Does This Guy Really Gas Up His Tesla Model S To Extend Its Range? – InsideEVs

Posted on by

What do you do when your Tesla Model S fully depletes its battery and you need to extend its range? You ask for some gas, right? That's the strange thing you'll see here, but there's a twist.

Right away we know that's there's something fishy about this video. Why? Well, the license plate on the Tesla appears to be the same as the one we saw in a recent Tesla gas station prank video. That caught our attention, but we still decided to watch the video.

In the video, you'll see a Tesla stopped on the side of the road. A car pulls up behind it and the driver of the Tesla asks the occupants of the other car for some gas. The occupants of that car seem a bit confused, as they're mostly aware that Tesla's are electric and don't use gas.

Regardless, the Tesla driver insists he need some gas and the friendly guy in the other car obliges and pulls a gas can out of his trunk (seems convenient to have one on hand, right?). The gas can appears empty though, or at least it's quite spillproof and very light.

The Tesla driver tanks the gas tanks and proceeds towards his car. He pops the charge port open, but that's not where he's gonna put the gas. Instead, he opens the trunk and within lies a fancy Honda generator. He apparently needs the gas for this so that he can use the generator to charge up his Tesla so that he can make it to the nearest gas (whoops - charging) station.

Yes, it's all a joke, but well played with the generator that we honestly didn't see coming. We figure the Tesla driver would attempt to pour the gas into some orifice on the Tesla, but nope, it's for the generator.

We've grown accustomed to these videos where someone is trying to gas up a Tesla. To the best of our knowledge, everyone to date has been setup, staged or faked. We're not aware of one single such incident in which the driver of the Tesla truly thought the vehicle ran on gas. So yes, these are done for the humor and to perhaps try to convince some that the act of gassing up a Tesla is indeed something that some Tesla drivers try to do.

But you won't believe what has been done with gas before and this one, to the best of our knowledge, is not a fake.

See original here:

Does This Guy Really Gas Up His Tesla Model S To Extend Its Range? - InsideEVs

Inside the industry: How selling emissions credits helps Tesla grow – Autocar

Posted on by

Hidden in whatyou might call the small print, were it not such a large number, of Teslas recent Q2 financial report were the latest figures highlighting its income from selling emissions credits to rival car makers: $428 million, or 7% of the companys revenue.

The moral standpoint of these credits is hotly debated. They work in a variety of ways, such as car makers with emissions below the mandated target selling them to car makers above the target, or car makers with zero-emissions capability selling them to car makers without it, allowing them to then sell cars in various US states, including California.

These credits have played a crucial role in Teslas against-all-odds growth. Its net profit for the Covid-19-afflicted quarter running from March to June was $104m, and without the credits, it would not have recorded accounting profitability across the past 12 months, a milestone that unlocks a variety of potential benefits for the firm, not least increased standing in the all-important investor circles, where even the most conservative of commentators can now justify getting a bit giddy. An operating margin of 5% okay in car industry terms would be a perilous 1% without them.

The estimate is that Tesla will earn more than $1 billion from these credits in 2020 alone, and while senior executives concede that they are staring down the barrel of a decreasing income stream as rivals get their acts together and launch some BEVs of their own, the rate at which Tesla is earning has so far kept accelerating. Its a lucrative if unpredictable income stream currently enjoying exponential growth: in 2018 Tesla earned $419m from them and in 2019 $593m.

Who is buying the credits, and what they are paying, is hidden mostly in opaque accounting. Of everyone, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is the most open because of its ownership structure, so it is on record that FCA has a deal to buy $1.1bn of credits through to 2023. Court filings last year revealed that GM, which has its own EV capability with the Bolt, is also a customer.

However, one CEO, well known for being brilliantly connected and with recent experience of mainstream premium brands, recently told Autocar that almost every car maker is buying credits in some form, but we dont have to declare it.

None of this is Teslas fault, of course. Indeed, a fair mind can only give credit where it is due. But when its cheaper to pay a competitor than build cars to meet regulations, you have to wonder if the system itself is fit for purpose.

READ MORE

Inside the industry: Will a radical shake-up save Ford?

Inside the industry: Tesla's success starts on the playground

Continue reading here:

Inside the industry: How selling emissions credits helps Tesla grow - Autocar

GMs Cadillac Is Coming for Tesla. The Lyriq Is on the Way, – Barron’s

Posted on by

Text size

The 111-year-old General Motors is serious about a future with all electric vehicles, and about making sure Tesla, the husky teenager on the automotive block, doesnt shove it into the shadows. GM launched its electric Lyric Cadillac SUV Thursday evening.

It feels a little odd to say General Motors (ticker: GM)a firm selling millions of cars generating hundreds of billions in salesis coming for Tesla (TSLA)a company selling hundreds of thousands of cars generating tens of billions in sales. But thats automotive reality these days.

Tesla, including stock-market value and debt, is valued at roughly six-times more than GM. The traditional industry is chasing the EV upstart. Volkswagen (VOW. Germany) management suggested recently that Teslaor, perhaps, Volkswagencould become the largest company in the world in the coming decade as autonomous driving, software, and electrification come to define the driving experience.

GM would like to be included in that conversation. The Lyriq will be available in late 2022 and boasts fast charging and a range of 300 miles per charge. Lyriq will start at about $70,000.

Led by Lyriq, Cadillac will redefine American luxury over the next decade with a new portfolio of transformative EVs, said GM North America President Steve Carlisle in the companys news release. We will deliver experiences that engage the senses, anticipate desires and enable our customers to go on extraordinary journeys.

Its an attractive vehicle. The comparable Tesla Model X gets 300 to 350 miles per charge, depending on battery configuration. A Model X starts at about $80,000; sales started in 2015. .

GM also boasted the ability to deliver truly hands-free driver assistance. That is presumably similar to Teslas autopilot, which comes as an upgrade on all Tesla vehicles.

Investors have to decide how not only which vehicle is better, but how fast electric vehicles will penetrate the overall car market. More EVs are coming from myriad auto makers. And traditional car companies, such as GM, have to manage converting legacy gasoline-based sales to battery-powered vehicles. Tesla, of course, only makes electric vehicles.

The market, at this point, is betting Tesla will be a long-term winner in the EV wars. Tesla stock is up 256% year to date, far better than comparable returns of the S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average as well as its automotive peers. GM stock is down about 27% year to date. Volkswagen shares have fallen about 17%.

Recent gains have made Tesla the worlds most valuable car company.

Write to Al Root at allen.root@dowjones.com

Go here to read the rest:

GMs Cadillac Is Coming for Tesla. The Lyriq Is on the Way, - Barron's

Shares of electric vehicle makers Nio and Nikola could be a better bet than Tesla, traders say – CNBC

Posted on by

Two electric vehicle stocks are catching up to Tesla. Nio and Nikola shares have been speeding higher.

Both have kept up to Tesla's more than 200% rally in 2020. Nikola surged another 22% on Monday after catching a buy rating from Deutsche Bank heading into its earnings after the bell Tuesday. Nio gained 14% on Monday after reporting a 322% increase in July deliveries.

Boris Schlossberg, managing director of FX strategy at BK Asset Management, said the electric vehicle group remains too speculative to make a solid bet. Still, he does see one name emerging as a true rival to Tesla's dominance.

"Nikola is the first real interesting competitor to Tesla, because it's providing the first true value proposition with a 600-mile range and the ability to essentially create a power plant out of its truck for a lot of the construction industry. So to me, the big question is if Nikola can deliver even 70% of what it promises, I think it becomes an interesting viable competitor," Schlossberg said Monday on CNBC's "Trading Nation."

Deutsche Bank said it is looking to hear what the company says in its earnings conference call about how many customers it has attracted for its pickup truck. The firm gave a short-term catalyst buy call on the stock, though kept a long-term hold rating.

Ari Wald, head of technical analysis at Oppenheimer, sees better opportunity in Chinese EV maker Nio.

"The stock has consolidated since peaking in July and I think this consolidation, it's allowing previously overbought conditions to recede," he said in the same "Trading Nation" segment. "It's allowing the moving averages to catch up to the price and I think what you're going to see is a resumption of the uptrend."

