Latest news with #BigLie
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Brooklyn Center lawyer in Big Lie cases suspended by Minnesota Supreme Court
Chambers of the Minnesota Supreme Court. Courtesy Minnesota Judicial Branch. The Minnesota Supreme Court suspended Susan Shogren Smith from practicing law after finding she named plaintiffs in Big Lie election cases without their consent in 2020, according to a June 5 order. The state's highest court filed the order following a petition for disciplinary action from the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board. The board, which oversees the state's lawyer disciplinary system, alleged Shogren Smith, now 57, committed professional misconduct. '[Shogren Smith's] misconduct is serious,' the court order stated. 'Her misconduct involved not just a lack of competence and failure to communicate with clients, but dishonesty to the courts and disregard for the discipline process.' Shogren Smith did not respond to a phone message. In 2020, the Brooklyn Center attorney represented the conservative group Minnesota Election Integrity Team in five cases that challenged election results. Shogren Smith named Secretary of State Steve Simon and Democratic House candidates as defendants. President Donald Trump and his allies were busy at the time fostering unfounded claims of election fraud in what became known as the Big Lie, i.e., that President Joe Biden didn't actually win the election. The claims were rejected by Trump's own attorney general and dozens of judges. Ramsey County District Court Judge Leonardo Castro presided over four cases, and one was sent to a three-judge panel. The cases, which Smith filed on behalf of 14 plaintiffs, were dismissed with roughly $18,000 in monetary judgement filed against the plaintiffs. The state Supreme Court found that Shogren Smith enlisted the plaintiffs without their consent or even any communication with them. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Shogren Smith selected the 14 people out of a group who had returned affidavits to an email soliciting people to contest Minnesota election results. She drafted the affidavit, and then tacked the responders' names onto lawsuits she filed the next day, according to the order. 'Indeed, at no time either prior to or during the litigation did [Shogren Smith] have any conversations or communications, of any kind, with any of the 14 plaintiffs, none of whom even knew [Shogren Smith's] name,' the court order stated. The plaintiffs didn't speak with the attorney until February 2021. According to the court order, one plaintiff had 'fortuitously discovered through other means' that she was listed as a party in a lawsuit and had a monetary judgement against her. That plaintiff — identified in news reports as Corinne Braun — alerted local authorities and the presiding district court judge. Between a hearing and a decision from the three-judge panel, Shogren Smith was charged $25,000. Once other plaintiffs were aware, nine of the 14 asked to be removed from the proceedings. Shogren Smith became a licensed Minnesota lawyer in 2004, according to state records. In addition to practicing law, she operates a licensed foster home and has been involved in a number of nonprofits, political and otherwise. Among those is Picture A Hero, which delivers family portraits to military personnel who are preparing to deploy. Social media posts from Shogren Smith show her posing in Trump merch and assisting in storm clean-ups with the group We the People are Coming to Save America. The Minnesota Supreme Court determined Shogren Smith's suspension based on four factors: the nature of the misconduct; the cumulative weight of the violations of the rules of professional conduct; harm to the public; and harm to the legal profession. The suspension takes effect 14 days after it was filed, and it also bars Shogren Smith from petitioning for reinstatement for six months. She cannot be reinstated until she pays $25,000 in sanctions she received in 2021, and upon reinstatement she would face two years of probation.
