Tag: questions

Ocasio-Cortez says Thomas’ statement raises ‘more serious questions’

[ad_1]
Thomas issued his statement Friday after ProPublica reported that Crow had paid for multiple trips for the justice and his wife, which included the use of Crow’s yacht, private jet and Adirondacks resort, among other gifts. ProPublica estimated the cost of one vacation as more than $500,000.
New regulations were put into place on March 14 by a Judicial Conference committee to require Supreme Court justices and federal judges to disclose complimentary trips and any other such gifts. In his statement, Thomas promised to follow those restrictions moving forward.
The news sparked outrage among Ocasio-Cortez and many of her Democratic colleagues. She has already called for Thomas’ impeachment and on Sunday said the justice’s actions indicate other consequences for the court.
“I do believe that Chief Justice John Roberts must now come forward and state if he allows, and is allowing this kind of very serious corruption to happen on this court,” she said. “I know that there are calls for Chief Justice Roberts to initiate an investigation. I do not think that this Court any longer has any legitimacy, especially after the Supreme Court leak last year.”
Ocasio-Cortez claimed that it’s the House’ responsibility to oversee an investigation. When asked by CNN’s Dana Bash how a Republican-controlled House would accomplish that, Ocasio-Cortez said: “I admit it is, it is very difficult to see a path in a Republican Party that refuses to hold itself accountable, and in fact, breaches the law itself” — referencing former President Donald Trump’s indictment.
“If it is Republicans that decide to protect those who are breaking the law, then they are the ones who then are responsible for that decision, but we should not be complicit in that,” she said.
Crow, a real-estate developer from Texas, is a director at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and serves on the boards of the American Enterprise Institute, George W. Bush Foundation, and the Supreme Court Historical Society, Reuters reported. He helped found Club for Growth, an influential anti-tax group.
[ad_2]
#OcasioCortez #Thomas #statement #raises #questions
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

April 9, 2023
Farooq Abdullah Questions GoI’s ‘Double Speak’ On JK Assembly Elections

[ad_1]
SRINAGAR: National Conference President and Member of Parliament from Srinagar, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, questioned the “double speak” of the Government of India regarding assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir on Saturday. “The Centre is saying the situation has normalized in Jammu and Kashmir. One of our local IGs is saying that militancy has declined but not over. Why this double talk?” Farooq said while talking to journalists during his visit to Anantnag.
“If the indices of security have improved, then what is holding them back from holding elections? First it was security, and then it was weather. Now that the weather is clear and the security situation admittedly better. What is it then? When we visited the Election Commission, we were told that the delimitation exercise, voter lists have been completed. All they are doing is managing new excuses every day to delay Assembly elections,” he said.
Responding to a question on the removal of chapters relating to Mughal history from NCERT books, he said, “It’s sheer mockery. What are we going to tell visitors who built the Taj Mahal, Fatehpur Sikri, and many other fascinating buildings/structures? How will you hide the architectural and cultural insignias of Mughals spread across the country? It’s there to remain. People come and go, but history remains unchanged.”
Earlier, as per a statement to GNS, he visited Kokernag to commiserate with senior leader Choudhary Zaffar Ali Khatana on the demise of his brother Choudhary Amjad Ali Khatana. Joined by the party’s local unit and other South Zone functionaries, he expressed sympathies and condolences with the bereaved household and offered Fatiha for the deceased.
Among others, District presidents Altaf Ahmed Wani, Sajad Shaheen, senior leader Abdul Majeed Bhat Larmi, Provincial Vice President Syed Tauqeer Shah, and Reyaz Ahmed Khan accompanied him on the condolence visit. (GNS)

[ad_2]
#Farooq #Abdullah #Questions #GoIs #Double #Speak #Assembly #Elections

( With inputs from : kashmirlife.net )

April 9, 2023
7 questions from the Texas ruling on abortion pills

[ad_1]

