-year-old fisherman was among hundreds banned from fishing a stretch of water near the entry point for a pipeline that pumps oil 770 kilometers (480 miles) across Myanmar to southwest China and forms a crucial part of Beijing’s “Belt and Road” project to deepen its economic links with Asia and beyond.
“How can we make a living if we’re not allowed to catch fish?” said Nyein Aye, who bought a bigger boat just four months ago but now says his income has dropped by two-thirds because of a decreased catch resulting from restrictions on when and where he can fish. Last month he joined more than 100 people in a protest demanding compensation from pipeline operator Petrochina.
The pipeline is part of the nearly $10 billion Kyauk Pyu Special Economic Zone, a scheme at the heart of fast-warming Myanmar-China relations. Its success is crucial for the Southeast Asian nation’s leader, Aung San Suu Kyi.
Embattled Suu Kyi needs a big economic win to stem criticism that her first year in office has seen little progress on reform. China’s support is also key to stabilizing their shared border, where a spike in fighting with ethnic armed groups threatens the peace process Suu Kyi says is her top priority.
China’s state-run CITIC Group, the main developer of the Kyauk Pyu Special Economic Zone, says it will create 100,000 jobs in the northwestern state of Rakhine, one of Myanmar’s poorest regions.
But many local people say the project is being rushed through without consultation or regard for their way of life.
Suspicion of China runs deep in Myanmar, and public hostility due to environmental and other concerns has delayed or derailed Chinese mega-projects in the country in the past.
China says the Kyauk Pyu development is based on “win-win” cooperation between the two countries.
Since Beijing signaled earlier this year that it might abandon the huge Myitsone Dam hydroelectric project in Myanmar, it has pushed for concessions on other strategic undertakings — including the Bay of Bengal port at Kyauk Pyu, which gives it an alternative route for energy imports from the Middle East.
Internal planning documents reviewed by Reuters and more than two dozen interviews with officials show work on contracts and land acquisition began before the completion of studies on the impact on local people and the environment, which legal experts said could breach development laws.
The Kyauk Pyu Special Economic Zone will cover more than 4,200 acres (17 square kilometers). It includes the $7.3 billion deep sea port and a $2.3 billion industrial park, with plans to attract industries such as textiles and oil refining.
A Reuters tally based on internal planning documents and census data suggests 20,000 villagers, most of whom now depend on agriculture and fishing, are at risk of being relocated to make way for the project.
“There will be a huge project in the zone and many buildings will be built, so people who live in the area will be relocated,” said Than Htut Oo, administrator of Kyauk Pyu, who also sits on the management committee of the economic zone.
He said the government has not publicly announced the plan, because it didn’t want to “create panic” while it was still negotiating with the Chinese developer.
In April, Myanmar’s President Htin Kyaw signed two agreements on the pipeline and the Kyauk Pyu port with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, as Beijing pushed to revive a project that had stalled since its inception in 2009.
The agreements call for environmental and social assessments to be carried out as soon as possible.
While the studies are expected to take up to 15 months and have not yet started, CITIC has asked Myanmar to finalize contract terms by the end of this year so that the construction can start in 2018, said Soe Win, who leads the Myanmar management committee of the zone.
Such a schedule has alarmed experts who fear the project is being rushed.
“The environmental and social preparations for a project of these dimensions take years to complete and not months,” said Vicky Bowman, head of the Myanmar Center for Responsible Business and a former British ambassador to the country.
CITIC said in an email to Reuters it would engage “a world-renowned consulting firm” to carry out assessments.
Although large-scale land demarcation for the project has not yet started, 26 families have been displaced from farmland because of acquisitions that took place in 2014 for the construction of two dams, according to land documents and the landowners.
Experts say this violates Myanmar’s environmental laws.
“Carrying out land acquisition before completing environmental impact assessments and resettlement plans is incompatible with national law,” said Sean Bain, Myanmar-based legal consultant for the International Commission of Jurists, a human rights watchdog group.
School, development funds
CITIC says it will build a vocational school to provide training for skills needed by companies in the economic zone. It has given $1.5 million to local villages to develop businesses.
Reuters spoke to several villagers who had borrowed small sums from the village funds set up with this money.
“The CITIC money was very useful for us because most people in the village need money,” said fisherman Thar Sai Aung, who borrowed $66 to buy new nets.
