Comments (71)

the truth will out wrote on May 10, 2007 11:01 AM:

"climbing where they probably never will"

could that be on a dung heap?

Anonymous wrote on May 10, 2007 11:14 AM:

Wow, so that's what they're going with- old racist white dudes hate young Indian woman. They forgot one thing though. Apparently this chick is a TOTAL BITCH!

Bugboy wrote on May 10, 2007 11:16 AM:

"...someone so young climbing"

I was relieved of an appointed position once. In retrospect, my only salvation would have been to find Jesus, join GOP, and learn to play golf, and not necessarily in that order.

Funny how Paulose, who is known to quote Bible verses at work, retreats to this "they can't hack working for me" garbage. Stupid is as stupid does.

Code word is "horse" as in horse dung heap.

modmom wrote on May 10, 2007 11:17 AM:

One of Rove's tactics seems to be to find find "loyal bushies" of certain ethnities to deflect blame for actual wrongdoings. Think Ken Blackwell (Af Am disenfranchising Af Am voters), Abu Gonzales or Ms. Paulose (here claiming their action had to do with her ethnicity). Yeah, right nothing to do with their actions.

someparisian wrote on May 10, 2007 11:19 AM:

Anyone who disagrees with this administration's continuous and unapologetic plotting is a crazy racist (also please disregard our almost-official policy of suppressing the minority vote kthxbye).

Arkansan wrote on May 10, 2007 11:19 AM:

Calling her a BITCH tends to give aid and comfort to the enemy.

The truth is she is an under-qualified immature, fanatical, megalomaniac who is in waay over her head.

lysias wrote on May 10, 2007 11:32 AM:

Paulose has apparently adopted a tactic that was not very successfully when DOJ tried to use it against the fired U.S. Attorneys.

Anonymous wrote on May 10, 2007 11:38 AM:

(also please disregard our almost-official policy of suppressing the minority vote kthxbye).
Posted by: someparisian
HaHa!
code word: bucket
Like that guy said in Monty Python's Meaning of Life, "Get me a bucket." This unchecked corruption is going to make me throw up.

bordersmuggler wrote on May 10, 2007 11:39 AM:

I'm sure Minnesotans appreciate the disdain the Bush Administration has shown the state by the appointment of wunderkind Paulose as its U.S. Attorney. Norm Coleman will get get to see how they show their thanks.

Again, what's up with the "child exploitation" yammer? Isn't that supposed to be a Third World issue? Oh I forgot, this is now a Banana Repuglic.

Jean Arf wrote on May 10, 2007 11:54 AM:

I am familiar with CJ's "work," and, unfortunately, her person. She is an unmitigated ass. Dumb, too.

Tim wrote on May 10, 2007 11:56 AM:

So nice to see that DOJ political appointees are sensitive to racial issues.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 11:59 AM:

Other than a friendship with Monica Goodling, Ms. Paulose's qualfications are fairly light.

Here is a link to Paulose's resume (also posted below):

http://judiciary.house.gov/Media/PDFS/DOJDocsPt2-9070319.pdf

The resume is on p. 11. Note that she is a member of the Federalist Society.

LOL - I wonder if Paulose listed herself as a Republican in 1998 when she went to for the DOJ Civil Rights Division in 1998.

Paulose claims that, as an AUSA, she was involved in what would seem to be high-profile cases. But I only found one case in Lexis-Nexis with Paulose's name on it. The case was a routine appeal in Minnesota district court - Criminal No. 01-163 where the defendant claimed he had been illegally searched.

I'd like to know more about the cases that Paulose worked on when she was in private practice since they seem to be ones that enhance her conservative credentials.

When she was with Dorsey & Whitney, she claims that she successfully represented the Republican Party in an election lawsuit. I can't find the case that Paulose is referrring to. The only election case I found involving Dorsey & Whitney has to do with whether off-reservation Indians can use their Indian i.d. cards to register to vote, Case No: 04-CV-4653.

Did Paulose's defense of a "faith-based health care program" have anything to do with the fact that it was faith-based? Paulose gives no indication as to why the health program needed to be defended.

I don't remember any major class action lawsuits involving the demand for slave reparations but Paulose highlighted her work on the case when she was with Williams & Connolly.

Anyone know how we can find more about Paulose's private practice cases? I very much doubt Paulose will answer my questions about them.

As we have already seen with Monica Goodling and D. Kyle Sampson, these up-and-coming right wingers have a tendency to exaggerate their achievements. Sampson's one and only criminal case in Palm Beach in March 2004 was an excuse for a free vacation, imo.

Did Little Miss High Achiever pump up her resume, too? Inquiring minds want to know.