What are abortion pills and why are they important?
The FDA first approved Mifeprex in 2000 and mifepristone, a generic version, in 2019. The drug, which blocks a hormone called progesterone needed for a viable pregnancy, is usually taken in combination with a medicine called misoprostol to end a pregnancy during the first 10 weeks. Numerous studies have found the pills to be safe and effective.
Republican lawmakers have outlawed most abortions in about a quarter of the country in the nine months since Roe v. Wade was overturned, often threatening doctors who perform abortions with jail. But a recent FDA decision, allowing the pills to be mailed and taken at home, offered a way around some of those laws and made the pills a prime target for anti-abortion advocates and conservative lawmakers.
Can I still obtain abortion pills?
Yes. U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, delayed the effect of his ruling for one week, and the Biden administration on Friday appealed the decision.
What was this case really about?
The most important implications of this ruling have to do with abortion. But the legal arguments centered on procedure and whether mifepristone received proper scrutiny from the FDA more than two decades ago.
The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group that brought the case on behalf of providers who oppose abortion, argued that the FDA went beyond its authority when it approved the medication. Their lawyers also argued that a 19th century anti-obscenity law, the Comstock Act, prohibits the mailing of any medication used for abortion.
What did the judge say?
Kacsmaryk ruled that both the initial approval of the pills in 2000 and a more recent decision to allow them to be prescribed via telemedicine were unlawful.
“The Court does not second-guess FDA’s decision-making lightly,” he wrote. “But here, FDA acquiesced on its legitimate safety concerns — in violation of its statutory duty — based on plainly unsound reasoning and studies that did not support its conclusions. There is also evidence indicating FDA faced significant political pressure to forego its proposed safety precautions to better advance the political objective of increased ‘access’ to chemical abortion — which was the ‘whole idea of mifepristone.’”
The judge also agreed that mailing the pills likely violates the Comstock Act, writing the plaintiffs have a “substantial likelihood of prevailing on their claim that defendants’ decision to allow the dispensing of chemical abortion drugs through mail violates unambiguous federal criminal law.”

Why did the judge allow this to happen 23 years after a medicine was approved?
“Simply put, FDA stonewalled judicial review — until now,” Kacsmaryk wrote in his ruling. “Before Plaintiffs filed this case, FDA ignored their petitions for over sixteen years, even though the law requires an agency response within ‘180 days of receipt of the petition.’ … Had FDA responded to Plaintiffs’ petitions within the 360 total days allotted, this case would have been in federal court decades earlier. Instead, FDA postponed and procrastinated for nearly 6,000 days.”
How can a federal judge in Amarillo, Texas, prohibit access in blue states like California and New York?
Kacsmaryk issued a nationwide injunction, meaning the ruling will take effect across the country in a week unless a higher court issues a stay. These types of rulings have become increasingly common over the last 20 years, and judges have used them to halt former President Barack Obama’s plan to offer quasi-legal status to certain undocumented immigrants and former President Donald Trump’s ban on travelers from certain countries. The Department of Justice during the Bush, Obama and Trump administrations, argued that nationwide injunctions are overused and “inconsistent with constitutional limitations on judicial power.”
What will happen next?
The Department of Justice quickly appealed the ruling Friday night to conservative-leaning 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
Kacsmaryk’s ruling came out the same day as a federal judge in Washington state ruled that the FDA is placing overly burdensome regulations on mifepristone. This will also likely be appealed to the more liberal-leaning 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco and possibly set up dueling circuit court rulings, teeing up a case over abortion pills for the Supreme Court.
[ad_2]
#questions #Texas #ruling #abortion #pills
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

April 8, 2023
“Get ready to answer citizens’ questions”, Prakash Raj to Kichcha Sudeep

[ad_1]
Bengaluru: A day after Kannada superstar Kichcha Sudeep confirmed he would campaign for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), another south star Prakash Raj took a jibe at him for choosing a ‘political party’.
Taking to Twitter on Thursday, Prakash wrote, “Dear Sudeep.. as an artist loved by everyone.. I had expected you to be a voice of the people. But you have chosen to colour yourself with a political party .. WELL .. Get ready to answer ..every question a citizen will ask YOU and YOUR party…@KicchaSudeep#justasking.”
Kichcha Sudeep hogged the limelight throughout Wednesday amid speculations of his joining BJP.