Chinese investors say they also plan to spend $1 million during the first five years of the development, and $500,000 per year thereafter to improve local living standards.
But villagers in Kyauk Pyu say they fear the project would not contribute to the development of the area because the operating companies employ mostly Chinese workers.
From more than 3,000 people living on the Maday island, the entry point for the oil pipeline, only 47 have landed a job with the Petrochina, while the number of Chinese workers stood at more than double that number, data from labor authorities showed.
Petrochina did not respond to requests for comment. In a recent report it said Myanmar citizens made up 72 percent of its workforce in the country overall and it would continue to hire locally.
“I don’t think there’s hope for me to get a job at the zone,” said fisherman Nyein Aye. He had been turned down 12 times for job applications with the pipeline operator. “Chinese companies said they would develop our village and improve our livelihoods, but it turned out we are suffering every day.”
Comey’s Release of Trump Memo to Newspaper Draws Criticism
When former FBI Director James Comey revealed Thursday that he orchestrated a disclosure of damaging details about his conversations with President Donald Trump, he demonstrated his savvy use of media and his skills as a Washington operator. He also kicked up a hornet’s nest of questions about the legal and ethical implications of the move.
Trump’s personal lawyer made Comey’s secret gambit a central piece of his defense of the president against the fired lawman’s testimony. Attorney Marc Kasowitz claimed Comey made “unauthorized disclosures” of privileged communications. He said he would leave it to the “appropriate authorities” to determine whether Comey’s plan should be investigated along with the leaks of material that have infuriated Trump.
But Comey seemed unconcerned about that prospect when he acknowledged the move Thursday before a throng of cameras and a packed Senate intelligence committee hearing room.
With vivid detail, he told the panel when the idea dawned on him — “in the middle of the night” — and what moved him to act. He said he was reacting to Trump’s cryptic tweet saying Comey better hope there are no tapes of their disputed conversations about the Russia investigation into election-season hacking. Comey said the president’s message convinced him he needed to get his account, detailed in contemporaneous memos, out quickly.
“My judgment was, I needed to get that out into the public square. And so I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter,” Comey testified. “I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”
Timeline doesn’t match
The friend, who was later identified as Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman, read part of the memo to a reporter from The New York Times, according to the newspaper. The paper reported Trump had asked Comey to drop the investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
Kasowitz has denied that account, but he also argued that Comey’s move “unilaterally and surreptitiously made unauthorized disclosures to the press of privileged communications with the president.” He claimed that The New York Times quoted from the memo before Trump’s tweet, although that is not born out by the timeline. Trump issued his warning online on May 12, three days after Comey was fired and four days before the newspaper reported on the information in the memo, which was recounted by Comey associates. A special counsel was appointed the following week.
Comey contended that the material was not classified or protected.
Still, experts debated the legality of Comey’s secret back channel. Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, suggested it was at minimum unprofessional and possibly unethical or even illegal.
Are memos government property?
Turley contended that the memos were written in the style of the standardized forms agents use to summarize interviews, documents known as 302s, and were likely typed on an FBI computer and, therefore, could be considered government property. That would make stealing, selling or conveying it a crime, Turley said.
“This doesn’t strike me as a daily diary,” Turley said. “You don’t keep your diary on an FBI computer and write passages during work hours about a work-related meeting. He knew he was preparing something that was evidentiary in nature.”
Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, disagreed. It’s hard to view the memo as government property, and it was shared, not lost or stolen, so it would not likely qualify as a crime, he said. And Comey discussed the contents of the memo in an open congressional hearing, which means the material he shared with his friend would not have been classified, Aftergood said.
“At this point, Comey is not a government employee, and he is not under the direction of the president, and so I don’t see a legal or procedural bar,” Aftergood said. “He’s being totally above board about it, and if anybody wants to say that’s wrong, he is standing by his actions. If anybody wants to pursue him, he has made himself available, and that’s the most anyone can ask for.”
Finds the spotlight
Comey’s confirmation that he was behind the disclosure was not a shock to many in Washington. The lawman is known for understanding how to find the spotlight.
He defied FBI norms by making public pronouncements about the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, including during the campaign’s final days, drawing the ire of those who believe he tipped the electoral scales to Trump.