Nio has raced from a low of $2.11 in March to a high above $16 in mid-July. Since that peak, it has fallen back below $14.

"In terms of trading levels, $10.46 cents is an important support level. That was the stock's July low. As long as the stock is above there, our assumption is that this is going to make a new high above that July peak," said Wald.

Nikola closed Monday's trading session at $36.49 a share. By contrast, Tesla closed at $1,485.

Disclaimer

Originally posted here:

Shares of electric vehicle makers Nio and Nikola could be a better bet than Tesla, traders say - CNBC

Anand Mahindra is impressed by this Honda powered Tesla – Livemint

Posted on by

The concept of 'jugaad' is not only limited amongst Indian masses. Anand Mahindra was left surprised when he came across a video of a Tesla owner using a Honda gasoline generator to charge his all-electric car. Anand Mahindra, chairman of the Mahindra Group, posted the video which has gone viral on social media wherein a Honda generator is being used to charge his Tesla car.

Mahindra shared the video and wrote, "And we thought jugaad was purely an Indian talent! Hilarious. A Honda-powered Tesla..."

The viral video shows a man using his innovative trick for charging his electric car through a gasoline-powered generator. The car owner explained the entire process of the charging innovation. The viral video also led to a war of arguments where people raised ethical questions about this 'jugaad.'

Subscribe to newsletters

* Enter a valid email

* Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

Read more here:

Anand Mahindra is impressed by this Honda powered Tesla - Livemint

The perfect all-electric Ford Mustang is actually a souped-up Tesla – The Next Web

Posted on by

When American carmaker Ford announced that it was breathing new life into the Mustang name and resurrecting it in the form of an electric vehicle people were a bit miffed. Electric and Mustang they scoffed, those two words just dont go together!

Im not even going to touch the whole whats a Mustang badge doing on a crossover SUV conversation.

Bringing back iconic names is a bit on trend at the moment, Ford isnt alone in reviving a defunct name and reinventing it with more environmentally sound drivetrains. GMC is also bringing the Hummer name out of retirement and slapping it on the grille of an all-electric pickup truck.

[Read: Tesla launches car wrapping service because its colors are boring AF]

The thing with the Ford, though, is that the Mustang Mach-E bears virtually nothing in common with its spiritual grandparent. It just has a charging stallion on the front, and thats about it. If youre one of those cars looked better in the 60s people, then I might have the answer.

A boutique electric car startup from Russia, called Aviar, is working on a Mustang-styled concept thats built atop a Tesla Model S platform.

Called the R67, the modern take on the classic American muscle car has all the features youd expect. Its got a wide rear-end, its ridiculously fast in a straight line, and it makes no apologies about that fact.

According to Aviar, the R67 will do zero to 100 kph in 2.2 seconds, which will make any classic Mustang look like a shopping cart in comparison. Its also going to have a 100 kWh battery thats good for over 500 km of range. So youll be able to burn rubber, with a slightly cleaner conscience than if it were powered by a big block V8. (But please dont burn rubber, thats bad too.)

Note that this isnt some kind of restomod like the Jaguar XK120 I wrote about a few months back. Its an entirely new body built atop a Tesla Model S platform. It uses all of the Teslas drivetrain components, and most of the interior by the looks of things. The R67 spec list reads exactly like a Model S, so think of this as a Tesla thats actually interesting to look at and has character.

Im sure itd be enough to convince even the most hardcore of classic Mustang fans to give electricity a try. If not, Fords also showed off whats possible with electric drivetrains with an experimental race-edition Mustang that has seven motors!

Perhaps the best bit of all this, though, is that the car will be certified for use at Tesla Supercharger stations. Just imagine the heads youd turn arriving in the R67, and plugging in among the lineup of derivative T mobiles.

Theres no word on pricing yet, but I wouldnt expect this to come cheap.

The electrified Jaguar X120 which is part restoration and part modification, starts at around $200,000. Given that Aviar needs to acquire a Model S to build the R67, and those cost north of $82,000, I wouldnt be surprised if the Aviar R67 ended up selling for more than $300,000.

But hey, true style comes with a price tag.

This article is brought to you by Polestar. Its time to accelerate theshiftto sustainablemobility. That is why Polestar combines electric driving with cutting-edge design and thrilling performance. Find out how.

Published August 7, 2020 14:16 UTC

Read the original here:

The perfect all-electric Ford Mustang is actually a souped-up Tesla - The Next Web

Tesla Gets Crushed in Germany by EVs from Volkswagen, Renault, and Hyundai Group: It Woke Up the Giants – WOLF STREET

Posted on by

Teslas share of the EV market plunged to 8.7% year-to-date, from 18.4% last year. Competition is now huge and across the spectrum. Tesla faces the same situation globally.ByWolf RichterforWOLF STREET.

It has been a very ugly year in Germany for auto sales, except for EVs. The overall new vehicle market in Germany has plunged by 30% in the first seven months of 2019 to 1.526 million units. But EV sales have skyrocket by 65% over the first seven months, after having already skyrocketed by 88% in the same period in 2019, according to KBA, the German agency that handles nationwide new-vehicle registrations. Year-to-date, 61,105 EVs were sold, giving EVs a share of 4% of total new vehicle sales, up from less than 1% in 2018.

But Tesla got crushed. Its sales over the seven-month period fell from 6,816 in 2019 through July to 5,306 over the same period this year, and its share in the EV market plunged from 18.4% to 8.7%.

There are now three automakers that blew past it in Germany Volkswagen Group, Renault, and Hyundai Group while Daimler Group came in even with Tesla, and BMW group wasnt far behind. This chart shows market share of each automaker, with all their EV brands and models combined:

By Automaker: The table shows registrations by automaker, each with all their EV makes and models combined, in July and year-to-date through July, in order of their share of the total EV market (right column).

By major brand: The table below splits out the major brands of each automaker that offer EVs. So, Volkswagen Group has five brands with EVs on this list: VW, Audi, Skoda, Porsche, and Seat. BMW Group has two brands on the list: BMW and Mini. Daimler Group also has two brands on it, Mercedes and Smart, as has Hyundai Group, Hyundai and Kia. In this lineup, Tesla is in third place, behind the brands VW and Renault. There are still a bunch of major brands that do not offer EVs in Germany, including Toyota, and those are not on the list:

Tesla is now in the process of building an assembly plant in Germany. But by the time it is up and running, more of the other major automakers that currently dont offer EVs in Germany will offer them. And the giants with their numerous brands are gearing up to offer a whole spectrum of vehicles, across all categories and price classes.

To Teslas credit, it shook up the German automotive industry that for years had pooh-poohed EVs in favor of internal combustion engines, particularly diesels. Volkswagen Group was so focused on diesels that it couldnt even see EVs.

But the fallout from the diesel-emissions-fraud scandal, which continues to fester in the German court system, has changed that. Consumers are turning away from diesels. And for automakers, EVs are the only major segment that is red hot, even during the pandemic. Its where growth is. What Tesla accomplished was that it woke up the giants. And now theyre going after this market with all their might.

Tesla is facing the same situation globally: The giants have woken up and many of them are now offering or will soon be offering models across the spectrum, and Tesla has to get down in the trenches with them and compete on price, service, quality, reliability, and all the other mundane factors that regular consumers not true believers demand. And its going to get very tough.

Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? Using ad blockers I totally get why but want to support the site? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. Click on the beer and iced-tea mug to find out how:

Would you like to be notified via email when WOLF STREET publishes a new article? Sign up here.

More here:

Tesla Gets Crushed in Germany by EVs from Volkswagen, Renault, and Hyundai Group: It Woke Up the Giants - WOLF STREET

Aviar R67 Is Russia’s Tesla-Based Ford Mustang With 840 HP – autoevolution

Posted on by

Blending features and styling from two very American icons, the Ford Mustang and Tesla, Aviar R67 aims to be the worlds first electrified muscle car. It uses the platform from Tesla Model S and design language from the unmistakable 60s Ford Mustang, to create a powerful machine that is as impressive in looks as it is in performance. On paper, for the time being.

