Ashok Gehlot warns of ploy to remove Rajasthan Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma
Former Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot has claimed that a deep-rooted conspiracy is underway within the BJP to remove current Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma from his post. Addressing the media, Gehlot said, 'There is a terrible conspiracy going on to remove Bhajan Lal Sharma. He is unaware of what's happening around him. His own party leaders—both in Delhi and Rajasthan—have started working against him. If he continues to ignore this, he will pay a heavy price.'advertisement'A young man and a first-time MLA has been given the chance to become the Chief Minister. That's no small thing. They should maintain him instead of constantly plotting changes,' he said.
Criticising the BJP government's performance, Gehlot accused it of failing to deliver on basic services like pensions, salaries under NREGA, electricity, and water. 'There's no work being done. People are not getting pensions for four months. NREGA workers have not received their wages for nearly four-five months. Power cuts during the summer were unbearable, and despite warnings of a water crisis, nothing was done,' he said.Taking a dig at Sharma, the former Chief Minister said that the CM is completely unaware of the sufferings of the common people. 'The ground reality in Rajasthan is dire. The public is crying for help. If Sharma starts holding public hearings, he will know what the people really want. Let him speak privately to his workers as they can tell him the truth,' he said. advertisementGehlot defended the Congress's recent criticism of the BJP government, saying that it reflects genuine public grievances and feedbacks. 'We're in the opposition and raise issues based on public sentiment, media reports, and feedback. It has just been a year and a half. We are just putting forward the problems being faced by the public,' he said. - EndsTune InMust Watch
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump officials to give 1st classified briefing to Congress on Iran strikes
The delayed classified briefing comes ahead of a Senate vote on a resolution requiring congressional approval for any future Iran strikes by Trump AP Washington Senators are set to meet with top national security officials Thursday as many question President Donald Trump's decision to bomb three Iranian nuclear sites and whether those strikes were ultimately successful. The classified briefing, which was originally scheduled for Tuesday and was delayed, also comes as the Senate is expected to vote this week on a resolution that would require congressional approval if Trump decides to strike Iran again. Democrats, and some Republicans, have said that the White House overstepped its authority when it failed to seek the advice of Congress and they want to know more about the intelligence that Trump relied on when he authorised the attacks. Senators deserve full transparency, and the administration has a legal obligation to inform Congress precisely about what is happening, said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, who said Tuesday that it was outrageous that the Senate and House briefings were postponed. A similar briefing for House members was pushed to Friday. CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth are expected to brief the senators on Thursday. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was scheduled to be at the Tuesday briefing, but will not be attending, according to a person familiar with the schedule. The briefing could be contentious as questions have swirled around Trump's decision to strike Iran and whether the attacks were successful. A preliminary US intelligence report found this week that Iran's nuclear programme had been set back only a few months, contradicting statements from Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the status of Iran's nuclear facilities, according to two people familiar with the report. The people were not authorised to address the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. On Wednesday, Gabbard and Ratcliffe sent out statements backing Trump's claims that the facilities were completely and fully obliterated. Gabbard posted on social media that new intelligence confirms what @POTUS has stated numerous times: Iran's nuclear facilities have been destroyed. She said that if the Iranians choose to rebuild the three facilities, it would likely take years to do. Ratcliffe said in a statement from the CIA that Iran's nuclear programme has been severely damaged and cited new intelligence from a historically reliable and accurate source/method that several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years. Most Republicans have staunchly defended Trump and hailed the tentative ceasefire he brokered in the Israel-Iran war. House Speaker Mike Johnson even went as far as to question the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, which is intended to give Congress a say in military action. The bottom line is the commander in chief is the president, the military reports to the president, and the person empowered to act on the nation's behalf is