That came nearly a decade after Comey, whom Trump recently derided as “a showboat,” first stepped onto the national stage with testimony about his hospital visit with the attorney general to prevent the reauthorization of a domestic surveillance program.
That he would have another star turn came with little surprise, according to Tobe Berkovitz, a political media consultant who now teaches at Boston University.
“He absolutely knows what levers to pull, when to pull them, how things are going to play,” said Berkovitz. “He’s very clear about his own image and persona and clearly revels in the media spotlight.”
What Comey’s Testimony Clarified, and What it Didn’t
Nuanced conversations. Conflicting versions of events. Lingering intrigue.
For all of the things that came into clearer focus with Thursday’s testimony from fired FBI Director James Comey, plenty of other questions remain.
A few takeaways from Comey’s appearance before the Senate intelligence committee:
Watch: Comey on Trump‘s Word: ‘I Took It As A Direction’
The obstruction question
A central, and unresolved, question from the hearing revolves around whether President Donald Trump was trying to derail the Russia investigation by pressuring, and ultimately firing, the man in charge. Comey delivered his answer clearly.
“It’s my judgment that I was fired because of the Russia investigation,” he said. “I was fired in some way to change, or the endeavor was to change, the way the Russia investigation was being conducted.”
The firing came, Comey said, after he was pushed to drop the probe into former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. The president told him, “I hope you can let this go,” and he took it as more than a mere suggestion.
“I took it as a direction,” Comey told the committee.
Trump’s lawyer says the president “never, in form or substance” directed Comey to stop investigating anyone, and Republicans suggested Comey was reading too much into it.
“You may have taken it as a direction, but that’s not what he said,” said Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho.
Whether Trump’s behavior and comment amount to obstruction of justice, however, depends not on how Comey understood the comment, but Trump’s intent in delivering it.
Finding that out, as Comey noted, is now up to the special counsel, Robert Mueller.
Comey: ‘If There Are Tapes, It’s Not Just My Word Against His’ on Flynn Investigation
‘My word against his’
In one of the unexpected moments of the day, Comey essentially took credit for Mueller being on the case.
The former FBI director and media-savvy operator acknowledged he shared with a friend the memos detailing his conversations with the president and specifically asked the friend to pass them on to reporters.
“My judgment was I need to get that out into the public square,” Comey said.
But the goal wasn’t just to tell his story. Comey said he wanted to spur the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to take over the investigation.
Comey knew the whole thing could come down to his word against the president’s, and he wanted the memos to serve as proof of his version of events.
With trademark flair, Comey told the committee, “Lordy, I hope there are tapes” of his conversations with Trump.
“If there are tapes,” Comey said, “it’s not just my word against his.”
Comey added an element of intrigue to the hearings when he said he knew of a “variety of reasons” why Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ involvement in the Russia investigation would be problematic but that he couldn’t discuss those reasons “in an open setting.”
Sessions recused himself from anything related to the Russia inquiry in March, after it was revealed that he had spoken with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak twice during the presidential campaign. Sessions failed to disclose those contacts during questioning at his Senate confirmation hearing, when he told senators he hadn’t had any contacts with Russia.
Even before Comey’s cryptic reference Thursday, Democratic senators had been raising more questions about Sessions’ contacts with Kislyak.
Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Al Franken, D-Minn., have asked the FBI to check into the possibility of a third encounter at an April 2016 Trump campaign event that Sessions and Kislyak attended. The Justice Department has acknowledged that Sessions was at the Mayflower Hotel event in Washington, but said there were no private or side conversations that day.
It wasn’t just the Trump administration that made Comey anxious about the need to protect the integrity and independence of the FBI.
He’d had moments of discomfort during the Obama administration as well.
Comey described an episode during the inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server when then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch directed him “not to call it an investigation but to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me.”
Comey said that language tracked how the Clinton campaign was talking about the FBI’s work.
“We had an investigation open at the time so that gave me a queasy feeling,” he added.
Pence Expresses Support for Cyprus Peace Talks
Vice President Mike Pence said Thursday that the United States supported peace talks on Cyprus aimed at reunifying the divided island.
Pence hosted Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades at the White House on Thursday. The White House said Pence expressed hope that Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders “will agree to a settlement that would reunify Cyprus as a bizonal, bicommunal federation to the benefit of all Cypriots.”
Pence also thanked Cyprus for its support for the Middle East peace talks and the fight against Islamic State.
