Hyderabad: No political party has the capacity or the courage to fight Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as people’s support is increasing rapidly in Telangana, said BJP spokesperson NV Subhash.
No party has capacity to contest elections on its own against the BJP. The ruling Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) party led by chief minister K Chandrasekhar Rao (KCR) is trying to enter into a pre-poll alliance with left parties and Congress.
The BJP leader further alleged that the BRS has a secret tie-up with AIMIM and continuing its appeasement policy towards Muslims.
Subhash pointed out that CPI leaders joined Telangana Pradesh Congress Committee (TPCC) leader Revanth Reddy in his padayatra at Bhadradri Kothagudem district.
“The latest instance was joining of local CPI leaders in the padyatra of TPCC president and MP Revanth Reddy in Bhadadri Kothagudem district. Revanth Reddy is using Haath se Haath Jodi” yatra to grab attention of Communist party of India (CPI) to win assembly elections,” he said.
“Political parties are joining hands to defeat the BJP government at the Centre led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi who has been developing the country,” Subhash added.
New Delhi: Sixteen opposition parties on Friday came together to chalk out a strategy in Parliament on the Hindenburg-Adani issue.
The parties met at the chamber of Mallikarjun Kharge, the Leader of Opposition, in Parliament premises.
Apart from the Congress, the DMK, Samajwadi Party (SP), AAP, BRS, Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackrey group), RJD, JD(U), CPI(M), CPI, NCP, NC, IUML, Kerala Congress (Jose Mani), Kerala Congress (Thomas), and RSP attended the opposition parties meeting.
The joint opposition demand is to constitute a joint parliamentary committee (JPC) to probe the loss of money to the Public Sector Banks and LIC.
On Thursday, both Houses of Parliament were adjourned as the opposition demanded an investigation by the JPC on the new revelations.
Kharge had said on Thursday: “We demand an investigation by the JPC on the issue and will raise the demand inside Parliament. We demand that a JPC should be constituted to go into the alleged irregularities.”
The opposition also alleged that the proceedings of both Houses of Parliament were adjourned to stop them from raising the Adani issue.
Taking to Twitter on Thursday, Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh had said: “Both Houses of Parliament adjourned today till 2 p.m. because Govt did not agree to combined Opposition demand for an investigation into forced investments by LIC, SBI & other public institutions that have lost huge value in recent days endangering savings of crores of Indians.”
“We’re preparing because that should be a Democratic seat. And we’re going to make sure that whoever gets the Democratic line is in a position to win,” said Rep. Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), a Queens party boss. “We have no shortage of individuals that could run and win. That seat will go back into the Democratic column.”
Both parties have begun drumming up a wish list of potential contenders to run for the Nassau County-based seat in 2024 — or sooner. While Republicans are hamstrung on the national level by Santos’ status as a sitting member, intense jockeying has kicked off among local officials. Some of the GOP’s possible prospects include an Ethiopian Jewish refugee-turned county legislator; a state senator who just ousted a sitting Democrat; and a gay woman who spent decades with the New York Police Department.
House Democrats have been even more aggressive behind the scenes, desperate to flip the seat back after a humiliating 2022 showing. Several sitting members have begun phoning possible candidates, including their onetime colleague, former Rep. Tom Suozzi. (He declined a run last November in favor of a failed gubernatorial bid.) Another local official, a Nassau County legislator, has already declared, while others could join, including several candidates who have previously run for the seat.
Democratic optimism isn’t misplaced. They’ve controlled the turf since it was created in 2012, losing it only last November in a Republican surge, propelled by voter angst over rising crime, that reddened the length of Long Island — from its New York City commuter neighborhoods to the ritzy Hamptons. And Joe Biden’s party will be even more favored next year, in a presidential cycle; he carried the seat by 9 points in 2020, and no Republican besides Santos has won there since the seat was created.
Multiple Democrats began making calls even before Santos was sworn in, shortly after the New York Times penned the first major story on his fabulism in late December. Lawmakers across the Democratic caucus have since made entreaties to Suozzi, who left Congress last year, though he has mostly been noncommittal about running for the seat, according to multiple people who have spoken with him.