Addressing a joint press conference with CM Basavraj Bommai, Kichcha Sudeep said, “I had no necessity to come here, and I have not come here for any platform or money. I have come here only for a person. I have high regard for CM Mama (Bommai). That’s why I am announcing that I am giving my full support to Bommai sir”.
On being asked if he agrees with the ideology of BJP, Sudeep said, “As a citizen, I totally respect certain decisions PM Modi has taken, but that’s my perspective. But that has got nothing to do with me sitting here today”.
Karnataka CM Bommai also said that Sudeep doesn’t belong to any political party.
Reacting to Sudeep’s words on Wednesday, Prakash Raj said, “I am shocked and hurt by Kichha Sudeep’s statement.”
The Assembly election in Karnataka is scheduled to be held on May 10 and the counting of votes will take place on May 13.

[ad_2]
#ready #answer #citizens #questions #Prakash #Raj #Kichcha #Sudeep
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

April 7, 2023
The new revelations — and key questions — in the Trump indictment

[ad_1]
All 34 felony charges against Trump are identical, with each carrying the possibility of up to four years in prison, although judges rarely sentence defendants to jail for such offenses.
The indictment is a bare-bones document that simply recites the alleged offenses in boiler-plate language. However, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office also released a 14-page statement of facts laying out the case in greater detail.
Here are details from the groundbreaking court filings that could make or break the case of People v. Donald J. Trump.
The aggravating factor

Going into Tuesday’s historic and much-previewed arraignment, a key mystery was exactly how Bragg planned to bring the charges as felonies. The charge at the heart of the case – falsifying business records – is typically a misdemeanor, but it becomes a felony if the defendant falsified the records to obscure a separate crime.
The most obvious candidate for that aggravating element is the admission from Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, that he arranged a $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in consultation with Trump and to aid Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
“The defendant Donald J. Trump repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election,” the statement of facts says.
“The participants [in the scheme] violated election laws,” the statement continues, though it does not explicitly cite which ones. The statement also mentions Cohen’s guilty plea in 2018 to two federal campaign finance crimes. And in a press release, Bragg said Trump and others sought to conceal “attempts to violate state and federal election laws.”
The references to federal election violations are virtually certain to be the focus of pre-trial motions from Trump’s attorneys, who have contended publicly that this state-law offense cannot be piggybacked on a federal-law crime.

