The Bengaluru Police have received a response from the residential school regarding Atul Subhash and Nikita Singhania’s son. The school also shared the admission documents, including the child’s admission form
In a provocative and headline-grabbing Tuesday speech on his territorial ambitions for the United States, incoming US leader Donald Trump was heavy on intimidation but light on details — leaving many wondering how seriously the comments should be taken.
In a rambling press conference at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump said he would not rule out using military or economic coercion to acquire Greenland and the Panama Canal, and vowed to bring Canada to heel.
He called the border with the United States’ northern neighbor an “artificially drawn line,” and promised to rename the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America.”
The free-wheeling press conference brought to mind the Republican’s many bombastic and provocative statements from his first term, when he said he would encourage Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies and called North Korea’s leader a “rocketman on a suicide mission.”
At the United Nations, the incoming US leader’s latest comments won little applause.
“The charter is very clear in the need for every member state to respect the territorial integrity of other states,” Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, told reporters.
Threatening Panama, Greenland
On the strategic Panama Canal, which was built by the United States and then handed over to the Central American country 25 years ago, Trump said the waterway was “vital to our country.”
“Look, the Panama Canal is vital to our country. It’s being operated by China — China! — and we gave the Panama Canal to Panama, we didn’t give it to China,” Trump said. “And they’ve abused it, they’ve abused that gift.”
Panama has repeatedly denied Trump’s allegations that China has been given a role in running the canal or is given preferential rates to use it.
As for Greenland, an autonomous territory of longtime US ally Denmark, Trump said: “We need Greenland for national security purposes.”
Canada will also soon be brought into the fold, Trump promised.
“You get rid of that artificially drawn line, and you take a look at what that looks like, and it would also be much better for national security,” Trump said.
Familiar themes
While Donald Trump’s fixation on the Panama Canal is relatively new, his interest in Greenland is not: he had already raised the idea of buying the island during his first term, drawing a sharp refusal from local authorities.
His son, Donald Jr., arrived in Denmark on a private trip on Tuesday.
Trump did, however, rule out using military force against Canada, which was thrown into political turmoil Monday when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced his plans to resign.
Trump threatened to use “economic force” against Ottawa, after suggesting that Canada should become the 51st US state.
Trudeau’s reaction: “There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States.”
His government is, however, preparing for the possibility of Trump following through on his threatened 25-percent tariffs on Canadian imports.
During his first term, Republican billionaire Trump frequently accused US allies — particularly NATO — of using the partnership and demanded they pay up.
It remained unclear whether Trump, whose inauguration will take place on January 20, was seriously considering expanding US territory, including by military force, or whether such sensational statements were merely a bargaining tactic to obtain economic or political concessions.
(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Influential Republican lawmaker Lance Gooden has challenged the Biden administration’s decision to probe billionaire Gautam Adani’s companies, stating that such selective actions threaten the country’s important allies. In a strongly worded letter to US Attorney General Merric B Garland, he asked why the Justice Department was selective in prosecuting foreign entities. The department should focus on punishing bad actors at home, rather than chasing rumours abroad, he said in the letter.
The Adani Group had earlier rejected the allegations as baseless.
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland,
I am writing to inquire about the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) recent selective pursuits of cases against foreign entities that could irreparably strain America’s global alliances.
As our country enters a new period under President Trump, Americans are hopeful it will mark the revival of prosperity, growth, economic recovery, and political freedom. An important factor in our quest to revive our country’s prosperity includes the ability and freedom of prospective investors to do business in America. In complete abeyance of public outcry about the rising violent crimes at home, the DOJ seems to be pursuing new expeditions to target businesses for alleged injustices abroad. One such example is the recent indictment of an Indian company’s executives for alleged acts conducted in India in United States v. Adani (the Adani case) before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.1
The allegations in the Adani case, even if proven true, would still fail to make us the appropriate and final arbiter on the issue. These “bribes” were allegedly paid to Indian state government officials, in India, by Indian executives of an Indian company, with no concrete involvement of or injury to any American party. Conversely, Smartmatic, an American company responsible for conducting our elections, had executives who allegedly laundered money and paid bribes to foreign governments, according to the DOJ’s indictment earlier. However, despite numerous attempts by my colleagues and I to have our concerns addressed before the elections, we were never briefed by your department.
Considering the highly selective nature of these pursuits, I wish to understand the wisdom guiding some of the decisions surrounding the Adani case:
Q.1. Why has the DOJ not indicted a single American if the case involves a significant nexus with the United States? Were there no Americans involved in this alleged scheme?
Q.2. Why has the DOJ pursued this case against Gautam Adani when the alleged criminal act, and the parties allegedly involved are in India? Do you seek to enforce justice in India?
Q.3. Will the DOJ seek an extradition of the Indian executives involved in this case?
Q.4. What is the DOJ’s contingency plan if India refuses to comply with an extradition request and claim sole authority over this case?
Q.5. Is the DOJ or the Biden administration willing to escalate this case into an international incident between the United States and ally like India?
These questions are also here to remind you of the probable consequences of these actions. India is one of the few reliable partners America has in the Asia-Pacific region, alongside being one of the fastest-growing and largest economies in the world. Such reckless acts of pursuit against its top industrialists could start a harmful narrative against India’s growth. Not respecting India’s authority over this matter could strain and even permanently damage our international relations with a strategically important and key economic and political ally. At this juncture, letting the Indian authorities investigate, determine any injury, and adjudicate on the matter instead of jumping to premature conclusions would be the best and only appropriate course of action. It would also be wise to pursue cases where the department is certain we have appropriate and conclusive jurisdiction, aside from a serious shot at winning.
Targeting entities who invest tens of billions of dollars and create tens of thousands of jobs for Americans only harms us in the long run. When we forego real threats from violent crime, economic espionage, and CCP influence and go after those who contribute to our economic growth, it discourages valuable new investors hopeful of investing in our country. An unwelcome and politically charged atmosphere for investors will only stall efforts to revitalize America’s industrial base and economic growth, directly undermine President Trump’s commitment to revive the economy with increased investments. Given the timing of these decisions coincides with the end of the Biden administration, concerns arise that the only true goal here is disruption for President Trump.
Instead of expending valuable taxpayer resources on opening lengthy, and perhaps politically motivated pursuits in foreign countries thousands of miles away, the Department should co-operate with the incoming administration on better serving the American people. As a cog in the outgoing administration, it is your duty to the public in being mindful of not creating further complications that could compromise America’s geopolitical eminence.
In addition to the above questions, please also report if there has been any communication or negotiation regarding the Adani case between the Department of Justice (including any of its agents, subsidiaries, instrumentalities, or authorized representatives) and any third-party or agent representing any third party that works closely, for, or in conjunction with any entity partly owned or controlled by George Soros.
I ask for your complete and thorough cooperation in this matter and request the DOJ promptly and properly responds to this letter no later than January 31, 2025.
Sincerely,
Lance Hooden
Member of Congress
(Disclaimer: New Delhi Television is a subsidiary of AMG Media Networks Limited, an Adani Group Company.)