Kenji wrote on May 10, 2007 12:01 PM:

Read Susie Bright's on the Child Exploitation angle of this whole mess. She says this entire admin is driven by sexual hysterial, and Paulose's faux-cry of gender discrimination somehow fits into that dynamic. The real question is, how do they come up with so many vehement traitors to their sex, class, and ethnicity? It all started with Clarence Thomas and hs goddam Coke can, dinnit?

bobh wrote on May 10, 2007 12:01 PM:

What the fuck is a DOJ appointee doing talking to a gossip columnist?

for fucks sake if this columnist actually reported what she said that rises to the level of a crime does it not? libel? slander? anyone?

TheraP wrote on May 10, 2007 12:12 PM:

Mrs P - "faith-based healthcare"

Boy, that has got to take the cake! I can picture the way in which Healthyburton does this: THEY get the money and YOU pray!!!

mike wrote on May 10, 2007 12:22 PM:

I hope that Paulose opts not to correct the record, as the attorneys asked in the letter. Maybe then they will no longer feel compelled to honor the request that they not talk with the media.

DoingNuance wrote on May 10, 2007 12:25 PM:

Unlike Monica Gooding, this young woman happens to have very impressive academic credentials.

kjp wrote on May 10, 2007 12:26 PM:

John McKay, David Iglesias and Paul Charlton were part of a seminar yesterday held at Seattle University, where McKay is teaching. McKay made the point that the recent storm could make it harder to fire US Attorneys in the future. Charlton agreed with this, noting (sardonically)that if the self-demotion of three senior AUSA's in Minnesota isn't enough to get Palouse fired, then McKay's point is correct.

mini mum wrote on May 10, 2007 12:26 PM:

"...they can't handle working for a powerful, young, Indian woman."

Well I'm sure that's what Mummy and Daddy told her.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 10, 2007 12:27 PM:

Faith-based healthcare READ fucking fake abortion clinics shaming and shamming women to carryin the slimy little ampihibians to term then abandoning the woman onto the welfare roll . . .

It is not rocket science to connect the dots with these pukes.

Anonymous wrote on May 10, 2007 12:28 PM:

"older lawyers had difficulty dealing with a young, aggressive woman"

Substitute "managers" for "lawyers" here and I first heard this in the early 1970s in corporate America. Interesting that we heard this only from the incompetent female mgrs. The competent ones were accepted as equals by male mgrs and needed no defense. They were competent and knew it.

Or, "he has a problem with women" was another one. That's worse because it implies sexism, bigotry or even psychopathology.

We just had to wait and watch as they created bad morale, poor productivity and near mutiny by their subordinates before those who promoted them to got rid of them or shifted them off to some peter principled tasks.

Tough to talk about in mixed company without sucking the oxygen out of the room.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 12:29 PM:

TheraP,

I don't know all that much about the issue but I read about a health care program sponsored by the Catholic Church here in NY that did not want to cover the cost of contraceptives.

So there are real issues related to health care programs sponsored by religious organizations but we don't know if Paulose dealt with any such isses. For all we know, she may have defended a faith-based health program in a case unrelated to faith in any way.

I'm going through 196 Dorsey & Whitney cases in L-N right now to see if there are any cases that sound like the ones Paulose may have handled. Her name is definitely not on any of them.

I forgot the circumstances in which Paulose assumed the USA job. Did her predecessor quit unexpectedly? When? I suspect that when Paulose took the job working for McNulty in 1/06, she already knew she was getting the USA spot.

What does "portfolio includes ..." mean, anyway? She worked for McNulty for less than three months and she had a "portfolio"? More resume pumping?

Anonymous wrote on May 10, 2007 12:29 PM:

Faith-based healthcare READ fucking fake abortion clinics shaming and shamming women to carryin the slimy little ampihibians to term then abandoning the woman onto the welfare roll . . .

It is not rocket science to connect the dots with these pukes.

anon wrote on May 10, 2007 12:32 PM:

"Unlike Monica Gooding, this young woman happens to have very impressive academic credentials"

Sorry, but the correlation between academic credentials-- and grades -- and competence on the job is positive, but not high at all.

truthmissile wrote on May 10, 2007 12:32 PM:

As an Indian-American I am offended by Rachel Paulose. To play the race card in the midst of a situation that so obviously reeks of criminal actions is offensive. People like Scholtzman tried to bar blacks from voting, and got promoted - what do you think your GOP colleagues think of you Rachel?

Paulose needs to find strength from a truly great lawyer - MK Gandhi, or author Arundathi Roy - and look to those Indians who have been the voice of morality, fairness, and justice... and oppose the outright criminal behavior seen under Bush.