Boston Globe
06-06-2025
- Health
- Boston Globe
Here's what Rhode Island's movers and shakers are reading
Here's a rundown. David Cicilline Rhode Island Foundation president and CEO The book traces the slow, insidious, and ultimately deadly impact of the 'Big Lie' on the Jewish residents of a small German village ahead of World War II. It delivers a terrifying lesson about how ordinary people can become desensitized to the growing danger at their doorstep. Advertisement Martha L. Wofford Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Rhode Island president and CEO Get Rhode Map A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State. Enter Email Sign Up Dr. Topol's book provides evidence of how lifestyle, environmental exposure, and our genes and epigenetics impact our health. He shows how dysregulation of our immune response and inflammation is driving major diseases like cancer and autoimmune conditions. As we face an aging population in Rhode Island, and as a nation, Dr. Topol's book provides hope that there is a path to improving health as we age -- through diet, exercise, sleep, social connection, and reducing environmental toxins, combined with ongoing breakthroughs in diagnosing and treating age-related diseases. Laurie White Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce president Advertisement The degree to which Judge Caprio's life's purpose was shaped at a young age by the lessons imparted by his loving parents – particularly his dad, Tup, on the milk truck delivery route on Federal Hill. The book left me in tears. It mirrors my own sentiments about the influence of my mom and dad and the small business they started together in the 1950s (and still exists today.) Judge Caprio vividly takes the reader through the lessons of hard work and everyday acts of compassion that lift your soul. It is no coincidence that he has 25 million followers on social media. These are the lessons that resonate throughout the world. Rele Abiade Consultant My daughters were reading this graphic novel, and we were talking about how it had been banned in Texas. I skimmed through it because I was curious why anyone would be triggered by a book nine-year-olds loved. Of course it was one of the best books I have probably read! The main character is a gifted student who goes to a predominantly white private school and the book explores how he gracefully navigates through social dynamics. I wish I had books like this as a child because I related to Jordan (the main character) and despite some situations it really is a positive story. I think every adult should read it, especially during these interesting political times where diversity and inclusion is no longer seen as a necessity by some. Guess what? It is! Advertisement Cortney M. Nicolato United Way of Rhode Island president and CEO It talks about perseverance and the power that love can have on someone. In times like this, I want to spend my spare time being inspired and celebrating love and joy wherever possible. Kelli J. Armstrong Salve Regina University president Colin is a resident scholar here at Salve and leads our Nationhood Lab project. I find his ideas to be absolutely brilliant. In 'Union,' he describes how important it is for the US to have a common narrative, one that could hold its rival regional cultures together. Colin is an historian, and his ability to illuminate how we have evolved as a nation and how these patterns are affecting our current divisions is fascinating. Neil Steinberg Rhode Island Life Science HubBoard chair My preferred genre is the thriller category; it started with Robert Ludlum many years ago. Marcela Betancur Latino Policy Institute executive director I am a huge fan of mysteries and thrillers, and this one kept me on my toes the whole time. It's rare when I get to the end of a book without knowing what's happening or 'who did it' - but this one did it! This story first appeared in Rhode Map, our free newsletter about Rhode Island that also contains information about local events, links to interesting stories, and more. If you'd like to receive it via email Monday through Friday, . Advertisement Dan McGowan can be reached at
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Can Josh Hawley out-Trump Trump with the working person?
If you offered me half of Elon Musk's holdings to tell you what Josh Hawley truly believes, I would not be able to cash the check. But after watching our senior U.S. senator for eight years now, I can say with confidence that he likes to stand out in a crowd. By being first to object to the 2020 Electoral College results, then claiming he never tried to overturn the election that Joe Biden won, he did more harm than we'll ever be able to calculate. But there he was, leading the way, even if it was to perdition. With that infamous raised fist on Jan. 6, he tried to rally the rioters he then bolted away from. But hey, by that afternoon, many more Americans knew his name. Our man Hawley played a big role in the Big Lie: The risk that Donald Trump would not leave office after his defeat in 2020 really only became real, according to the 2021 book 'Peril,' by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, when Hawley said he would object to the Electoral College certification. In the traumatic hours after the attack on the Capitol, Hawley stood off to himself on the Senate floor, as The Star reported at the time. According to the book, 'No one spoke to Hawley, who many of them blamed for instigating the riot by announcing his opposition to the certification a week earlier.' Eventually, Sens. Ted Cruz and Roy Blunt asked him what he was going to do, and 'even with the carnage and push from some colleagues to stand down, Hawley decided he would keep his objection to both Arizona and Pennsylvania. He would remain in lockstep with Trump. When told of his decision, many of his Republican colleagues groaned. … Other Republicans would surely stick with Hawley, fearful of being seen as out of step with Trump's voters.' So what to make, then, of Hawley's recent declarations that he would never, no not ever, vote to cut Medicaid, as the Big Beautiful Bill currently does in a big, ugly way? This is quite a turnaround for someone who tried so hard to repeal Obamacare, and to fight Medicaid expansion. Lately, Hawley has started saying that cutting this precious program for the most vulnerable is one line he'd never cross, and that what's more, it's one that Trump wouldn't cross, either. This is clever, because how can Trump call him out for quoting Trump's own campaign promise to the public? Trump pushed hard for the House to pass the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' cuts