I like the 60s, Aleksey Rachev, founder of Aviar Motors, says. By charisma and style, they have no equal. Their powerful and aggressive silhouette is really recognizable, and the appearance on the road always attracts admiring glances. [] We tried to catch the spirit of the legendary cars of the 60s and rethink it in a modern way.

This means taking the unmistakable design of the Mustangs of that time and packing it with tech from Tesla, to create the ultimate dream machine for todays generation. While there is little chance to mistake the exterior for anything else but a Stang, despite the Aviar logo on the grille, Tesla elements have seeped in on the inside most notably the large, central infotainment screen.

Its a tasteful blend of the two, at least from the available renders. But R67 promises to be even more impressive as regards performance.

With 840 electrified hp from two electric motors, R67 boasts a top speed of 250 kph (155 mp) and 0 to 100 kph acceleration (0 to 62 mph) in just 2.2 seconds. The 100 kWh battery is good for 507 km (315 miles) on a single charge, Aviar Motors says. R67 will be compatible with Tesla Superchargers.

I will not say we have made the best car in the world, but still as a tool for making a special mood, there is none even likely to it. None at all, Rachev says without false modesty.

Aviar Motors is currently working on a prototype of the R67, so there are concrete plans to bring it to market. As for the price tag it might come with, no word yet. But you can imagine it wont come cheap.

Read more here:

Aviar R67 Is Russia's Tesla-Based Ford Mustang With 840 HP - autoevolution

Tesla Battery Supplier LG Chem Expects Revenue To More Than Double At $25.3B In 5 Years – Yahoo Finance

Posted on by

LG Chem Ltd (OTC: LGCLF) expects its business to double in size by 2025, driven by ever-increasing penetration of the electric vehicle industry, CEO Hak Cheol Shin said in an interview with Bloomberg Thursday.

What Happened

The South Korean companys revenue is expected to reach $11 billion this year,and could shoot up to $25.3 billion by 2025, according to Shin.

The global electric vehicle industry itself is growing fast, but the penetration rate is about 3% now, the CEO said. The rate will be about 10% in 2025.

Shin added that the company is in a position to deliver all orders from customers despite the COVID-19 pandemic.

Why It Matters

LG Chem emerged as the largest battery supplier in the first half of 2020 with its sales growth soaring 83% to 10.5 gigawatt-hours, according to SNE Research.

The battery firm benefitted from the growing popularity of Tesla Inc.'s(NASDAQ: TSLA) Model 3 vehicles in China as well as firm European demand for EVs.

European governments are using virus recovery funds to boost EV sales,which is helping the Korean firm, along with increase in sales of new models from the continent's automakers like Volkswagen AG (OTC: VLKAF), SNE Research noted, as per Bloomberg.

Yuanta Securities Korea Co. analyst Hwang Kyu-Won pointed out that that the scale of orders from Tesla will be an important factor for LG Chem's growth going forward, but that the battery maker has "diversified customers" and can benefit from growth of other EV companies as well.

LG Chem is helping Tesla grow its battery production capacity in South Korea.

See more from Benzinga

2020 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

See more here:

Tesla Battery Supplier LG Chem Expects Revenue To More Than Double At $25.3B In 5 Years - Yahoo Finance

Tesla touchscreen wiper controls akin to texting and driving: German court – Business Insider – Business Insider

Posted on by

A 2017 wreck is still causing headaches for Tesla.

A German judge ruled earlier this year that the touchscreen controls for Tesla's windshield wipers usually automatic, but manual speed controls can be used constitute an illegal mobile device, according to the BBC.

Newfound interest in the case spiked because of a local legal blog's recent reporting on the accident, which was spotted by US media this week. The judgment from March sets a precedent for further Tesla cases and backs up the driver's original punishment, a fine and license suspension, which is the same as using a phone while driving.

Jalopnik's Jason Torchinsky puts it a little more bluntly: "You should not have to look at a damn center-mounted touchscreen button to change your wiper speed."

German courts have had it out for Tesla this year.

In July, a judge sided with a German trade organization when it ruled that Tesla's Autopilot ads were misleading about the driver-assistance software's capabilities.

The software has been blamed in a handful of wrecks where inattentive drivers lost control of their vehicles. Tesla maintains the quick reactions and automatic braking improves traffic safety.

Original post:

Tesla touchscreen wiper controls akin to texting and driving: German court - Business Insider - Business Insider

Is Tesla’s Obsession With Manufacturing Really Starting To Pay Off? – InsideEVs

Posted on by

This article comes to us courtesy ofEVANNEX, which makes and sells aftermarket Tesla accessories. The opinions expressed therein are not necessarily our own at InsideEVs, nor have we been paid byEVANNEXto publish these articles. We find the company's perspective as an aftermarket supplier of Tesla accessories interesting and are willing to share its content free of charge. Enjoy!

Posted onEVANNEX on August 07, 2020byCharles Morris

The most critical part is manufacturing the carswhat Tesla calls the machine that makes the machine. As they teach us in Business 101, the secret of Henry Fords success wasnt so much the Model T itself as the assembly line he developed to build the Model T.

For Big Auto, manufacturing is something theyve been doing for a century or so, and its not something they talk about much. True, concepts such asthe Toyota Way andkaisenare taught in advanced biz classes, but theyre nowadays considered pretty mature technologies.

When Eberhard and Tarpenning set out to build an electric vehicle back in 2003, they knew they could never duplicate the Toyota Way, and they didnt bother to trythey subbed out almost every component of the Roadster, and contracted with Lotus to do the manufacturing.

With Model S however, Tesla set out to do its own manufacturingand it wasnt easy. As Matthew DeBord notes in a recentBusiness Insiderarticle, the company has struggled through Production Hell, from the fit-and-finish issues with Model S to the flaky Falcon Wing doors on Model X to theoverzealous automationon the early Model 3 assembly line, which necessitated the infamous tent in the parking lot.

DeBord was one of many in the media whoinitially ridiculedthat tent (its actually a sprung aluminum structure, and its still in service). Now, however, he understands that it was an innovative solution to a pressing problem, and helped Tesla deliver around 250,000 vehicles in 2019. That hastily improvised solution was not the first in Teslas history, and it probably wont be the last. The companys startup mentality includes a willingness to try unorthodox ways of getting things done in order to get its products to market quickly. Thats one of the reasons its been able to leapfrog the legacy automakers, despite their vastly greater resources and expertise (it also generatessome cracking good stories).

YouTube:Jason Yang

Over the years, manufacturing has gradually moved to center stage at Tesla, so much so that Elon Musk recently described it as nothing less than an obsession. We bring a massive amount of effort into manufacturing engineering, the machine that makes the machine, he said on Teslas most recent earnings call. We love manufacturing...Its awesome. And I really think more smart people should be working on manufacturing.

The relentless focus is now starting to pay off in a big way. By all accounts, Teslas quality control has improved exponentially, and were seeing nowhere near the number of complaints about panel gaps and paint defects that we did a couple of years ago. When manufacturing engineering expert Sandy Munro tore down a Model Y, he foundhuge improvements in the build quality. The body build is 1,000% better, said Sandy, who famously made some scathing comments about Model 3s body construction. There are still issues, but theyre minor in comparison to what I have seen in the past.

The constant improvements to Teslas production process translate not only into better quality, but reduced costs. Munro has predicted that the upcoming Cybertrucks simple body design and lack of paint should make itvastly cheaper to buildthan a traditional truck.

As Teslas production gradually expands from its Fremont factory, which it inherited from Toyota, to purpose-built facilities where it can build production lines from the ground up, incorporating the latest and greatest production learnings, the quality and cost improvements are bound to accelerate. DeBord notes that this should enable Tesla to reduce the cost of its vehicles, while continuing to report consistent profits. That means more market share and a bigger lead over much larger automakers that, when it comes to the electric future, find themselves in serious catch-up mode, he writes.