Rachel - come out and tell the truth. Make your people truly proud!

bibimimi wrote on May 10, 2007 12:36 PM:

Four letters.

Begins with "C".

She's cold, man. Really cold.

Security Code: roll

What one of these assholes should do on the lot of them

tjallen wrote on May 10, 2007 12:39 PM:

Paulose is an Indian? I thought she was an American. She looks like an American to me. Americans come in all colors sizes and shapes. She needs to get over her inferiority complex.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 12:47 PM:

Got the faith-based health care program case! Paulose's name is on it but why it didn't show up in an L-N search is beyond me.

I'm no lawyer but the case doesn't appear to have much to with faith:

Fairview Health Services, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Christian Community Homes and Services, Inc., Defendant. GuideOne Elite Insurance Company, Plaintiff, v. Christian Community Homes and Services, Inc., and Fairview Health Services, Inc., Defendants.

Civil No. 05-195 (PAM/RLE), Civil No. 05-688 (PAM/RLE)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44238

COUNSEL:
For Fairview Health Services, Inc, Plaintiff: Rachel K Paulose, LEAD ATTORNEY, US Attorney, Mpls, MN; Vernle C Durocher, Jr, LEAD ATTORNEY, Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Minneapolis, MN.

For Christian Community Homes and Services, Inc, Defendant: Crystal M Patterson, LEAD ATTORNEY, Kent G Harbison, Fredrikson & Byron, PA, Minneapolis, MN; Lynn M Stathas, LEAD ATTORNEY, Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren - Madison, Madison, WI.

For GuideOne Elite Insurance Company, Movant, ThirdParty Plaintiff: Mark R Bradford, LEAD ATTORNEY, Rider Bennett LLP, Mpls, MN; Paula D Vraa, LEAD ATTORNEY, Larson King, LLP, St Paul, MN.

JUDGES: Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Court Judge.

BACKGROUND
Dolly Bollig was employed by Christian Community Homes and Services, Inc. ("CCHS"). As part [*2] of her employment with CCHS, she and her son were covered by CCHS's health insurance plan. Her son received treatment by Fairview, and CCHS has allegedly refused to pay Fairview for these medical expenses. Fairview then filed the Liability Action against CCHS.

At the time of Bollig's son's treatment, CCHS had a general liability policy with GuideOne. CCHS tendered defense to GuideOne. GuideOne accepted this defense under a strict Reservation of Rights but denied that the policy covered CCHS's claims. In April 2005, GuideOne filed a separate action for declaratory relief to resolve the issue of insurance coverage. In May 2005, GuideOne filed a Motion to Intervene and Stay the Liability Action, pending a determination of coverage. Fairview has filed two motions in the Coverage Action: a Motion to Stay and a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).

CONCLUSION
In light of Wisconsin insurance law and policy, the Court finds that the relief sought by all parties in the pending motions inappropriate, and therefore the Motions are denied without prejudice. Accordingly, based on all the records, files, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Fairview Health Services, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Clerk Doc. No. 8) and Motion to Stay (Clerk Doc. No. 13) in Civil File No. 05-688 are DENIED without prejudice;

2. GuideOne Elite Insurance Company's Motion to Intervene and Stay (Clerk Doc. No. 11) in Civil File No. 05-195 is DENIED without prejudice;

3. Civil File No. 05-195 and Civil File No. 05-688 are CONSOLIDATED into Civil File No. 05-195 and the Clerk shall close Civil File No. 05-688;

4. The parties shall caption all filings under Civil File No. 05-195;

5. GuideOne Elite Insurance Company shall file a Third-Party Complaint in Civil [*15] File No. 05-195 within ten days of this Order; and

6. The parties shall abide by the briefing schedule and stay as set forth in this Order.

Dated: October 14, 2005

s/ Paul A. Magnuson

United States District Court Judge

c4logic wrote on May 10, 2007 12:51 PM:

I found this tidbit from the boring old man blog:

"Then there’s Rachel’s story [from the Minnesota Campaign Report]. She was at the Minnesota firm, Dorsey and Whitney, until December, 2006. Dorsey and Whitney represented Minnesota-based UnitedHealth, the largest U.S. health insurer. In December, William McGuire stepped down as the C.E.O. of UnitedHealth because there was an SEC allegation that they backdated a stock option in a $330 million deal. Dr. William McGuireHe was being investigated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota. So back to Rachel Paulose. She went to the DOJ in January 2006 to work in Assistant Attorney General McNulty’s office. In February 2006, she’s appointed to fill Heffelfinger’s post when he suddenly resigns and Paulose becomes the U.S. Attorney for Minnesota. So in a month or two, she goes from a firm representing McGuire and UnitedHealth, to being in charge of the office investigating him! Also, doesn’t sound right [great blogger reporting here]. Oh yeah, her resume’s been misreported maybe to cover the bad smell here."