and all, which it did. And when Hawley says Trump would never sign his own BBB if it included Medicaid cuts, well, sure he wouldn't. Hawley is right that cutting Medicaid would be a disaster for low-income families and the disabled and those with autism and in nursing homes. It's also incontrovertibly true that such cuts would hit Missourians particularly hard: An analysis by KFF Health News earlier this month found that Missouri was one of six states, along with Kentucky, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Carolina and West Virginia that would suffer the most. A recent front-page piece in The New York Times suggested that Hawley the culture warrior has also been 'less noisily' on the side of the little guy all along. So much less noisily that I can't say we ever noticed the effects of all those years of effort in Missouri. The graduate of Rockhurst High, Stanford and Yale Law, who clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts and spent a gap year teaching at St. Paul's in London, does, like Trump, who was a millionaire in grade school, talk an awful lot about how much the elites hate us regular folks. At Hawley's Senate campaign launch in 2018, I was still capable of disappointment at hearing him start right in with this us-versus-them golden oldie: 'The liberal elites who call themselves our leaders refer to us as flyover country,' he said. 'They deride not just our location but our whole way of living.' But, that's a song that always gets them out on the dance floor, and maybe the aggrievement was genuine. The Times piece about him said that as a longtime populist, Hawley had from his earliest days in office done things like go after opioid manufacturers as attorney general of our state. He did file lawsuits against them, it's true, and maybe he would have done so anyway. But he did that, as The Star reported, after discussion with the Washington political consultants who were involved in running his office and then his U.S. Senate campaign to get him some national buzz. And this was after his soon-to-be Senate opponent, Claire McCaskill, had already launched a Senate investigation into the opioid industry. My point is really that we have heard many words but seen few results from Josh Hawley, man of the people. If our senior senator really wants to, as a former aide to Bernie Sanders told The New York Times, break up the cozy relationship between his party and corporate America that's gone on since Reagan was president, does that mean he'll challenge Trump for selling access and demanding fealty from CEOs who then cash in? Rhetorical question. In some ways, what Hawley is doing reminds me of the recent moves from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is breaking with his party and running to the center on trans athletes, limits on Medi-Cal for undocumented immigrants and declarations that he's going to stop 'funding failure' when it comes to curbing homelessness. Only, where Newsom is concerned, everyone and his puppy sees what he's doing as a bald political calculation in preparation for a potential '28 presidential run. He's getting nothing but noogies, both from his own party and from Republicans, for tacking to the center, while Hawley has been praised and reappraised by Democrats for simply saying he wouldn't cut Medicaid. The Wall Street Journal did disapprovingly note 'Josh Hawley's Medicaid Switcheroo.' And on X, he's being pressured to change his mind. Of course, if Missourians lost their health care, and Grandma couldn't stay in the nursing home, those giving him grief now would feel differently. And if that's what he's betting on, then he's right. Hawley's ambition is one of the only other things I know for sure about him. In his own recent essay in The Times, he made it seem that on the issue of Medicaid cuts, this is him and Trump against the bad guys. 'Mr. Trump has promised working-class tax cuts and protection for working-class social insurance, such as Medicaid,' he wrote. 'But now a noisy contingent of corporatist Republicans — call it the party's Wall Street wing — is urging Congress to ignore all that and get back to the old-time religion: corporate giveaways, preferences for capital and deep cuts to social insurance.' I can practically hear the score to 'Les Mis' in the background, calling us to the barricades, can't you? Now that the Republican House has passed the bill with those very same deep cuts — deeper, actually — it will be up to the Senate to stop the worst of it. Far less surprisingly, Sens. Jerry Moran of Kansas and Susan Collins of Maine have concerns about the bill, and Sen. Ron Johnson thinks it doesn't cut spending enough. They have until July to figure it out. Maybe Hawley won't backtrack at this point. And trying to out-Trump Trump with the working person, if that's the goal, would not actually be that hard. But if he really wants to become Trump's heir, and make that dreamed-of presidential run in the way that he hopes, he'll have to start doing more than talk.
Wall Street Journal
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
Now They Speak Up About Biden? C'mon, Man
Regarding 'A Reckoning for the Biden Coverup' (Review & Outlook, May 19). If Donald Trump's assertion without evidence that he actually won the 2020 election is known as 'the Big Lie,' what should we call the Democratic Party's assertion that its occupant of the White House was physically and mentally fit for office, 'The Great Malarkey' or 'Weekend at Biden's'? Paul E. Greenberg
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's revenge machine is his only accomplishment — and MAGA is left out of it