If defense attorneys prevail on such motions, it would not necessarily wipe out the criminal case against Trump. Instead, the case could remain as 34 misdemeanor charges. That would amount to a legal, public relations and political victory for Trump.
Such a result would further diminish the chances of Trump being jailed if found guilty. The maximum sentence on a second-degree falsifying business records charge is up to one year in prison on each count. A downgrading of the case to a misdemeanor might also aid Trump’s efforts to delay a trial.
A strange tax claim
The charges against Trump do not include any tax fraud offenses that some legal experts said they hoped to see to buttress the seriousness of the case. However, the statement of facts Bragg filed along with the indictment makes a surprising claim: that Trump and his associates engaged in deception by paying New York state more in taxes than it was owed.
“The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme,” the statement says.
It alleges that Trump paid an increased reimbursement to Cohen – a procedure known as “grossing up” the payment – in order to compensate him for the taxes he would owe by booking the money as legal fees.
These alleged contortions resulted in Cohen paying about $180,000 in state and federal income taxes, when he may have not owed anything if Trump had simply reimbursed him for the $130,000 and the payment had been properly recorded. That’s because the reimbursement of money Cohen already paid to Daniels wouldn’t have represented income for Cohen.
But recording the money, falsely, as legal fees subjected Cohen to significant income-tax liability – meaning that any trickery the men engaged in may actually have benefitted state and federal coffers. That may be why Bragg’s team doesn’t deem the practice “fraud,” and why no tax fraud or evasion charge was included in the indictment.
Is every record kept at a business a business record?
For Trump to be convicted of falsifying business records, the records at issue have to be, well, business records.
The New York law at issue requires that the falsification involve the records of “an enterprise,” and each count of the indictment claims that Trump falsified records “kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”
The facts are more complicated. It’s true that the checks sent to Cohen, which labeled the payments as legal expenses, were issued by employees working for Trump’s business empire. But they were not charged to Trump’s businesses. Instead, the payments were made from one of Trump’s personal accounts or from a Trump family trust.
The key question, and one that is sure to feature in efforts by Trump’s lawyers to derail the case, is whether documents that happened to pass through the Trump Organization or handled by Trump Organization personnel are automatically classified as business records, even if the source of the funds was Trump’s personal accounts.
Bragg’s statement of facts declares that “each check was processed by the Trump Organization” and gives further details about how Cohen arranged payment from bookkeepers at the Trump companies. Prosecutors say at least two of the payments were approved by longtime Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg, who pleaded guilty to unrelated tax evasion charges in 2021.
“The TO CFO approved the payment, and, in turn, the TO Controller sent the invoice to
the Trump Organization Accounts Payable Supervisor (the “TO Accounts Payable Supervisor”)
with the following instructions: ‘Post to legal expenses. Put ‘retainer for the months of January
and February 2017’ in the description,’” the prosecutors’ filing says.
Legal experts said they expect Trump’s lawyers to argue to the judge and, if necessary, a jury that wholly personal expenses that are simply handled by an accountant or other clerical personnel don’t become the “records of an enterprise” just by virtue of that process.
Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
#revelations #key #questions #Trump #indictment
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

April 5, 2023
Your questions about the Trump indictment, answered

[ad_1]

What is Trump accused of?
While the precise charges are secret for now, prosecutors have concluded they can prove a criminal case against Trump because of the apparent subterfuge surrounding a $130,000 payment to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels to keep her from publicizing her claim about a sexual encounter with Trump. Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen funded that payment through a home equity line of credit.
Trump insisted in April 2018 he did not know about the hush money, but Cohen provided Congress a series of check images, signed by Trump, reflecting payments to Cohen that he said were reimbursements for the money he laid out, including at least two that came while Trump was in the White House. Cohen said that Trump and his company concealed the purpose of the payments by falsely labeling them as legal expenses.
Under New York law, disguising such payments in corporate records is a crime, but typically only a misdemeanor. It becomes a felony if the false business records were intended to obscure a second crime. In this case, that second crime appears to be the use of the funds to advance Trump’s presidential campaign allegedly in violation of campaign finance laws.
The strongest evidence of such a link to politics may be the timing: After months of demands, the money was wired to Daniels’ lawyer on Oct. 27, 2016, just days before the 2016 presidential election.
What are the possible holes in the prosecution’s case?
It is difficult to assess the case against Trump without knowing the exact charges or all of the evidence that prosecutors have marshaled during an investigation that has lasted more than four years. But based on publicly available information, legal experts have identified several features of the case that may present stumbling blocks as prosecutors seek a guilty verdict.
For starters, Cohen is not the strongest possible witness for prosecutors. He’s provided a lot of the evidence and testimony needed to bring the case, which investigators have gone to great lengths to authenticate. But his credibility is open to challenge since he pleaded guilty in 2018 to nine felonies and was sentenced to three years in federal prison. He’s also repeatedly expressed extreme bitterness towards Trump, even running a podcast he titled “Mea Culpa,” an allusion to his regrets over his time as Trump’s ally.
The case also dates to 2016 and 2017, so it is more than five years old. Some of the delay can be readily explained — pressing a criminal case against Trump while he was in office would have been difficult and perhaps impossible. But it’s been more than two years now since Trump left the White House.
Trump could argue that prosecutors waited too long. New York’s statute of limitations for most felonies is five years, but there are some exceptions to that deadline, including if the person being charged was living out of state.