AlphaLiberal wrote on May 10, 2007 12:52 PM:

The price of disagreeing with the Bush Regime is to see your name and repuotation smeared publicly. Now the Star Tribune is carrying water and attacking these individuals as racist.

Memo to Religious Right: Seen the ninth commmandment: "Though shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."

Ravi R wrote on May 10, 2007 12:52 PM:

As an East Indian, I am ashamed that Paulose is of Indian descent.

melior wrote on May 10, 2007 12:53 PM:

Paulose better hope she doesn't find herself in need of character witnesses in court. Sounds like she is fresh out.

Fides wrote on May 10, 2007 12:53 PM:

She actually does seem to have some credentials, which is rare for this administration - she got a degree somewhere other than Regent University (wow!)

On the other hand, she has "Brown Belt" on her resume, and she started nine years ago. Who the heck takes nine years to get a brown belt? If you're not that committed, you may not want to list it on your resume.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 10, 2007 12:53 PM:

Catholic Charities is one of the few prolife organizations that walk the walk. Yes, they are anti-abortion and pro-adoption BUT they providing assistance to thep poor after the birth in the form of food shelter healthcare and job training. THINK good guys. No serious person has issue with them.

I can not believe that any of these jackholes would be involved in doing the right thing . . . No Palouse probably had something to do with the case a coupla years ago where the fake clinics sued a real clinic for false advertising in the phonebook cuz the 'abortion' wasn't in large enough typeface.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 12:56 PM:

Fairview Health Services, Inc. must have been a regular client of Dorsey & Whitney. I found another Paulose case involving Fairview:

Rachel Peterson and Chad Johnson, On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff's v. Fairview Health Services, Defendant; Paul Kern and Michael Schemel, On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. Allina Health System and American Hospital Association, Defendants

Civil No. 04-2973 ADM/AJB; Civil No. 04-2974 ADM/AJB

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1962; 95 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1005

February 1, 2005, Decided

DISPOSITION: Fairview Health Services' Motion to Dismiss GRANTED; Second Amended Complaint of Rachel Peterson and Chad Johnson and Amended Class Action Complaint DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in part and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE in part. Allina Health System's Motion to Dismiss GRANTED.

CASE SUMMARY

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Two defendant health care systems filed motions to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 two class actions filed by plaintiff class members in which the class asserted a number of claims against the systems, including: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing; (3) violation of Minnesota Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Trade Practices Act; and (4) breach of implied trust.

OVERVIEW: The classes sought to form a class of all uninsured patients of the systems who were charged an amount for medical care in excess of the amount charged to the systems' Medicare patients, or who were pursued for any charged amount through collection efforts or lawsuits. The base of the class's complaints was that the systems were tax-exempt organizations that had failed to meet the charitable obligations imposed by 26 U.S.C.S. § 501(c)(3). The court found that Count I, as it was premised on 26 U.S.C.S. § 501(c)(3), had to be dismissed with prejudice for lack of standing and for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. 26 U.S.C.S. § 501(c)(3) did not establish a contract between the federal government and the systems and did not provide the class with a right to sue as third-party beneficiaries. Count II, alleging breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, was also dismissed with prejudice for the same reasons that Count I was dismissed. The court also dismissed the breach of constructive trust argument, and the class's complaints were facially deficient regarding a claim of a violation of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act.

OUTCOME: The court granted the systems' motions to dismiss and dismissed the class's actions without prejudice on some claims and with prejudice on other claims.

COUNSEL:
Robert Randall Hopper, Esq., Zimmerman Reed PLLP, Minneapolis, MN, and Richard F. Scruggs, Esq., Scruggs Law Firm, Oxford, MS, appeared for and on behalf of Plaintiffs.

Paul B. Klaas, Esq., Peter W. Sipkins, Esq., Marianne D. Short, Esq., and Rachel K. Paulose, Esq., Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Minneapolis, MN, appeared for and on behalf of Defendants Fairview Health Services and Allina Health System.

Janice Marie Symchych, Esq., Halleland, Lewis, Nilan, Sipkins & Johnson, Minneapolis, MN, appeared for Defendant American Hospital Association.

JUDGES:
ANN D. MONTGOMERY, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Orwell's Intuition wrote on May 10, 2007 1:00 PM:

Mrs. Panstreppon, you're getting right to the heart of the matter with Raging Rachel, or maybe it's Pumped-up Palouse. Good work.