the president, Johnson told reporters. But some Republicans including some of Trump's staunchest supporters are uncomfortable with the strikes and the potential for US involvement in an extended Middle East conflict. I think the speaker needs to review the Constitution, said Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. And I think there's a lot of evidence that our Founding Fathers did not want presidents to unilaterally go to war. Paul would not say if he is voting for the resolution by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., that would require congressional approval for specific military action in Iran. The resolution is likely to fail as 60 votes would be needed to pass it and Republicans have a 53-47 majority. But Kaine says it's important to put the Senate on the record. You have a debate like this so that the entire American public, whose sons and daughters are in the military and whose lives will be at risk in war, get to see the debate and reach their own conclusion together with the elected officials about whether the mission is worth it or not, Kaine said. While he did not seek approval, Trump sent congressional leaders a short letter Monday serving as his official notice of the strikes, two days after the bombs fell. The letter said that the strike was taken to advance vital United States national interests, and in collective self-defense of our ally, Israel, by eliminating Iran's nuclear programme.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Inexplicable, inexcusable: Congress slams 'delay' in Ahmedabad crash probe
The Congress on Thursday attacked the government over the lead investigator reportedly not being appointed till now for the probe into the Ahmedabad plane crash, saying the delay is "inexplicable and inexcusable". Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh shared on X a media report which claimed that almost a fortnight after the Air India plane crashed in Ahmedabad, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) is yet to appoint a lead investigator to probe the accident. "A fortnight after the catastrophic air crash in Ahmedabad it is being reported that the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau has yet to appoint a lead investigator for the probe," Ramesh said in a post in X. "This delay is inexplicable and inexcusable," he added. There was no immediate response from the AAIB in the matter. The London-bound plane with 242 persons on board crashed into a medical hostel complex in Meghaninagar area of Ahmedabad moments after taking off from the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport on June 12, killing 270 persons, including 241 on board. One passenger survived the crash.
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
NATO leaders' price for supporting Ukraine is their self-respect
It was scripted as a lovefest with only one purpose: to prevent the most impulsive and erratic US president in history from throwing NATO's toys out of his pram. No one provoked a tantrum. Yesterday's summit in the Hague made little pretense of discussing global strategy. It merely showcased the desperate efforts of European NATO members to increase their defense spending. It offered flattery to the US guest of honor in a fashion unprecedented even during the Cold War . NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte set the tone with his welcome message before Donald Trump 's arrival, congratulating the president on his 'decisive action' in Iran and promising that he would be 'flying into another big success in the Hague.' He even expressed sympathy for the president's public use of four-letter language. ALSO READ: NATO allies agree to hike defence spending, reaffirm collective defence National leaders who may have wondered what life was like under a Roman emperor now know from experience. As they struggle to do business with the most powerful man on earth, they are obliged to abase themselves, to pander, to profess assent when privately many dissent. No one in the room yesterday save the principal guest believed his claim that US and Israeli bombs had set back Iran 'by decades.' But they kept silent, and will continue to do so, lest they provoke his wrath, so easily roused. Some Europeans oppose this posture, arguing that appeasement demeans our continent to no purpose. I disagree. Like it or not, Trump is apparently unchallenged master of the richest nation on earth. He is being indulged by Congress and the Supreme Court in exercising dictatorial powers for making war, and much else. The rest of us must parley with Trump, or forfeit his indispensable support. Live Events ALSO READ: Trump meets with Zelenskyy, says higher NATO defence spending may deter future Russian aggression The standout issue is Ukraine, which survives only at his pleasure. He is squeezing US arms deliveries to the country, which he dislikes. He has completely suspended them once and might do so again tomorrow. The Russians are pressing the Ukrainians on the ground, and intensifying bombardment of their cities. President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's people are running perilously short of air-defense weapons. Their morale will