Anastasiades said that he invited Pence to visit the island and that “what satisfied me most is that the U.S. acknowledged the role Cyprus plays as a result of its excellent relations with all its neighboring nations.”
Cyprus has been split between a Greek Cypriot south and a Turkish Cypriot north since 1974, when Turkey invaded in response to a military coup aimed at unifying the island with Greece.
The south is recognized as the sole Cypriot government, while only Turkey recognizes a separate Turkish Cypriot north.
U.N.-sponsored reunification talks have been slow because of several sensitive issues, including Turkish demands that Turkish forces be allowed to stay on the island. The Greek Cypriots want them to leave.
Automakers Move Toward Automatic Braking at Different Speeds
Big automakers are rushing to launch self-driving cars as early as 2021, but the industry’s major players are moving slowly when it comes to widespread deployment of a less expensive crash prevention technology that regulators say could prevent thousands of deaths and injuries every year.
Nissan said on Thursday it would make automatic braking systems standard on an estimated 1 million 2018 model cars and light trucks sold in the United States, compact sport utility vehicles, the Altima sedan, Murano and Pathfinder SUVs, Leaf electric car, Maxima sedan and Sentra small car.
Nissan sold about 1.6 million vehicles in the United States last year.
Rival Toyota has said it will make automatic emergency braking standard on nearly all its U.S. models by the end of this year.
Overall, however, most automakers are not rushing to make automatic brake systems part of the base cost of mainstream vehicles sold in the competitive U.S. market. The industry has come under pressure from regulators, lawmakers and safety advocates to adopt the technology, which can slow or stop a vehicle even if the driver fails to act.
So far, only about 17 percent of models tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety offered standard collision-avoiding braking. Many of the models with standard collision-avoiding brake systems are luxury vehicles made by European or Japanese manufacturers.
The systems require more sensors and software than conventional brakes, and automakers said they need time to engineer the systems into vehicles as part of more comprehensive makeovers.
Last year, 20 automakers reached a voluntary agreement with U.S. auto safety regulators to make collision-avoiding braking systems standard equipment by 2022.
Safety advocates have petitioned the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to begin a regulatory process to require the technologies, but the agency has said the voluntary agreement will result in faster deployment than a formal rule-making process. NHTSA says the technology could eliminate one-fifth of crashes.
Mark Rosekind, who then was NHTSA’s administrator, told Reuters last year that with 5 million crashes occurring per year, a “20 percent reduction means 1 million less. Those are big numbers.”
But customers would most likely experience the benefits of the technology infrequently. The technology to enable a car to drive itself is far more costly, but industry executives foresee autonomous vehicles driving revenue-generating transportation services that could be attractive to investors.
General Motors offers automatic braking as optional equipment on about two-thirds of its models. The company did not say Thursday how many vehicles have the technology as standard equipment. GM has not made public its plans to make the technology standard across its lineup.
“Any time you have a voluntary agreement you have a spectrum of implementation,” Jeff Boyer, GM’s vice president for safety, told Reuters this week. Asked when GM would roll out standard automatic braking, Boyer said, “Let’s just say we honor the voluntary commitment.”
Ford “has a plan to standardize over time,” the company said in a statement Thursday. Currently, automatic braking systems are optional on several 2017 Ford and Lincoln models, and will be offered on certain 2018 models, including the best-selling F-150 pickup truck.
Fiat Chrysler offers automatic braking as optional equipment in seven model lines, using cameras and radar to detect hazards ahead. The company has said it will meet the 2022 target for making the systems standard.
As 2018 models roll out during the second half of this year, more vehicles will offer automatic braking, said Dean McConnell, an executive with Continental AG’s North American business.
Continental’s automatic braking technology systems will be on certain Nissan models.
“We see it accelerating,” he said. “It varies. There are some [automakers] that are being aggressive” and others that are waiting.
Nissan did not disclose how much prices for vehicles would rise to offset the cost of standard automatic emergency braking.
Currently, Nissan, like most carmakers, offers automatic braking as part of a bundle of optional safety and technology features.
A 2017 Nissan Sentra compact sedan has a starting price of $17,875. To buy the car equipped with automatic braking requires spending another $6,820 for a Sentra SR with a premium technology package.
German auto technology suppliers Continental and Robert Bosch GmbH will supply the systems, Nissan said.