Security code, keep. Let's keep digging, everybody. This nutcase is like all the right wingers, the more they rant and rave, the more dirt they're hiding.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 1:02 PM:

Oops! Paulose lost this one.

Arctic Cat, Inc., Plaintiff v. Polaris Industries Inc., and Polaris Sales, Inc., Defendants

Civil No. 04-3419 ADM/RLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25463

December 20, 2004, Decided

DISPOSITION: Defendants' Appeal denied and the Order affirmed.

CASE SUMMARY

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff patent owner accused defendant competitors of infringing two of the owner's patents for storage compartments within the fender of all-terrain-vehicles. The competitors argued that the owner's counsel, an attorney and her law firm, should be disqualified. A magistrate determined that disqualification was not necessary. The competitors appealed the magistrate's ruling to the district court.

OVERVIEW: The competitors argued that the attorney and the law firm should be disqualified because of the legal advice and litigation work they had previously provided to the competitors. Although the law firm provided substantial legal services to the competitors, no evidence suggested that its lawyers did any work for them relating to the technology presently at issue. The competitors' characterization of the attorney as its primary outside counsel was an overstatement, given that they also retained other law firms and lawyers to represent them in various matters. After reviewing the competitors' in camera submissions, the magistrate determined that no one at the law firm accumulated any confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information bearing on the legal and factual issues related to the instant litigation. Any information the law firm did gain concerning the competitors' operations was of the nature which would be "generally known" after the conduct of routine discovery. Thus, they failed to show that the relationship between issues in the prior and present cases was patently clear and that the issues involved were essentially the same. Disqualification was unnecessary.

OUTCOME: The magistrate's order denying the competitors' motion to disqualify counsel was affirmed, and the competitors' appeal of the magistrate's order was denied.

COUNSEL:
Michael V. Ciresi, Esq., and Annamarie A. Daley, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P., Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Plaintiff.

Peter M. Lancaster, Esq. and Rachel K. Paulose, Esq., Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Defendants

JUDGES:
ANN D. MONTGOMERY, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Beth wrote on May 10, 2007 1:03 PM:

I think Rachel Paulouse is a Native American, not an Asian subcontinent Indian.

Allen wrote on May 10, 2007 1:11 PM:

Being well past my half-century mark, I have had the opportunity to (1) work for unqualified superiors and (2) assumed a position in a legal defense office I was not quite ready to handle despite my superior's faith in my abilities.

In the first case, I will tell it was hell and I resigned when it put my ethical & professional credibility on the line. That is what these four men in MN did.

In the second case, I promoted a former peer who was older, more qualified, more experienced, of the opposite sex, of a different race, of a different religion, and who often disagreed with me, as my immediate assistant. I ate some crow, admitted my limitations, asked her to help me for the good of the office, and promised she would always have salary parity.... that was 17 years ago and we intend to retire together 9 years from now. We are equals now and she remains of the opposite sex, of a different race, of a different religion, and we continue to disagree more often than we agree. But, it works for us and, more importantly, it works for our clients. This is what mature, ethical, professional members of the bar do....

Unfortunately, Paulose has more in common with GWB: over-sized egos, under-sized intellects, and a lack of maturity that we expect from persons over the age of 30.

jeffgee wrote on May 10, 2007 1:13 PM:

She was born in Karala, India, 1973.
Paulose shows that wingnuts can play the race victim card too when cornered. Maybe she and Dinesh D'Souza and Ramesh Ponnuru can form a club of Indian right-wingers, lamenting the decline of civilization as they wished it was and blaming liberals for it.

Philonius wrote on May 10, 2007 1:14 PM:

She's Asian American... it's on her resume, under assn memberships

John S wrote on May 10, 2007 1:24 PM:

Could all this "yammer" about child exploitation have something to do with deflecting criticism of the DoJ deciding NOT to prosecute or investigate child sexual abuse in Texas youth detention facilities under the control of Texas Republicans? A copy of the decision is at http://www.lonestarproject.net/files/DOJTYC.pdf

jeffgee wrote on May 10, 2007 1:24 PM:

It's almost like the Paris Hilton defense: They're out to get me 'cause I'm so hot.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 1:30 PM:

Three of Paulose's AUSA cases. No biggies here.

#1
Norma June Cordt, Petitioner, vs. Office of the Inspector General, United States Postal Service, Respondent.

Civ. No. 99-1589 (RHK/RLE)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

DISPOSITION: [*1] Petitioner's Motion for Order Preventing United States Government from Obtaining Access to Her Financial Records [Docket No. 1] DENIED. Respondent's Motion for Order Dismissing Petitioner's Challenge and Directing Compliance with Administrative Subpoena No. 0889 [Docket No. 7] GRANTED.