suffer grievously if their armed forces lose the capability to blunt Putin's terror attacks. The Europeans can't provide Zelenskiy with what he gets from the US. To have a chance of forcing Putin to negotiate, Washington must intensify economic sanctions and increase weapons deliveries. Every NATO member present at the Hague understood this, recognizing that only their submission and that of Zelenskiy may sustain Ukraine's struggle unless or until Trump abandons his apparent infatuation with Russia's Vladimir Putin . On the wider issue of keeping the US in NATO , most other members are showing willingness to contribute more cash, and to support American strategic objectives. A British aircraft carrier has just docked in east Singapore in a swing across the Indo-Pacific, as an earnest of solidarity with the US amid Chinese aggression. The British government announced this week that it will buy 12 US F-35A strike aircraft. Rutte messaged Trump on Tuesday that all NATO members have signed up to a new target of spending 5% of gross domestic product on defense by 2035. In reality, many of the allies won't even meet the earlier 3.5% target. But the Germans, Europe's most important player, will spend €62.4 billion ($72.5 billion) on the military in 2025, a critical show of intent. Chancellor Friedrich Merz told parliament in Berlin on Tuesday: 'We are not doing that as a favor to the US and its president. We're doing this out of our own view and conviction, because Russia is actively and aggressively endangering the security and freedom of the entire Euro-Atlantic area.' I am a cynic. I don't believe that most of the NATO nations will seriously attempt to achieve the ambitious spending targets, set for a decade ahead, by which time most of the present generation of national leaders will have quit politics. A game is being played in which none of the parties is being honest. But the Europeans have an honorable purpose -- to save Ukraine and to save NATO, not from the Russians but from the Americans. And so to Iran. Most of Europe, like most of the US, was appalled by Trump 's airstrikes, which were perceived as a dance to a tune written by the deeply feared and mistrusted Israeli leader, Benjamin Netanyahu. As with Iraq in 2003, while nobody likes Iran, few people believe that the country was on the verge of producing nuclear weapons. It seems especially outrageous, to have attacked within days of telling the world that the White House would grant a two-week pause for diplomacy, before resorting to force. Moreover, the real objection to the airstrikes isn't the scale of damage to the nuclear program, which must be considerable, but to the destabilization of the region, with unknowable consequences that could well include an Iranian dash to acquire a bomb. The only people who can achieve successful and durable regime change in any country are its own citizens, as the West should have learned from our several failures to achieve this since the millennium. At the Hague yesterday, however, once again truth was subordinated to telling the US president what he wanted to hear. National leaders surely had to do this, but those of us who don't hold public office, and thus aren't constrained by the demands of diplomacy, seem to have a responsibility to be frank. We need not simulate belief in Donald Trump's constant outrageous statements and acts. I chance to have reread recently Giuseppe Lampedusa's great novel The Leopard, about 19th century Sicily. In it, his principal character describes the villain: 'Free as he was from the shackles imposed on many other men by honesty, decency and plain good manners, he moved through the forest of life with the confidence of an elephant which advances in a straight line, rooting up trees and trampling down lairs, without even noticing the scratches of thorns and moans from the crushed.' What seems especially depressing about such events as this NATO summit, and Trump's participation in it, is that while others leaders may go home believing that their flattery and deceit will suffice to save the organization, Trump is perfectly capable of returning to the White House and tearing up everything NATO members think has been agreed upon. the game of stroking the president must go on and on, presumably for three years and seven months. Britain has just issued an invitation to the president for a full state visit to London in September. In the past, US leaders have been received here with genuine warmth and gratitude, sometimes even with love. We have always recognized how much we have owed to the greatest nation on earth, especially during the Cold War. Now, however, it is different. Not one person, including the king and our prime minister, sincerely wants Donald Trump in London. He has been invited solely in hopes of constraining the worst of his elephant-charges against allies, in hopes of sparing the flora and fauna around Buckingham Palace, figuratively echoing Lampedusa. Many of us feel sad that we have shrunk so far that we must make this gesture. But just as Trump has no respect for others, so the rest of us must, I suppose, sacrifice our self-respect to him. If it helps to save Ukraine, it will be worth it.