Another potential difficulty: Prosecutors may have to prove that Trump knew the arrangement was illegal. Trump could argue that he fairly assumed that Cohen, as an attorney, was executing the payments and related paperwork in a manner that was lawful.
Will Trump remain free? Can he campaign while under indictment?
That will be up to the state-court judge assigned to Trump’s case, but it seems unlikely that prosecutors would seek to detain the former president or restrict his travel in the U.S. while the case is pending. There is no legal impediment to him continuing his presidential campaign while facing criminal charges — or even if he were jailed.
If Trump won the presidency while facing charges or a conviction, the legalities become considerably more murky. There are serious constitutional questions about whether a state court could keep someone elected to federal office from serving.
How will the indictment affect the other ongoing Trump-focused investigations?
The short answer is: Not much. There’s no reason to think the indictment in Manhattan will influence the trajectory of several other probes that present an acute risk of more criminal charges for Trump. A grand jury in Fulton County, Ga., is examining his bid to overturn the election results in that state, and at the federal level, special counsel Jack Smith is leading twin probes into Trump’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and his retention of government documents after his presidency.
Formally, a federal criminal case against Trump — if it were filed — would allow federal prosecutors to take precedence over any local case or cases.
Concurrent criminal proceedings against Trump would inevitably cause some logistical problems, but typically the feds and local prosecutors try to work out any conflicts.
How long will it take Trump to be brought to trial?
It will, by necessity, take many months to commence a trial of a former president of the United States. Even if both sides were eager to proceed to trial quickly, ironing out legal and constitutional questions would likely stretch out over the next year and into the 2024 primary season.
Add to that Trump’s penchant — in nearly every legal matter he’s embroiled in — to seek to delay and prolong proceedings whenever possible.
Trump’s lawyers could try to move the case to federal court, arguing that at least some of the payments to Cohen took place while Trump was president and therefore a state court should have no authority to resolve the matter. Trump also could seek to move the trial to a different courthouse elsewhere in New York state. And he could try to have the indictment dismissed or reduced. All of these pre-trial motions will take time to resolve.
A criminal tax case the Manhattan district attorney’s office filed against the Trump Organization in the same court in 2021 took about 15 months to get to trial. A jury convicted two Trump companies on all 17 felony charges last December. The issues in the new case are narrower, but the focus on Trump personally seems certain to drag things out.
[ad_2]
#questions #Trump #indictment #answered
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

March 31, 2023
BJP wants to avoid Adani questions, PM silent on him: Priyanka Gandhi

[ad_1]
New Delhi: Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra on Saturday launched a fresh attack on the BJP over her brother and Congress leader, Rahul Gandhi’s disqualification from the Lok Sabha, saying the move was a ploy by the ruling party to evade questions on the Adani issue in Parliament.
Taking to Twitter, Priyanka Gandhi posted, “BJP wants to avoid this (Adani) question. The entire Parliament, barring the Opposition, is silent and the Prime Minister himself has turned mute.”
“They (BJP) are levelling all kinds of charges on Rahul. However, the PM remains silent on whose money was invested in shell companies owned by Gautam Adani and why isn’t it being investigated,” Priyanka wrote.
Tagging a photograph of her brother to her post, Priyanka highlighted three key statements of Rahul during a press conference on his disqualification on Saturday.
In the first of these three statements, Rahul said, “Prime Minister was scared of my next speech that was to come on Adani. I saw it in his eyes.”
“The moot question remains: who invested Rs 20,000 crore in the Adani shell firms? I will keep raising this question,” the former Wayanad MP said, in another statement that her sister highlighted.
In the third statement that Priyanka tagged to her post, Rahul refused to tender an apology for the remark for which he was convicted and eventually disqualified from the Lower House, saying, “My name is not Savarkar, my name is Gandhi. Gandhis don’t apologise to anyone.”
Rahul claimed that he was not scared of going to prison, adding his disqualification was aimed merely at diverting public attention from the controversy over the report by US-based short-seller Hindenburg Research against the Adani Group.