DeBord estimates that each of the new Gigafactories could build 250,000 vehicles a year, bringing Teslas total production to over a million units per year. The alien dreadnoughts are multiplyingand theyre coming for the legacy automakers.

===

Written by:Charles Morris; Source:Business Insider

Follow this link:

Is Tesla's Obsession With Manufacturing Really Starting To Pay Off? - InsideEVs

NATO expands scientific cooperation with Ukraine – Ukrinform. Ukraine and world news

Posted on by

Cooperation and dialogue with Ukraine is deepening thanks to the countrys new status as an Enhanced Opportunities Partner, obtained in June 2020.

The NATO Science for Peace and Security (SPS) Programme provides the Ukrainian scientific community with a platform to work side-by-side with NATO Allies and partner countries on security-related issues, according to a press release on the NATO website.

Ukraine is currently leading 27 ongoing activities, one of which is a key flagship project in the field of counter-terrorism called DEXTER (Detection of Explosives and Firearms to Counter Terrorism). It aims to develop an integrated system to detect explosives and firearms in public places, remotely and in real time, without disrupting the flow of passengers.

This project will contributeto NATOs enhanced role in the international fight against terrorism,said Dr Deniz Yuksel-Beten, senior SPS and partnerships cooperation advisor at NATO.

The SPS Programme also opens doors for Ukrainian experts especially young scientists and researchers.

In particular, in the field of security-related advanced technology, Ukrainian experts have collaborated with peers from the United Kingdom and the United States to increase the robustness of ground and air vehicles, as well as their performance, operational agility in severe terrain and resilience to failures.

This year, the SPS Programme has approved 13 new activities with Ukraine. These focus on the protection of soldiers and civilians from chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear contamination; using advanced technology to strengthen civilian population resilience, and national medical and emergency-response systems; and developing tools to protect military personnel from biological and explosive threats, while enhancing their energy efficiency.

Through these new activities, Ukrainian co-directors will work together with experts from Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, the United Kingdom and other partner countries including Belarus, Jordan and Sweden.

As reported, on June 12, the North Atlantic Council recognized Ukraine as an Enhanced Opportunities Partner. This status is part of NATOs Partnership Interoperability Initiative, which aims to maintain and deepen cooperation between Allies and partners that have made significant contributions to NATO-led operations and missions.

ish

Follow this link:

NATO expands scientific cooperation with Ukraine - Ukrinform. Ukraine and world news

Why Trump’s Troop Withdrawal from Germany Is Only the Beginning – The National Interest

Posted on by

NATO is in trouble. Last week Secretary of Defense Mark Esper followed through on President Trumps threats to withdraw forces from Germany. Esper announced twelve thousand troops would depart Germany, some remaining in Europe, mostly Belgium and Italy, and others returning to the US where they will then join rotational deployments in Eastern Europe and around the world. The announcement was condemned in Washington and caused a sense of foreboding on the other side of the Atlantic. The significance of the troop level cuts has less to do with its impact on US force posture in Europe than what it signals about the U.S. commitment to NATO, especially should Trump win a second term. If Donald Trump is reelected in November, last weeks arbitrary and uncoordinated withdrawal of U.S. forces from Germany portends a bleak future for historys most successful alliance: Trump will pull the United States out of NATO.

The Adults Have Left the Building

Over the last four years, there has been a persistent narrative that, despite Trumps reckless inclinations on foreign affairs, the actual policies that have been put in place have been relatively normal. Trump may tweet one thing but the adults in his administration ignore it or limit the damage.

At the beginning of the Trump administration, Europeans concern over Trump was mitigated by the presence of trusted senior officials in government, namely Secretary of Defense Mattis, National Security Advisor H. R. MacMaster and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Trump may express bizarre fealty to Putin but, look at the sanctions placed on Russia or the evictions of Russian personnel following the Skripal attacks (all of which occurred during Tillerson and MacMasters final month). Meanwhile, the Pentagon under Mattis, strengthened its force presence in Europe, turning the European Reassurance Initiative into the Deterrence Initiative.

But the adults have left the building. Mattis even wrote an ode to allies upon exiting, explaining how America's strength in the world is inextricably linked to the strength of our unique and comprehensive system of alliances and partnerships. Trumps hostility towards Americas allies prompted Mattis to depart.

The Trump administration is now staffed with officials, many unconfirmed by the Senate, that are there not because of their qualifications but because they are loyal to Trump and willing to do what he says. His tweets are now acted upon.

Espers announcement of the troop withdrawals revealed what policy by tweet looks like.

His announcement made clear this was about appeasing the Presidents desire to slight Germany and not US national security. In attempting to lay out a logic or a strategy for withdrawals, he simply revealed there was none. Instead, he offered a sloppy and ill-conceived strategy to justify the presidents dangerous rhetoric. One could soundly make the case for adjusting force posture amid shifting geopolitical dynamics in Europe, for example repositioning forces in Poland or Southeast Europe. It could also make sense to move headquarters to Belgium to better integrate with NATO. But such a decision would require coordination and consultation with the military services, Americas allies in the region, and members of Congress. It would require addressing logistical concerns and answering questions about deterrence against Russian aggression. But none of this was done.

Esper was in a rush to please his boss. But why does Trump care so much about troop numbers in Germany?

The Bear in the Room

Trump and Espers actions only make sense in the context of the broader approach to Europe and Russia throughout the Trump administration. Trumps affinity and praise for Russian President Vladimir Putin and his desire to mend ties and work with Russia is consistent and clear. Whatever the reason for this, and speculation is rife, it is simply a trend that cannot be ignored. Similarly, there has also been a clear and consistent pattern of hostility from Trump toward NATO and Americas closest democratic allies in Europe. From the beginning of his presidency, Trump has called into question whether the United States would actually honor its NATO security commitments and has repeatedly discussed withdrawing the United States from NATO.

Trump has treated NATO as if it were a protection racket and he was the mob boss coming to collect. He has little idea of how the Alliance works, and said, according to John Bolton, I dont give a shit about NATO. Trump questioned whether the United States would defend a treaty ally, claiming in an interview that Montenegro has very aggressive people, asking himself why the U.S. should defend it. During his first visit to NATO headquarters in May 2017, Trump had yet to reaffirm his commitment to Article 5. White House staff told the New York Times prior to that speech he would do so, and it was in his prepared remarks. But when he addressed the summit, there was no mention of Article 5. It would only come weeks later, slipped into a press conference in Washington.

In former Trump National Security Advisor John Boltons new book, he even claims that he talked Trump out of announcing he would pull the United States out of NATO at the 2018 summit. Bolton recently remarked at the Aspen Security Conference that the way to talk Trump down was to highlight the reelection ramifications. Bolton fears a second term Trump would be able to act more on his tweets. As he recently told Carol Lee at the Aspen Security Forum:

If the political guardrail of reelection is removed, and the most powerful argument any of us ever used in the foreign affairs area to get Trump to do something in the first term, that is to say the risk of volcanic negative reaction by Republicans in Congress is removed, I think the prospect is that he will do more of what he talks about rather than do more of what he did under complaint and criticism. That could well mean, whether with respect to Russia or NATO or any other issue in foreign policy, that what he actually says he would then do because there would not be the fear of losing political credit."

The best hope for NATO in a Trump second term is that the Alliance, and the prospect of an American withdrawal, simply does not cross the radar of the easily distracted president. But this is where Trumps desire to improve relations with Russia spells trouble for the Alliance.

Undermining the NATO alliance is Russias top strategic objective and has been since the Alliance was formed after World War II. Russia has long called for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Europe and Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov could barely hide his pleasure as he told CNN: "We never hid that [we think] the less American soldiers there are on the European continent the calmer it is in Europe." Russia seeks a new grand bargain with the United States to recreate set defined spheres of influence and to see NATO, which it sees as a Cold War relic designed to threaten Russia, drastically downsized or dismantled.