Amid all the news these last few days about the first 100 days of Trump 2.0, there has been little written about one of his most important agenda items, and few questions about it by the various pollsters. We do know that he's underwater everywhere, starting with his flagship issues of the economy and immigration. He ran on those issues, so it's important to know what America thinks about his performance so far. But Trump had another flagship issue that was a big part of his appeal to his most fervent followers: The Washington Post/ABC/IPSOS poll asked what people think of Trump "taking measures against his political opponents," which doesn't exactly address the question of "retribution" (some might think it's about policy). But even then, 53% disapprove to 33% approve. The New York Times-Sienna poll asked whether Trump was exceeding his power (88% said yes), but that doesn't address this specific question either. 57% agreed that Trump shouldn't be allowed to withhold funding for universities in the Reuters Poll, which can be considered an act of political retribution, but is one that derives more from the right-wing extremists around Trump, such as the culture warriors who have been battling the allegedly liberal academy for decades. The polls have looked at Trump's gross abuse of power in some ways, such as the administration potentially ignoring court orders and congressional prerogatives, and majorities really don't like it. But as far as I can tell, there were no questions asking people if they approve of Donald Trump's vengeful actions against his political enemies. And that's strange since there have been a boatload of them. One of the first actions Trump took when he assumed office was to pardon all the Jan. 6 rioters. He considered that a priority because he saw their prosecution as a direct attack on the Big Lie that he had actually won the 2020 election. He reportedly was offered some names of violent criminals who should be kept behind bars and he said "f**k it — release 'em all," which gives us some idea of his mindset when it comes to his personal vendettas. He soon had the Justice Department fire 12 prosecutors assigned to the cases. His Acting U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C., Ed Martin (who happened to have been involved in the defense of some of the defendants), ordered an investigation into how the prosecutions were carried out. Prosecutors were told that they had committed a "grave national injustice." Martin has also notified one of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's deputies that he is investigating the "integrity and legality" of the Russia investigation, suggesting that the Mueller team is in the crosshairs as well, which is almost certainly the case since Trump has said for years that they should all be jailed. Meanwhile, the administration has targeted one of his major antagonists, New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led the civil prosecution against Trump for which he was found liable for nearly half a billion dollars over his fraudulent valuations of Trump Organization properties. The Federal Housing Finance Agency sent a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, accusing James of mortgage fraud. The administration has pulled the security clearances of numerous lawyers and former government officials, Trump has personally called out for investigation, including some who are now unable to work in their field. For instance, a lawyer Trump wanted investigated in the first term, Mark Zaid, represented the whistleblower who raised concerns about Trump's "perfect phone call" with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. That led to Trump's first impeachment, and now Zaid is no longer able to represent anyone who might want to access the whistleblower protections. The message this sends to anyone who might represent such a client is pretty obvious. And then there are the law firms, some of which were singled out for representing people Trump doesn't like and others who may have employed attorneys he has faced in court, such as Covington & Burling, which assisted Special Counsel Jack Smith, and Perkins Coie, which represented the Dominion Voting Machine Company in its defamation suits against the right wing networks that spread Trump's Big Lie. Others have been targeted supposedly for their "DEI policies" (which the administration fatuously asserts are violations of the Civil Rights Act) and have shamefully bent the knee by agreeing to do pro bono work for the administration, which Trump seems to believe makes them his personal legal servants. What it does do is take them off the table as defenders of anything that might benefit his enemies or threaten him. Luckily, some of these law firms are suing the administration rather than capitulate to his threats, and the courts so far do not seem amused. There are also the aforementioned universities, most of which seemed poised to give Trump whatever he wanted, but after a (supposed) mistaken moment of overreach, the biggest of them all, Harvard, decided to fight back. That, too, is going to be decided in the courts. Then there is the media, which he is personally suing in a couple of cases. He has the FCC going after others and is banning other reporters from working inside federal buildings. He's pulled the security details from anyone associated with the Biden family except the former president himself because he's bound by law (and probably worries that it could blow back on him when he finally leaves office). And he's singled out several people who worked in his former administration whom he sees as disloyal, starting with the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley. He had his security clearance removed, despite still being under threat, and is now under investigation by the Pentagon for "undermining the chain of command" under some kind of administrative action. Milley, for his part, was preemptively pardoned by former President Joe Biden. Perhaps most ominously, Trump recently issued orders to the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security to investigate Trump's former cybersecurity expert Chris Krebs and pulled the security clearances of everyone in the company he now works at as well. Krebs' crime was to say that the 2020 election was secure, the truth. And Miles Taylor, Trump's former Chief of Staff to the Department of Homeland Security Secretary, who later revealed himself as the author of an infamous anonymous New York Times op-ed that claimed people inside the administration were keeping Trump in check, is also the subject of a DHS investigation at the direction of the president. He's targeting specific people now for serious criminal investigation. That's just the tip of the iceberg. The entire Department of Justice, under the leadership of Attorney General Pam Bondi, is being turned into a Trump revenge machine. They're even targeting judges whom she has declared to be "low-level leftists who are trying to dictate President Trump's executive powers." If an attorney general using those words doesn't make your blood run cold, you're not paying attention. Trump promised to do this even in the face of pressure from his campaign and allies not to. He will not stop until and unless the courts tell him he has to. If they do say he's gone too far, the question then is whether he will once again abuse his power and defy them. Even a large majority of Republicans don't want him to do that. But considering all he's done already, we have to be prepared for the possibility that he may just say, "f" it as he did with the J6 pardons. His thirst for revenge is unslakable.