COUNSEL:
For NORMA JUNE CORDT, petitioner: Peter Benson Wold, Wold Jacobs & Johnson, Mpls, MN.

For INSPECTOR GENERAL, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, OFFICE OF, respondent: Rachel K Paulose, US Attorney, Mpls, MN.

For INSPECTOR GENERAL, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, OFFICE OF, respondent: Daniel E Ellenbogen, Not Admitted.

JUDGES: Raymond L. Erickson, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

#2
United States of America, Appellee, v. Fausto Morales Santos, Appellant.

No. 00-1615

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. CR 99-153(1) PAM/JGL. Honorable Paul A. Magnuson.

DISPOSITION: Judgment of district court affirmed.

CASE SUMMARY

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Defendant appealed convictions and sentence entered by the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota for five counts stemming from the production and sale of false identification documents in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 1028.

COUNSEL:
Counsel who presented argument on behalf of the appellant was Joseph Margulies of Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Counsel who presented argument on behalf of the appellee was Rachel K. Paulose of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Also appearing on the brief was James E. Lackner.

JUDGES: Before WOLLMAN, Chief Judge, LAY, and BEAM, Circuit Judges. BEAM, Circuit Judge, concurring.

#3
United States, Plaintiff, vs. Ira Earl Johnson, Defendant.

CR 01-163 JRT/FLN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20782
August 28, 2001, Decided
August 28, 2001, Filed

SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: rejected, United States v. Johnson, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19044 (D. Minn. Nov. 13, 2001)

DISPOSITION: [*1] Recommended that defendant's motion to suppress statements, admissions and answers and motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of search and seizure be granted.

CASE SUMMARY

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: After the magistrate judge recommended that the motions to suppress of defendant, an arrestee, be denied, the arrestee filed a motion to reopen the evidentiary hearing based on locating a material witness to the suppression issues.

COUNSEL:
For IRA EARL JOHNSON, defendant: Virginia G Villa, Federal Public Defender, Mpls, MN.

For the Government: Rachel Paulose, Assistant United States Attorney.

JUDGES: FRANKLIN L. NOEL, United States Magistrate Judge.

Noam Sane wrote on May 10, 2007 1:33 PM:

What struck me about the letter was that the four prosecutors who stepped down had been asked not to speak to the press and had complied.

They may consider changing their minds, I would hope so, for the good of the country.

twirling fartknocker wrote on May 10, 2007 1:47 PM:

>>Again, what's up with the "child exploitation" yammer?

it's simply something to toss out there to distract people from why she was REALLY placed there, which was to conspire towards that elusive "permanent republican majority," or as saner and more honest heads would call it, to corruptly ensure total corporate domination, a one-party fascist state in America

Thucydides Junior wrote on May 10, 2007 1:48 PM:

A key graf in the letter from the 4 AUSDAs is that they have up to now refrained from talking to the press per the request of the DOJ folks.

If that wasn't a warning shot across the bow, I do not know what is.

Austin Cooper wrote on May 10, 2007 1:53 PM:

Paulose's gender, age, and race were absolutely unimportant to me -- and now that *she's made them an issue*, they're no more singular than they were before.

She was appointed on the basis of her political leanings, and (as another Pat-Robertson-law-school-diploma-plus-two-box-tops-allows-you-to practice-law attorney) her religious leanings. In my opinion, she's another incompetent, arrogant, evangelical idiot -- much like some of the British employees of the Raj who once ruled her country of origin.

Every time she quotes the bible in her office, the baby Shiva cries.

T. Scheisskopf wrote on May 10, 2007 2:11 PM:

Brown Belt is supposed to impress? Lawdy...when I was a brown belt, I was regularly reminded that I was lower than whale droppings. I was, too. Just good enough to be bad.

Things did not get much better once I made Shodan, either. ;-)

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 2:19 PM:

So far, we know that Paulose pumped up her right wing creds by claiming that she defended a faith-based health program when all she did was represent a health care insurer on routine matters.

I can't find any reference to an election case handled by Dorsey & Whitney anywhere between 10/03 and 12/05 when Paulose was a trial attorney there. If anyone can find this case, I'd really to like to hear from you.

I did find an Illinois slave reparations class lawsuit in which CSX, a defendant, was represented by Williams & Connolly.

Williams & Connolly is a DC-based firm so was Paulose in DC from 10/02 to 10/03? I'm curious as to when Paulose worked in DC and when she worked in Minneosta. Her resume is not clear on that point. I'm especially interested in that I'd like to know more about when Paulose developed the reported friendship with Goodling.