And now Russia has an American president who demonstrates clear hostility to the Alliance and is intent on transforming bilateral relations and appears to listen to what Putin has to say. When Putin and Trump met in Helsinki, Trump was constrained by a coming midterm election, the Mueller investigation, and the oddly timed announcement of indictments against Russians for interfering in the election. Nevertheless, the warmth in that meeting and Trumps willingness to follow Putins lead was evident. The adults still in the room were quick to assure that former Ambassador Michael McFaul would not be made available to Russian authorities and that the United States wouldnt engage in some bizarre cybersecurity cooperation.

Whats clear however is that in that meeting and others, Trump and Putin got along extremely well. What is less clear is what theyve been talking about in their many conversations. Trump has hidden the content of at least five meetings with Putin from U.S. officials. It was recently revealed that Trump and Putin have talked seven times since the coronavirus pandemic began but we know little about what they are discussing. However, we do know that when it was revealed that Russia put bounties on U.S. forces in Afghanistan Trump still didnt broach it with Putin. Instead, he downplayed it and parroted Kremlin talking points.

All this adds up to a very bleak picture for NATO should Trump remain in office. The former Commander of the U.S. Army in Europe Ben Hodges described last weeks withdrawal of forces from Germany as a gift to Putin. He was right. But the ultimate prize is not in the withdrawal but what Russia stands to get should Trump win a second term. The withdrawal of U.S. forces from Germany was a taste of whats to come with a second Trump term: the end of NATO.

Max Bergmann is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. He served in the State Department from 20112017. James Lamond is a fellow at the Center for American Progress.

Original post:

Why Trump's Troop Withdrawal from Germany Is Only the Beginning - The National Interest

5,500 US troops to be stationed in Poland – SOFREP

Posted on by

Poland and the U.S. have reached the Enhanced Cooperation Agreement. Under it, 5,500 U.S. troops will be stationed at bases in Poland; thePolish will bear the majority of the costs associated with the U.S. troops move.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper said that the Agreement with Poland will enhance deterrence against Russia, strengthen NATO, reassure our Allies, and our forward presence in Poland on NATOs eastern flank will improve our strategic and operational flexibility.

Last week, Esper had stated that relocating the Germany-based troops to Belgium, Italy, and back to the U.S. is a strategic decision that will benefit the U.S. and NATO.

However, President Trump did put the Polish in an awkward situation vis--vis their German allies as the increase in troops in Poland is at the cost of Germany.

President Trump did not mince words last week regarding Germany. He stated that Germany has not been living up to the agreed-upon 2 percent GDP spending on defense. He added that the U.S. was tired of being suckers so were reducing the force because theyre not paying their bills. Its very simple, theyre delinquent.

According to Pentagon spokesman LTC Thomas Campbell, the Polish government has agreed to fund infrastructure and logistical support to U.S. forces in Poland, including the current 4,500 rotational forces and the planned increase of 1,000 additional rotational forces.

The Polish government has released the following information regarding the U.S. troops future stations:

While the final amounts of the costs borne by Poland have not yet been agreed to, there are already rumblings that Trump and Polish President Duda are breaking the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act. According to the Founding Act, which was signed 23 years ago, NATO troops are prohibited from being permanently based in Central and Eastern European countries.

Despite Russian propaganda claiming a breach of the Founding Act and many leaders in Europe worrying about a violation of it, the relocation of troops does not run contrary to it. The Founding Act specifically prohibits permanently based NATO troops in the current and foreseeable security environment.

Under President Putin, Russia has frequently and continuously violated the tenets of the NATO-Russia agreement and moved far away from the cooperation and goodwill that the agreement aimed at.Several of those violations were cataloged by the Heritage Foundation in a 2016 piece.

Despite the above, American newspapers are already parroting the Russian line, and many in NATO want to continue following an agreement on paper despite the Russians thumbing their nose at it.

Retired LTG Ben Hodges, who until last year was the American commander in Europe, sees both advantages and disadvantages regarding the U.S. troops relocation from Germany. In an interview, Hodges said that President Trumps decision to commit more forces to Poland helps in deterring Moscows aggressive posture and builds up U.S. credibility. On the other hand, with Germany being a major hub for U.S. operations in the Middle East, he did not like seeing any further split with Americas long-time ally. I think its a mistake to take [the troops] out of Germany to go to Poland because it will be seen as the punishment of our most important ally in Europe, he said.

With the Poles and others who were part of the defunct Warsaw Pact now under the NATO umbrella, it is important to have a defensive deterrence in place. The Poles are acutely aware and sensitive to the number of times the Russians have invaded their country. A relatively small American footprint in Poland will not increase but reduce the possibility that any conflict with the Russians starts there.

A determined Russian assault on Poland could still push the small number of troops aside, but the relocation ensures that NATO would respond in a timely fashion. The 2018 Brussells Summit called for a timely response in the case of an attack. The NATO Readiness Initiative, the so-called Four 30s plan, would designate 30 ground battalions, 30 air squadrons, and 30 major naval combatants to be ready to deploy and engage an adversary within 30 days.

The Enhanced Cooperation Agreement is just the start. The states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are expected to promote and fund sustainment operations for increased U.S.-led SOF training and other rotational deployments in the Baltic region.

These moves will build deterrence and increase cost-sharing, something the current Washington administration views as critical. This will allow for not only the United States but all of NATO to have greater military capabilities and as the capacity for rapid reinforcement in the case of an attack.

Read more from the original source:

5,500 US troops to be stationed in Poland - SOFREP

Allies testing naval readiness in Canada’s Arctic – CBC.ca

Posted on by

Operation Nanook, the Canadian military's annual northern sovereignty exercise, is taking on a distinct NATO look this year with the participation of three other allies, one of which is not an Arctic nation.

Five warships, a replenishment vessel and U.S. coast guard cutter are slated to take part in the three-week drill, which senior American and Canadian commanders said Monday was designed to test not only their ability to operate together in the harsh environment but also their "basic war-fighting" skills.

Canada is sending the frigate HMCS Ville de Quebec, the coastal defence vessel HMCS Glace Bay and the supply ship MV Asterix.

Joining them will be Danish frigate HDMS Triton, the French coastal defence ship FS Fulmar, the U.S. coast guard cutter Tahoma and the brand-new American guided missile destroyer USS Thomas Hudner.

Canada, Denmark and the U.S. are all Arctic nations, but France is not.

The annual exercise, which began in 2007, has had international participation in the past, but the training that got underway Monday is broader and very tightly focused to include gunnery and ship-tracking scenarios.

From a geopolitical perspective, the Arctic is becoming an area of increasing interest to rivals such as Russia, which has invested heavily in rebuilding its cold weather military capability, and China, a nation that has no border in the region but has embarked on an icebreaker-building binge.

American Vice-Admiral Andrew Lewis, who commands both the U.S. Second Fleet and the allies' joint forces command in Norfolk, Va., said "this is absolutely not a NATO exercise. It's a Canadian exercise and a Canadian-led operation."

Having said that, NATO is interested in seeing allies gain experience operating together in the ice-choked passages and barren landscapes.

The Western military alliance has been paying increasing attention and even delivered a policy assessment on the changing shape of security in the region, all of which have drawn sharp rebukes from Russia.

The multinational exercise sends an important signal, said Vice-Admiral Steven Poulin, the U.S. coast guard'sAtlantic-area commander.

"The message is that the Arctic is strategically important. It's becoming increasingly important for our collective national security," Poulin told a media teleconference on Monday. "Presence [in the region] matters and I think the participation reflects that presence matters."

Rear Admiral Brian Santarpia, the commander of Canada's East Coast fleet, said the region is so vast and harsh that allies need each other to operate safely and effectively, and that the exercise will test how well they can do that.

The example he gave, compared to some of the planned training, was benign and involved a search-and-rescue scenario involving a stricken cruise ship, an illustration the Canadian military has frequently invoked to describe the kinds of missions that might take place.

In comparison to previous years, Operation Nanook is being scaled back and there are restrictions, such as a ban on port visits, because of the coronavirus pandemic.

Santarpia said every effort is being made to ensure that the isolation from COVID-19 that the people of the North have largely enjoyed will be maintained.

Demonstrating to potential adversaries that the virus has not hindered the ability of the U.S. and other nations to deploy forces in harsh conditions is an underlying message, Lewis suggested.