Some of those Democrats wager that Suozzi would be more likely to run for a special election — if one were to happen — than seek a full term in the seat. Suozzi, when reached by POLITICO, said he had no comment on his plans, though he has drawn attention for a Jan. 3 New York Times op-ed calling for Santos to be removed from office.
There is also chatter about Robert Zimmerman, the Democrat who lost to Santos in November. Zimmerman is interested in running in a special election and would consider a 2024 run, according to a person close to him. (The Zimmerman-Santos race marked Congress’ first general election race between two openly gay candidates.) While Zimmerman has faced some local criticism for failing to dig into his GOP opponent’s fabricated resume, others have blamed those missteps and lack of resources on party leaders.
“When you look at the people, they’ll want to vote for somebody they know,” Meeks said, pointing to Zimmerman, Suozzi and “several others that have shown interest.”
Other possible candidates include Anna Kaplan, an Iranian Jewish refugee who recently lost a state Senate seat, as well as Jon Kaiman and Josh Lafazan, local legislators. Kaplan, Kaiman and Lafazan have all made bids for the seat in past cycles.
Lafazan, who has filed for the seat, told POLITICO he is not yet entertaining questions about the race: “I currently serve as Nassau County Legislator, and fully intend on serving my term and running for re-election in this position. That is the only election I am thinking about.”
Santos has refused to resign and has not made clear whether or not he will run for a second term in 2024, a decision that complicates the decision-making of national Republicans. The National Republican Congressional Committee does not move against incumbents, nor does the Congressional Leadership Fund, a big-spending super PAC closely aligned with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
But that might not matter thanks to Long Island’s machine-like politics, where local organizations are dominant and often act as a clearinghouse, interviewing potential contenders and working to unify the party. The Nassau County GOP has disavowed Santos and vowed to field a different candidate. (Should Santos decide to mount another run, the county party can stymie him further by denying him support in helping him gather the large number of signatures required to get on the ballot in New York State.)
“The Nassau County Republican Committee, and our chairman has made it very clear that George is not welcome in our party,” said Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, a fellow first-term Long Island Republican who flipped a seat adjacent to Santos’. “And he is not going to be the nominee of the Nassau County GOP in two years.”
The Nassau County GOP’s open hostility to Santos gave local Republicans cover to begin considering possible new standard bearers. Among the names floating in Republican circles: state Sen. Jack Martins; Andrea Catsimatidis, the daughter of billionaire radio host and businessman John Catsimatidis; Elaine Phillips, Nassau County comptroller and former New York state senator; and Alison Esposito, the openly gay 2022 lieutenant governor nominee who spent decades in the NYPD.
Yet another Republican to watch: Mazi Melesa Pilip, a Nassau County legislator and Ethiopian Jew who was airlifted to Israel during Operation Solomon. She married an American and later moved to the United States.
While all six of Santos’ fellow GOP freshmen in the New York delegation have demanded he step aside, party leaders have sidestepped the topic of a possible resignation amid a chaotic few weeks running the House chamber. Those resignation calls have mostly stayed within the Empire State delegation, though at least one more Republican, Rep. Max Miller of Ohio, has also joined in.
And McCarthy stressed to fellow Republicans this week that Santos would remain on committees until or unless he is charged with a crime. Whether that happens remains to be seen, with both federal and local officials probing his long record of fabrications.
The list of Santos probes is lengthy: A federal investigation led by the U.S. attorney’s office in New York is looking into his financial matters, while the district attorney’s offices in Nassau County and in Queens are doing their own work, as is the state attorney general. The House Ethics Committee is also reviewing a complaint filed by a pair of Democrats, though that panel has not disclosed any separate investigation.
Campaign finance inquiries can take years to yield an indictment, and members often continue serving in Congress while federal prosecutors compile a case.
For example, Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (D-Neb.) was indicted in October 2021 for alleged straw donations that were solicited in 2016. He resigned in March after being convicted of multiple felonies.
Nicholas Wu contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#Santos #digs #parties #ramp #campaign #plans #demise
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
BBC on Wednesday released the second episode of the two-part documentary – ‘India: The Modi Question‘ – which directly blames Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s role in the 2002 Gujarat riots when he helmed the state as its chief minister.