Anyone hear about Paulose having a boyfriend or dating? If Paulose is going to confide in gossip columnists, her personal life is fair game.

foggylady wrote on May 10, 2007 2:51 PM:

So nice to see that DOJ political appointees are sensitive to racial issues.
Posted by: Tim
Date: May 10, 2007 11:56 AM

As proven again by Gonzo's comment early in the hearing today, when he responded to a question about Debor Yang being hired for 1.5 mil a year by the law firm defending Jerry Lewis..
gonzo said " she is Aisian and a woman, I should think theywould be glad to hire her"
I do hope that comment will be addressed by some eagle eyed reporter, preferably on National news..
It goes so well with the DOJ not promoting an Asst. USA because she was pregnant..

buckles wrote on May 10, 2007 3:08 PM:

I find it extremely hard to believe that any of the attorneys had issues with Paulose's gender or heritage. MN has its share of bigots, but on the whole anyone working in a public office would not be able to do their job in a state with so much diversity. If anything, if that was the case I would have expected her to have problems with them, not the other way around.

The fact that Paulose talked with C.J. just shows she's the typical rightwingnut using the gossip media circus to sway, or at least fog up public opinion. The lavish swearing in ceremony was the first clue that she was just another neo-con appointment.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 10, 2007 4:51 PM:

some questions answered but some raised. Was Paulose recruited to work in DC for McNulty or did she apply?

Minneapolis Star Tribune
By Dan Browning
4/15/07

"Paulose says `conspiracy theories' on her fast rise to top are off base; Minnesota's U.S. attorney defends her qualifications and says she's learned from her mistakes'

Rachel Paulose, the embattled 34-year-old U.S. attorney for Minnesota, cannot fathom how she came to be portrayed in some recent news reports and blogs as a mean-spirited, autocratic climber who may have gotten her job as part of a scheme in Washington to replace independent prosecutors with GOP foot soldiers.

"These wild conspiracy theories are just that - totally off base," Paulose said in her first interview on the subject. "No one communicated to me - in any form - about any plan to remove any U.S. attorney."

Paulose's appointment in March 2006 as interim U.S. attorney raised eyebrows among some former colleagues in that office and the cloistered world of Minnesota's federal bar.

Publicly, no one objected to the choice, but privately some wondered how a young woman with virtually no management experience had bested more seasoned candidates for one of the most coveted legal jobs in Minnesota...

At Yale Law School, she was an editor of the Journal on Law & Feminism and helped represent immigrants seeking asylum; as U.S. attorney, she oversaw the December raids on meatpacking plants in the state in which 230 immigrants were arrested...

Born in India, Paulose spent her childhood in Eagan and then Ohio before returning to Minnesota. She started college a year early and graduated summa cum laude from the University of Minnesota in 1994, with a double major in political science and history...

Paulose clerked for James Loken, chief of the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, who also remains an ardent supporter. After a stint in the civil rights division of the Justice Department in Washington, she returned to Minnesota as an assistant U.S. attorney in Minneapolis, where she tried a variety of civil and criminal cases and worked on some appeals.

Scott Tilsen, a federal public defender, said Paulose was "not necessarily feared because of her trial skills."

In October 2002, Paulose jumped into private practice at Williams & Connolly in Washington. But family health issues a year later brought her back to Minnesota, where she took a job at Dorsey & Whitney.

Williams & Connolly was sorry to see her go, said partner David Kendall, an attorney for former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, both Democrats.

Dan Lainsbury, a Wells Fargo attorney who worked for Paulose at Dorsey & Whitney, described her as a "fantastic" lawyer, supervisor and colleague. But that stint lasted only 15 months.

In January 2006, she was recruited for a job as senior counselor to the deputy attorney general, working primarily on health care policy.

Interim replacement

Paulose said she never met Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty until she applied to work for him. Nor was she close to Gonzales, adding that they have never had a one-on-one meeting.

She says Monica Goodling, the Justice Department's former liaison to the White House, is a friend. Goodling invoked the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination and refused to testify before a Senate committee investigating the replacement of U.S. attorneys.

But they didn't meet until January 2006. Neither Goodling nor anyone else ever told her about a plan to replace U.S. attorneys, Paulose said. Six weeks after starting her job in Washington, Minnesota U.S. Attorney Thomas Heffelfinger resigned, and Paulose was quickly appointed as his interim replacement.

A lifelong Republican, she said she was as surprised by the appointment as anyone, noting that she had signed a year's lease for an apartment in Chevy Chase, Md...