"We have a lot of missions out there," he said. "It's a COVID-environment for sure, but it's also hurricane season We continue to march through that."

The rest is here:

Allies testing naval readiness in Canada's Arctic - CBC.ca

The Baltics missed out this time but the long pursuit of US troops in the region will pay off View – Euronews

Posted on by

When President Donald Trump first floated his plans to drawdown US forces in Germany, the Baltic states immediately sprang into action in an attempt to lure some of the reassigned troops within their own borders. The permanent housing of American military personnel has long been a strategic objective of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

We are ready to invest in this and we would be extremely happy, Latvias defense minister pitched his proposal to Washington in a well-choreographed message. Given that the Baltics are currently spending 2 per cent of their GDP on defence, a metric that in Trumps mind separates good allies from delinquent ones, Baltic lawmakers had hoped that this, in turn, could lead to a more robust US footprint in the region.

The details of the planned US force structure realignment in Europe are still trickling out. Reportedly, the US military presence in Poland will be beefed up with additional 1,000 US troops. According to US Defence Secretary Mark Esper, additional service members may also eventually land in the Baltics, but only on a rotational basis, however. The bulk of re-positioned forces are in fact heading either home to the US, west towards Belgium or south to Italy; not the direction the Baltics had hoped for.

The Baltic republics have fervently courted a permanent US military presence on their soil ever since joining NATO in 2004. Their rationale behind this is simple: when it comes to believable deterrence, the Baltic states trust the United States. While they have genuinely welcomed the arrival of alliances multinational force formations on their territories, which are currently led by Canada, the UK and Germany, they equally attach an entirely different quality to the company of US armed forces.

As the Lithuanian Defense Minister bluntly put it: The US is the most powerful ally and its deterrent effect is not comparable to other allies. This sentiment, that America occupies an indispensable position atop the NATO hierarchy and is the only one capable of deterring Russia in NATOs frontier region, is widely shared among Baltic officials. In the words of Jri Luik, Defence Minister for Estonia, the American flag has a great deterrence effect against Russia. For these reasons, the Baltics desire to see the US firmly implanted in the region.

From time to time, the idea of permanent American troop basing in the Baltic has received backing of prominent US national security figures. The late Republican Senator John McCain, for instance, favoured having US soldiers assigned to Estonia full-time. Former US Secretary of Defence James Mattis, during his confirmation hearing, equally voiced support for this proposal. Still, while the US-Baltic relations have matured into a multifaceted partnership and the Pentagon has constantly cycled rotational battalions and special operations forces in and out of the region, Washington has remained unwilling to permanently place forces on Russias doorstep.

Standard arguments against such move have been that this would only irritate the Kremlin and worsen already toxic US-Russia relations. Other sceptics have taken a more legalistic approach by submitting that permanent troop stationing in this part of Europe would be in violation of the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act. When speculation began to swirl regarding redeployment of US forces, the former head of Russias Foreign Affairs Committee, Aleksey Pushkov, was quick to remind US officials on Twitter that a troop transfer east would run afoul of this agreement.

The announced reshuffle of US forces in Europe is, without doubt, a setback for Tallinn, Riga, and Vilnius. Estonian Defense minister summarised it as not a positive move. However, if one pulls back the historical curtain here and looks at the developments of the past fifteen years, then it becomes obvious that the arc has bent towards greater US involvement in the security architecture of Eastern Europe. It is useful to remember that when the Baltic states initially joined NATO in 2004, there were not even contingency plans to defend its newest members.

For quite some time, our NATO membership was something that was more de jure than de facto, recalled a high-level representative of the Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The only NATO presence on the Baltic territory, he adds, consisted of four NATO planes that scrambled when Russian military airplanes approached their airspace. In the wake of the Russo-Georgian war, official defence plans, tailored to the needs of the Baltic nations, were finally put in place in 2009.

Moreover, following Russias annexation of Crimea in early 2014, both NATO and the US have substantially augmented their presence on the alliances eastern flank via so-called Enhanced Forward Presence missions. While the United States does not lead a battle-group in the Baltic region, it was the one who got this initiative off the ground, rallied others to participate, and now anchors it with its military presence in Poland.

If for a moment we subtract President Donald Trump from the picture, then the general trend lines actually point in the opposite direction. To each external pressure, Washington has responded by bringing forward-deployed forces further east. The long view suggests that a permanent US flag will be one day flying over the Baltic states.

____________

Are you a recognised expert in your field? At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at view@euronews.com to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

View post:

The Baltics missed out this time but the long pursuit of US troops in the region will pay off View - Euronews

City Lights: Sit with Yuri Schwebler’s Spiritual Art or Probe Your Psyche with Project Implicit – Washington City Paper

Posted on by

At his peak, Yuri Schwebler was a major presence in the D.C. art scene. Now, 30 years after his death by suicide at 47, Schwebler is getting a long-awaited retrospective at the American University Museum that spotlights his minimalism- and earth-art-inspired conceptual artworks. Schweblers career was meteoric. Within three years of being discharged from the Army Reserves and Walter Reeds psychiatric ward, he managed to have two museum shows and an appearance on national televisionall without a college degree, much of a track record in Washington, or anywhere else for that matter, writes curator John James Anderson (whos been an art critic for Washington City Paper). Schwebler, an immigrant from Yugoslavia, was best known for his 1974 work that turned the Washington Monument into a sundial. His inspiration came when he realized he had never seen the obelisks shadow because it was so big; he would eventually discover that the shadow moved at four feet per minute, making it feel like you can actually see the earth move. But after relocating to New York in 1980, Schwebler had one solo exhibition, in 1982, and never exhibited again. Most of Schweblers works were ephemeral and are represented in the retrospective through photographic documentation. This made it easier to move the exhibit online during the coronavirus pandemic, Anderson says. It makes as much sense to be a slideshow on the internet, where more people can access it, he says. The online catalog features essays by Anderson and former Washington Post architecture critic Benjamin Forgey; plus, a July gallery talk with Anderson and AU museum director and curator Jack Rasmussen is archived online. The exhibition is available at american.edu and the catalog is available at auislandora.wrlc.org. Free. Louis Jacobson

Do you associate certain types of people with goodness, moral purity, attractiveness, or foreignness? Visit Harvard's implicit bias test portal if you can psych yourself up enough to see your results laid bare. This batch of recognition, association, archetype sorting, and image choice tasks will yield scores for various prejudices. This international research cooperation was created to serve as a public "virtual lab" for hidden bias recognition. By requiring takers to sort through pairings instantly, the test compels snap judgments and introduces a time penalty that makes it hard to trick. Possible results include slight, moderate, and strong labels of bias. And in 2011, the team released a spinoff site: At Project Implicit Mental Health, you can do additional tests that measure the implicit associations you have in relation to yourself. Some gauge, for example, the extent to which you associate yourself with anxiety, poor health, negativity, alcoholism, and sadness. Anonymous data is made publicly available for scientists and used to map implicit bias nationwide, including in D.C. The test has been granted a Golden Goose Award from the Library of Congress and funding from the National Institutes of Health. There's no true quantitative screening for racism, and these assessments, though well-circulated, are not foolproofand theres controversy about their interpretation. For curiosity's sake, however, it's useful to know what your psyche has done with what you've been taught. Though the knowledge is no panacea, it still can have value. And if you're hoping to rid your subconscious of discriminatory debris, this isnt a terrible place to start. The project is available at implicit.harvard.edu. Free. ViktoriaNagudi

Follow this link:

City Lights: Sit with Yuri Schwebler's Spiritual Art or Probe Your Psyche with Project Implicit - Washington City Paper

Inside the Project Veritas Plan to Steal the Election – The New Republic

Posted on by

The purpose of Diamond Dog, as one source close to theorganization put it, is literally to get Trump reelected.