He alleged that the BJP-led central government was protecting the billionaire investor, who was accused of stock manipulation by the US short-seller.
“Why is the BJP protecting Gautam Adani? Kyun ki aap hi Adani ho,” Rahul alleged.
He added, “The whole game of disqualification and allegations (against him) by ministers is aimed at distracting people from the Adani issue.”
[ad_2]
#BJP #avoid #Adani #questions #silent #Priyanka #Gandhi
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

March 26, 2023
JKBOSE Class 10th Science Multiple Choice Questions: Check

[ad_1]

Never Miss An Update After Joining This Group
Join Our What’s Group Click Here

JKBOSE Class 10th Science Multiple Choice Questions: Check Your Answers Here
Check your answers for JKBOSE Class 10th Science multiple choice questions here.
Q 1:- A ray of líght goes from water into air. Will it bend towards normal ?
Ans: No, a ray of light going from water into air will actually bend away from the normal.

Q 2:- Name the mirror which can give an errect and enlarged image of an object ?
Ans: The concave mirror can give an erect and enlarged image of an object.
Also: Join WhatsApp Group
Q 3:- Which type of lens has a posítive power ?
Ans: A converging lens, also known as a convex lens, has a positive power.
Or
A diverging lens has a focal length of 0.10m. What is it’s power ?
Ans: The power of the diverging lens is -10 diopters.
The power (P) of a lens is given by the formula P = 1/f, where f is the focal length of the lens.
Given that the focal length of the diverging lens is 0.10m, we can calculate its power as:
P = 1/f = 1/0.10m = 10 diopters (D)
Therefore, the power of the diverging lens is 10 diopters (D).
Q 4:- The coloured light having the maximum speed in glass prism is :
Ans: Violet light has the maximum speed in a glass prism.
Q 5:- Out of an A.C. generator and a D.C. generator, which one uses a commutator ?
Ans: A DC generator uses a commutator.
Q 6:- At the time of short circuit, what happens to the current ?
Ans: In a short circuit, the current in the circuit can increase dramatically.
Q 7:- The modern periodic table was prepared by ?
Ans: The modern periodic table was prepared by Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev.
Q 8:- Name the functional group which always occurs in the middle of carbon chain ?
Ans: The carbonyl group (C=O) always occurs in the middle of a carbon chain in ketones.
Or
Why does ethyne burn with a scooty flame ?
Ans: Ethyne burns with a sooty flame due to incomplete combustion caused by its low hydrogen-to-carbon ratio.
Q 9:- The noble gas having only two electrons in its valence shell is :
Ans: The noble gas that has only two electrons in its valence shell is helium (He).
Q 10:- The number of molecules of water of crystallisation present in washing soda crystal is :
Ans: There are 10 molecules of water of crystallisation present in each washing soda crystal.
Q 11:- Do all cells use oxygen to produce energy ?
Ans: No, not all cells use oxygen to produce energy. Some cells can produce energy without oxygen through anaerobic respiration.
Q 12:- Name the organism which has parasitic mode of nutrition ?
Ans: Parasites have a parasitic mode of nutrition.
Q 13:- What is the other name of sex cells ?
Ans: The other name for sex cells is gametes.
Please note that the information provided is for informational purposes only and may not be entirely accurate. It is recommended to verify the information before relying on it solely.
[ad_2]
#JKBOSE #Class #10th #Science #Multiple #Choice #Questions #Check
( With inputs from : kashmirpublication.in )

March 19, 2023
Yechury questions Centre’s reluctance in allowing JPC to probe Adani issue