The first part was released on January 19 and was shared by many on all social media platforms which encouraged debates around the 2002 Gujarat riots and the role of then chief minister Narendra Modi during the riots that killed more than millions and displaced many, especially Muslims.
The one-hour documentary reveals ‘never-seen-before’ or ‘restricted’ documents in detail. It looks at the escalating tension between the Muslim community and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as well as Hindu right-wing organisations – Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
The documentary holds Modi directly responsible for the riots and states that such large-scale mass murder or in other words, a pogrom, was not possible without steady help from the state.
Modi government was quick to respond calling the documentary propaganda material ‘designed to push a particular discredited narrative.’
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said, “The documentary is a reflection on the agency that has made it. We think it is a propaganda piece designed to push a particular discredited narrative. The bias, lack of objectivity, and continuing colonial mindset are blatantly visible. Can’t dignify such a film.”
As the documentary created interest and buzz on the internet, the Central Government banned its airing in the country as well as directed all social media platforms to remove any posts and links pertaining to the documentary, creating a protest call from netizens and Opposition parties.
With the help of Rule 16 of the IT Rules, 2021 — formally known as the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 — notified on February 25, 2021, describes the government’s power with regard to “Blocking of information in case of emergency”.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting used emergency powers stating the documentary is based on a ‘colonial mindset’.
Following the ban, several student unions and political parties across India screened or tried to screen the documentary leading to tensions or conflict. Here are a few cities and states where the documentary was screened.
Hyderabad
In Hyderabad, the BBC documentary was screened at the University of Hyderabad (UoH) campus by a student group called the Fraternity Movement. Around 200 students turned up.
However, members of the ABVP complained to the university registrar who then released a statement saying no prior permission was taken by the students to screen the film.
Kerala
The documentary was screened in various places, including colleges, in Kerala on Tuesday with the BJP youth wing going up in arms in protest against the screenings.
In Thiruvananthapuram, the Youth Congress organised a screening at Manaveeyam Veedhi, a cultural space on Tuesday. The Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) held one at Poojappura Maidan.
Not just Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala’s financial capital Kochi saw many screenings. The Students’ Federation of India (SFI) conducted screenings for students of the Cochin University of Science and Technology, Kalady Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Maharaja’s College Ernakulam, and Government Law College.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) state secretary V Govindan came out in support of the screening saying, “Banning the documentary is an undemocratic stand. Ideals should not be banned in a democratic society.”
Delhi
In New Delhi, the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) saw the screening turned into a protest on Tuesday when student unions ignored the administration’s statement to cancel the screening which was supposed to take place on the same night at 9 pm.
The administration went ahead and snapped current and internet supply thus halting the screening. However, determined students started watching it on their laptops and phones. Protests between the college authorities and students broke out and incidents of stone pelting were also reported.
On Wednesday, a day after the ruckus in JNU, students at Delhi’s Jamia Milia Islamia university announced it would screen the banned BBC documentary at 6 pm.
While there are reports that several SFI students have been detained, the university has categorically said that no permission was given for the screening.
“The University reiterates that no meeting of students or screening of any film will be allowed in the campus without permission. University is taking all measures to prevent people/orgs having vested interest to destroy peaceful academic atmosphere here”, the university said in a circular.
By the time of publishing this report, Delhi Police has detained over 70 students who were gathered at Jamia Millia Islamia to protest against the detention of four activists over the proposed screening of a BBC documentary on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Students’ Federation of India said.
Member of Parliament A A Rahim from CPM party has strongly condemned the detention which includes female students also. In a tweet, he described the ban as a cowardly act by the Modi government. He demanded the immediate release of the students.
The students from #Jamia should be released immediately. The authorities including university admin and police are responsible for upholding security. Right to assemble must not be curtailed. Attack on students in #JNU should be investigated and perpetrators brought to justice.
SFI of Presidency University in Kolkata has asked for permission from the university’s administration to show the banned BBC documentary on January 27 at 4 pm.
The student union sent an email to the university administration seeking permission to book the badminton court on the campus where the screening will take place. The university is yet to respond.
