Skip to Content

Support MinnPost

Rachel Paulose still drawing a U.S. Govt. paycheck

Rachel Paulose, whose brief, stormy tenure as U.S. attorney for Minnesota ended in late 2007, is still working for the U.S. government, now with the Miami office of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

This news comes via the excellent Joe Palazzolo of Main Justice, which bird-dogs the Department of Justice.

Palazzolo has not been able to get Paulose to return a call, nor to learn how long she has held the job nor how she got it. (This is not too surprising to your humble ink-stained wretch, since I wrote extensively about her Minnesota U.S. Attorney tenure and never got her to return a call. She left Minnesota for a job at Main Justice during 2008, although my calls to Washington to ascertain what she was doing for DOJ were likewise unreturned.)

But Paulose is the lead trial attorney for the Miami SEC and has been making court appearances and filing papers, Palazzolo reports.

For those who didn't follow the afore-mentioned stormy tenure, Paulose was appointed U.S. attorney by the Alberto Gonzales administration that was famously pushing "loyal Bushies" in these jobs as top federal law endorcement officers. Paulose alienated her staff and ended up under investigation for sloppy handling of national security documents and for alleged acts of discrimination. The federal Office of Special Counsel did ultimately conclude that Paulose had engaged in improper acts of retaliation against her top deputy.

Get MinnPost's top stories in your inbox

Comments (5)

OK. And this is news because...? Is your position that she is unfit to hold any job? Or just a government job?

She may have been too young, not a good manager, or in over her head. Or she could have been a victim of disloyal and petty staff. But why should her presumed shortcomings as U.S. Attorney disqualify her for what appears to be a civil service position? If we kick her out of her new job, wouldn't that be a political firing?

Someone, perhaps Eric Black (I'm too lazy to search the archives), once wrote about the praise Paulose got from local law enforcement. So maybe the scandal would be if Paulose did NOT have a job.

Everyone deserves the chance to get a new job when they lose their old one. Isn't that what, ahem, Minn Post is about?

"OK. And this is news because...?"

Seems like a "where are they now" story more than anything. I don't see where Mr Black claims Ms Paulose is unfit for employment within the DOJ. If she's winning cases as a prosecutor for the SEC, great.

I'm glad she's "still drawing a ... paycheck."

I realize this may not make the bloodthirsty people who went after her for political reasons happy. They wanted to string her up big time, and probably won't be happy until she's broke, jobless, and cast down to ignominy.

I hope this thread does not suggest EB is one of them.

Um, it would be nice to characterize this as a nice human interest "where are they now?" feature, but the article and headline suggest otherwise. As a blogger, it would be hard for EB to hide behind the age-old newspaper excuse that someone else writes the headlines.

Does the following paragraph sound like a "where are they now" feature?

Palazzolo has not been able to get Paulose to return a call, nor to learn how long she has held the job nor how she got it. (This is not too surprising to your humble ink-stained wretch, since I wrote extensively about her Minnesota U.S. Attorney tenure and never got her to return a call. She left Minnesota for a job at Main Justice during 2008, although my calls to Washington to ascertain what she was doing for DOJ were likewise unreturned.)

@Brian Simon:
I don't think that the SEC is part of the DOJ.

I agree that Eric's post might be a bit snarky, though it seems to be good reportage to seek information about what a person who was deemed inadequate for one government job is doing in another one; i.e., how either she or the job has changed. After all, she is still a government employee, although her current appointment would appear to be less political (and maybe less managerial).

If I were to be really snarky, I'd ask why, as a good conservative (that does not seem to be in question) she did not move to the private sector.