Last year, Project Veritassdonor development team solicited big-ticket funders with a pitch deckfrequently tailored toa given patrons pet ideologicalgrievances and personal hang-upsoffering tantalizing details about thegroups undercover operations for the 2020campaign cycle. One iteration of this Apple Keynote file was prepared for anask meeting with a person who appears to be Cognex Corporation founder Robert Shillman, a devoted funder of Islamophobic causes who was alsoone of OKeefeswould-be wedding guests. (Shillman ended up pledging to donate $50,000 to thegroup.) The slate of investigations in the Dr.Bob pitch includedschemes to procure evidence of illegal aliensvoting, mail-inballot tampering at nursinghomes, andthe sale of absenteeballots and voter profiles on the Dark Web.

By the end of summer 2019, Diamond Dog had already grown to be across-country effort, based on internal Project Veritas memos, research notes,and other documents that we have obtained. InCalifornia and Texas, Project Veritas has tasked its operatives withunearthing supposed evidence of widespread mail-in ballot forgery. In bothstates, Project Veritas has worked to infiltrate the groups of volunteers andpaid canvassers who collect absentee and mail-invoter applications from low-income, elderly, and minority groupsa perfectly legalpractice in most states that conservatives have tried to label as nefarious ballot harvesting.

In Texas, Project Veritas has alsocoordinated in secret with a local Republican operative named AaronHarris, codenamed Dragon, currently chief of staffto Republican congressman Lance Gooden. In turn, through the activist group hefounded, Direct Action Texas, Harris has helped Project Veritas covertlystrategize with a staffer working for the office of the states Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton. Paxtonis leading the states election integrity initiative, oneof many Republican efforts nationwide to suppress the vote under the guise ofrooting out the nearly non-existent threat of voter fraud.

Granted, Project Veritas, whose fervor to own the libs is matchedonly by its comical incompetence, is hardly likely to tip the election inDonald Trumps favor all byitself. But it is at the vanguard of a larger underhanded approach thatRepublicans, starting at the very top, are taking to the 2020 cycle. If theywant to win, they really have no other choice but to undermine the vote: Trumps poll numbers are in the basement, and heappears constitutionally incapable of making appeals beyond his hardcoresupporters on the right.

Republicans have all but admitted that this is their strategy. Incoordination with the Republican National Committee and a raft of independentconservative groups, Trump has staked the success of his entire reelectioncampaign to a widespread voter suppression effort built on the pretext ofpreserving election integrity. The project, led by his campaigns senior counsel Justin Clark, has worked toplace operatives in at least 10 battleground states to challenge voter rollsand procedures. Between lawsuits and local advertising blitzesallregularly relayed to Trump in the Oval Officethe effort could cost wellover $20 million, as the RNC told The Washington Post.

Project Veritas has been among the on-the-ground organizations atthe forefront of these efforts and has benefited substantially as a result.According to internal Project Veritas documents, the groups fundraising total for 2019 leaped up to morethan $13.44 million, $4.58 million more than their 2018 returns and the groups largest reported annual revenue figure todate. The group may be comically incompetent, but in these cursed times, we allknow how dangerous comical incompetence can be once enough money and cloutline up behind it.

For an operation premised on conspiracy theories and fueled byraging paranoia, it will come as no surprise that the agents helping tospearhead Project Veritass election mischief are oddballs on the fringes ofAmerican political life. In one slide prepared forDr. Bob, a 69-year-old Florida resident, a registered Republican named JosephVancheri notifies OKeefe of his soon-to-bestatus as a poll worker in Broward County, likely for undercover Election Daysnooping on Project Veritassbehalf. Vancheri, an ex-cop and die-hard Trump supporter, has routinely taken to Facebook to lash out against all the Trump haters and SHEEP, includingSHIFTY SCHIFF and the Idiot Warren, using Trumpspreferred epithet Pocohontas [sic]. Afirst-generation immigranthimself, Vancheri has nevertheless long harbored hardline views onimmigration that echo his anxieties over thepotential for illicit enfranchisement of foreigners.

In anotherslide, Project Veritas boasts of receiving a tip from a formerbroadcast meteorologist named ArchKennedy, who found it suspicious that 300 people were all registered to vote atthe address for Emory UniversitysEmory Muslim Student Association in Atlanta. (In all likelihood these voters,who constitute 2 percent of Emorystotal student population and .0028 percent of Georgias population, have their mail forwarded there.) In 2017,Arch organized one of the anti-Muslim group ACT! For Americas28 nationwide March Against Sharia rallies. Held in AtlantasPiedmont Park, it was a sparsely attended affair but still managed to includeRepublican Georgia State Senator Michael Williams, then mounting a doomedprimary campaign for governor.

See the original post:

Inside the Project Veritas Plan to Steal the Election - The New Republic

Perry Mason Season 1 Finale Recap: The Defense Rests – The New York Times

Posted on by

Its all connected. This is Perry Masons argument as he takes on his star witness (and a hostile one at that), Sgt. Ennis, in court. It beggars belief that an accountant like George Gannon could have executed his two accomplices (both of them professional hoods), driven across town with a bullet wound, then blown his own head off with a shotgun.

But Ennis? He has history in Colorados mining wars with both the two dead strikebreakers and their boss, Elder Eric Seidel, currently missing and presumed dead. He has been tied to the Chinese-American sex worker whose heroin-laced milk suffocated baby Charlie Dodson. He was somehow the first man at nearly every crime scene connected to the case. Hes the linchpin for six murders, and hes about to break

but only in Perrys mind. The entire courtroom sequence that helps open this fine season finale is a figment of Masons imagination as he rehearses with his associates Della Street, Paul Drake and Hamilton Burger.

No one confesses on the stand! Burger yells from the illusory gallery, repeating himself as Perrys mind flashes back to the real world. Calling Ennis to the stand without having real, hard evidence linking him to each of the murder victims would be a disaster. You dont go in unless you got him, says Drake, and you dont got him.

So much for the Perry Mason courtroom-confession clich of yore. In this climactic episode of the shows first season, the showrunners, Rolin Jones and Ron Fitzgerald, have definitively abandoned the definitive convention of the old Perry Mason series; its as if a Columbo remake did away with the whole One more thing bit.

The amazing thing is that the new Perry Mason doesnt need these dramaturgical training wheels. Just look at that opening courtroom sequence, with its intense direction by Tim Van Patten, its impassioned performance by Matthew Rhys once again allowed to burst into outright rage and its fantasy-dismantling intervention by Justin Kirks Hamilton Burger. To attempt a bait-and-switch like this takes guts. To pull it off takes talent.

An odd thing to say, perhaps, about an episode that hinges on its main characters relative lack of talent. This is not to say hes a bad lawyer; his closing argument moves his associate Della Street to tears, and he manages to secure a mistrial for his client, Emily, whom he put on the stand (at Dellas urging) at great risk to the case.

But a mistrial isnt the same as being found not guilty, let alone exonerated in full as the real killer is brought to justice. (Ennis meets his end at the hands of his partner and their vengeful associates, one last loose end to be tied up.) Thats the [expletive] of this lawyering thing, Perry tells his old partner, Pete Strickland. You can have all the truths on your side, but if you cant prove, if you cant hold it in your hand, it doesnt exist.

And while two of the jurors who hung the jury came to their positions honestly, a third was bribed by Perry via his now-former partner, Pete. Strickland ends up going to work for Burger, helping him take down the surviving hierarchy of the Radiant Assembly of God rather than joining the newly minted Perry Mason & Associates with Della and their new investigator, Paul Drake, who quits the police force in what is arguably the seasons top feel-good moment.

Other moments well, Im not exactly sure how to describe them, whether feel-good or feel-bad. Theres the matter of Mother Birdy McKeegan, for one thing. She almost certainly orchestrated the disappearance of Charlie Dodsons body and the miraculous appearance nearby of a baby who looks nothing at all like Charlie in an attempt to salvage Sister Alices promise to resurrect the slain infant.

This costs her her relationship with Alice, who flees, changes her hair color and goes to work as a diner waitress, as Paul Drake dutifully uncovers. But it gives Emily Dodson a second chance at motherhood, at a time when she is totally at loose ends. If she has to pretend at Mother McKeegans traveling revival show that the baby is her own, who are we to tell this woman that what shes doing is wrong? She only wanted to be a good mother to her child.