[ad_1]
Thiruvananthapuram: CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury on Saturday lambasted the BJP-led government at the Centre for not allowing a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) to examine the alleged “Adani scam” and charged that it is to hide the nexus between the corporate house and Prime Minister Narendra Modi dispensation.
If there is nothing to hide and nothing is wrong, why is the Modi government refusing to inquire into the scam? he asked.
Charging that the “communal corporate nexus” that has emerged under the Modi government is actually together destroying the foundational pillars of the Indian constitutional order, he also said the worst form of “crony capitalism” has developed under the BJP regime.
Yechury was speaking after inaugurating the culmination of the month-long “Jana Jagratha Yatra” led by party’s state secretary M V Govindan here highlighting the anti-people policies of the Centre.
“If there is nothing wrong, why they are not allowing a Joint Parliamentary Committee to examine the said issue (Adani scam)? The JPC, according to Parliamentary norms, will be headed by the party that has maximum number of MPs which is BJP,” he said adding that but still they were afraid of the JPC.
Because, what is being hidden is the link between the corporate house and the Modi government and the truth of the crony capitalism, the Marxist veteran said.
If anybody questions the PM or the government, then they are immediately branded as anti-nationals and that is the most serious thing happening in the country now-a-days, the leader said giving the example of the recent BBC documentary on Gujarat riots.
“If you are questioning the Prime Minister, you are questioning India…you are anti-national….Any question of Modi is anti-national and any question of Adani is anti-national.”

Like the country had given a reply to the slogan “India is Indira and Indira is India” decades ago, he urged the people to give a firm reply to Narendra Modi also in the coming Lok Sabha polls.
India is neither Indira nor Modi-Adani but people of the country and it can be asserted only if this government at the Centre is removed from office, he said.
Noting that removing the Modi government from office is of paramount importance to defend the Constitutional order, democracy and democratic rights of people, Yechury said that is the most “patriotical duty” of all Indians today.
“And that is the final test of Indian nationalism and that is the final test of whether we are for the interest of India or for enemies of the country.”
The Left leader also alleged that the four foundational pillars of the Constitutional order-secular democracy, economic self-sovereignty, social justice and federalism-are facing threat under the BJP rule.
He claimed that there is much focus on the Pinarayi Vijayan-led LDF government in Kerala as the BJP and the central government are well aware that it is the only non-BJP state government in the country that is offering an alternative model for development.
There are a lot of false stories being spread to defame Kerala, but President Droupadi Murmu’s recent words praising the achievements of the state in various sectors is the befitting reply for that false propaganda, he added.
[ad_2]
#Yechury #questions #Centres #reluctance #allowing #JPC #probe #Adani #issue
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

March 18, 2023
BJP evading questions by blocking parliamentary proceeding: Cong MP Manickam Tagore

[ad_1]
Panaji: Congress MP Manickam Tagore on Saturday alleged that ruling members are blocking the process of parliament to evade the questions on ‘Adani scam’ and relation of latter with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Addressing a press conference, Manickam Tagore said, “We want parliament to function, but BJP doesn’t want it as we are asking questions about Adani’s scam and relation between Modi and Adani. For that, proceedings are being blocked by the ruling party. But we will continue to raise these issues,” Tagore said.
Manickam Tagore, who is also Congress’ Goa in-charge, is on a two-day visit to the state to attend party meetings and ‘Haath Se Haath Jodo Yatra’.
He said that Congress leader Rahul Gandhi wanted to clarify over his remarks on Indian democracy, however he has not been allowed to speak.
“Rahul Gandhi wanted to speak from Thursday, because allegations were made by the defence minister, law minister and parliamentary affairs minister… he wanted to clarify and put his views. He has not been allowed to speak,” he said.
“It’s a black day for democracy. Attack on parliamentary proceedings shows that Modi’s government doesn’t believe in democratic process. Opposition parties are demanding Joint Parliamentary Committee on ‘Adani scam’. All 18 parties are demanding it,” Tagore further said.
“In parliament for the past one week oppositions are not allowed to speak. BJP leaders are blocking the parliament functioning. First time in the history of parliament in India, the ruling party is involved in adjournment of parliament. Only the ministers are allowed to speak in parliament. Members of all 18 opposition parties are not given the opportunity to speak,” he lamented.
Meanwhile, the Political Affairs Committee of Congress in Goa has expressed solidarity with their leader Rahul Gandhi.

[ad_2]
#BJP #evading #questions #blocking #parliamentary #proceeding #Cong #Manickam #Tagore
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

March 18, 2023