Looking back on this refreshingly ambiguous season of whodunit television, I think Ill revisit Perrys reunion with Sister Alice quite a bit. Before he gives up on the case entirely, before he takes out the stitch he saved from baby Charlies eyes and blows it into the Pacific Ocean, he tells Alice about her mothers new ministry and wonders who removed Charlies body.

But however much she has questioned her own gifts, Alice is still a woman of faith. What comfort has digging for proof of the truth ever given Perry, she asks? In the end, both of them, with their diametrically opposed views of how the world works, will be alone. (Shes more right than she realizes; Perry has officially called off his relationship with Lupe, though he has finally admitted that her asking price for his family farm was a fair one and given her the land.)

Which leaves Perry with one final question: Did you really think you could bring Charlie back?

I did, didnt I? Alice replies. As far as her mother and Charlies mother are concerned, the answer is, for all intents and purposes, yes. Its not true, of course. But maybe its right.

From the case files:

The first visitor to Perrys new firm is straight out of film-noir central casting, a blonde bombshell who says simply, Im in trouble. Well, that, and that she can pay the retainer. Youve come to the right place, Perry says.

Perry reveals during the course of the episode that he knows Della is gay. He doesnt care except for resent, perhaps, that she felt she could, and should, keep this from him. I wonder how hell feel if he ever finds out about Burger?

I was struck by how Birdys minions made their initial overture to recruit Emily to their cause: a note that was nothing more or less than the footprint of the baby they claimed was Charlie. Simple, but brutally effective.

The thing I keep coming back to in all my conversations with friends and readers about this show is how little reason there was to expect it to be anywhere near as good as it was. I mean, Perry Mason? In this economy? Apparently the answer is yes, and I couldnt be happier about it.

Visit link:

Perry Mason Season 1 Finale Recap: The Defense Rests - The New York Times

The Trump Campaign Tries to Change the Subject – The New Yorker

Posted on by

With less than three months to go until Election Day, Donald Trumps campaign this week tried again to hit the reset button. Were going to run like were the underdog, Trumps new campaign manager, Bill Stepien, told Fox News on Monday. Before Stepien spoke, the Trump team released two new television ads targeting Joe Biden, who, thus far, has proved an elusive foe. One features a montage of Biden with Senator Bernie Sanders and Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, and claims that Biden has embraced the policies of the radical left. The other shows a woman of color silently holding up printed cards, the last two of which say IM AFRAID TO SAY THIS OUT LOUD I WONT RISK MY CHILDRENS FUTURE WITH BIDEN.

These ads seem to have come from the same playbook that Trump has been relying on for months now, with little success if you believe the polls. To get a better idea of how the campaign is trying to motivate the Presidents loyal supporters and reach out to less committed ones, I downloaded the campaigns official app, which promised to supply me with exclusive content and campaign updates. For a couple of days, I dived into the online Trump world, which turned out to be an immersive experience.

After registering, I was immediately invited to sign up and watch some of the apps proprietorial video content, including Triggered, a show that features the Presidents son Donald Trump, Jr., and Theology Thursday with Speaker Gingrich. As I waited for these examples of must-see viewing to begin, I watched another show, which had been recorded a few days previously. The Right View is the Trump campaigns version of The View, the popular daily talk show that airs on ABC. The four hosts were Lara Trump, the Presidents daughter-in-law; Kimberly Guilfoyle, a former prosecutor and Fox News host who is dating Donald Trump, Jr.; Katrina Pierson, a Tea Party activist who was a spokesperson for Trumps 2016 campaign; and Mercedes Schlapp, a Republican communications operative who served in the Trump White House from 2017 to 2019.

What the hosts lacked in objectivity, they more than made up for in vitriol toward Biden and the Democrats. Its really horrifying to see what these people are doing, Lara Trump said, in reference to Democratic efforts to expand mail-in voting in Nevada and other states. After conducting an interview with Kaya Jones, a conservative pop singer, the hosts then discussed the Trump campaigns two new ads, while carefully omitting how misleading they are. (One of the ads claims that Biden supports defunding the police and raising taxes on the middle class. He backs neither.) The hosts repeatedly tore into the Democratic candidate. They will go to any lengths possible to try and prop up Joe Biden, like a Weekend at Bernies skit, Lara Trump said. They cant be real thinking this guy can be President, Guilfoyle said. He cant find his own way out of his home. The socialists who controlled Biden were hoping to use him as a tool to advance their radical agenda and tear this country apart, she went on.

Things continued in this vein for close to fifty minutes, interspersed by pop-up ads offering Trump merchandise, such as a MAGA Mama T-shirt. The show was slickly produced, and it captured the essence of the Trump campaign, which has come down to employing scare tactics, many of which are racially coded; claiming Biden is mentally impaired; and trying to suppress the Democratic vote by challenging mail-in voting and other efforts to insure that an election during a pandemic can be held safely and fairly. Notably absent from the episode of The Right View that I watched was any serious discussion of the coronavirus, which has claimed more than a hundred and sixty thousand American lives, or any real defense of Trumps record. Evidently, the Trump campaign doesnt like its chances if the election turns into a referendum on its candidates performance in office. So its doing all it can to change the subject.

That approach is also clear in the campaigns Facebook ads, which are just as voluminous as they were in 2016. Dangerous MOBS of far-left groups are running through our streets and causing absolute mayhem, one says. Joe Biden has ABSOLUTELY lost his mind, another proclaims. Between early May and August 6th, the Trump campaign spent $60.2 million on Facebook, while the Biden campaign spent just $29.5 million, according to Facebooks own records. Some of this difference was offset by spending by Democratic groups that are not directly under the control of the Biden campaign, such as the Priorities USA super PAC. But just as it did in 2016, the Trump campaign is placing a great deal of emphasis on Facebook for fund-raising and reaching persuadable voters.

That doesnt mean its neglecting more traditional campaigning methods, such as canvassing and conducting voter-registration drives. At a moment when the Biden campaign has largely abandoned physical efforts to contact voters because of the pandemic, relying instead on phone calls, texts, and digital outreach, the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee have recruited mask-wearing canvassers, who they claim are knocking on more than a million doors a week. From now to Election Day, voters may only see one campaign at their doors, Elliott Echols, the R.N.C.s national field director, told Politico. We can do this safely for President Trump and Republicans up and down the ballot.

Republicans have also made extensive efforts to register new G.O.P. voters, particularly in some key battleground states. In Pennsylvania, for example, Republicans have added about 165,000 net voters, while Democrats added only about 30,000, since 2016, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported last week. Democrats still maintain an 800,000-voter edge over Republicans. But thats down from 936,000 in 2016, when Trump still won the state by less than 1%.

Despite all these efforts, the polls show Trump trailing Biden, as they have all year. In FiveThirtyEights poll average, the margin between the two candidates on Saturday morning was 7.8 percentage points. Thats down a bit from the nine-point advantage that Biden held a couple of weeks ago, but it still represents a substantial gap. Trump is also trailing Biden in most of the battleground states, including Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, which he won narrowly in 2016 to put together a majority in the Electoral College.

During his interview with Fox News, Stepien sought to downplay the public polls, pointing out that most of them had Trump behind in 2016, as well. He also claimed that the campaigns internal polls show a strong standing for the President. Some of the campaigns recent actions suggest otherwise, though. After putting television ads on hold last month, when Stepien replaced Brad Parscale as campaign manager, this week it resumed advertising in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolinaall states that Trump won in 2016, but where polls currently show him trailing or in very tight races with Biden.

The latest ad buy is just the beginning. Both campaigns have raised obscene amounts of moneyearlier this week, the Trump campaign announced it had more than three hundred million dollars in the bank, and Bidens said it has nearly two hundred and fifty million. Between now and November 3rd, anybody who lives in a battleground state is going to be blitzed by political ads from both parties, on all of their devices. With so many ads running, they are likely to cancel each other out, at least to some extent. Trump may well need something more seismic to shift things in his favor.

See original here:

The Trump Campaign Tries to Change the Subject - The New Yorker