Staff writer Pam Louwagie contributed to this report. Dan Browning -612-673-4493

Harriett wrote on May 10, 2007 6:28 PM:

Paulose fantasizes that she's royalty, according to the lavish 'coronation' ceremony she gave herself. She's really a spoiled child who needs to have a time out. A little power combined with such an immature, spoiled bitch mentality...well, we've seen the horrid results.

maxxx wrote on May 10, 2007 7:26 PM:

i'm sorry.... but i want to give her a facial in the worst way...i'll leave it to you to decide what kind of facial

buck turgidson wrote on May 10, 2007 8:31 PM:

Are you sure she's Indian? Her profile used to say that her parents were from the Philippines. Of course, both could be true.

noshrub wrote on May 10, 2007 9:37 PM:

Erica Mozangue (one of the lawyers (head of civil) who demoted herself in the Mpls USA office under Paulose) is AfricanAmerican. The idea that Paulose's color or gender has something to do with it is ridiculous. Nobody has written about this, but Erica is not the kind of person to stick her neck out unless it's really bad.

Michael wrote on May 10, 2007 10:59 PM:

We shouldn't over-play what does or doesn't appear on Lexis-Nexis reports as indicative of whether or not a lawyer actually represented a client in any particular matter. L-N only covers reported cases (which might include some trial level work, but it's largely at appellate level, at least in state court). She may well have done a significant matter for somebody that might have never seen the light of day in a courtroom, let alone an appellate courtroom.

So, while it's fair to read what we'd like into what we do see reported (and, by all means, please do so), it's not fair to presume that what isn't reported indicates what didn't happen. Much goes on that is never reported.

The code word is 'shame', as in Come Back Shame! Oops -- I think I messed something up there...

Mr.Murder wrote on May 11, 2007 12:27 AM:

She was part of the Abramoff crew.

Johann wrote on May 11, 2007 8:31 AM:

Mrs. Panstreppon:
Your comment of May 10, 4:51 stating "Goodling invoked the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination and refused to testify before a Senate committee investigating the replacement of U.S. attorneys." is incorrect.

Monica Goodling has never invoked her Fifth Amendment rights in testimony before congress. She has only stated that, if subpoenaed, she would invoke those rights. Also, she has never been subpoenaed to appear before congress to testify.

There is a hugh difference.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 11, 2007 8:50 AM:

Michael@May 10, 2007 10:59 PM

Fair enough. What I am really most interested in is Paulose's defense of the Republican Party and her defense of a faith-based health care program. Paulose would have us believe that the two cases are significant ones.

I searched the Minneapolis Star-Tribune for news about Dorsey & Whitney reprsenting the Republican Party lawsuit but came up empty.

I found this 12/16/05 Dorsey & Whitney reference:

"...Among the candidates conservatives had pushed for the state high court was Roger Magnuson, an attorney with the Dorsey & Whitney law firm who has represented Republican causes, Strom said..."

Then I read this story:

Minneapolis Star-Tribune
By: Mark Brunswick, Pat Doyle
11/3/04

"Tension prompts disputes at some poll sites"

"Reports of long lines and technical problems gave way to more serious concerns of voter intimidation and improper electioneering as Minnesotans went to the polls on Tuesday to vote in the presidential race...

Sporadic accounts of challenges and other disputes began to accumulate through the day.

Officials in Beltrami County and throughout the Twin Cities reported seeing poll challengers increasingly focused on polling places with particularly heavy populations of specific groups.

Examples of those specific groups were college students, Indians on reservations, minorities or the homeless.

In one case, the chairman of a Minnesota Indian tribe accused Republican poll challengers of intimidating legitimate voters by aggressively challenging their residency.

"It seems like a deliberate attempt to dissuade or deter voters from getting the right to vote," said Floyd Jourdain Jr., chairman of the Red Lake Band of Ojibwe in northern Minnesota, who was dealing with several complaints from residents.

Minnesota Republican Party officials accused some John Kerry supporters of violating state law by advocating for their candidate while standing within 100 feet of some metro-area polling places. A Hennepin County judge denied a request by the Republican Party of Minnesota to bar MoveOn.org from operating outside of polling places.

Attorney Roger Magnuson said that hundreds of voters had called the Republican Party to complain that activists with MoveOn.org were too close to the polls, creating an intimidating environment. David Lillehaug, an attorney representing MoveOn, called the Republican Party's legal action an "attempt to get a quick, cheap victory to show up on the 5 o'clock news and tell people there's voter fraud going on in Minnesota. Voter fraud is not going on," he said..."

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on May 11, 2007 9:01 AM:

Johann@May 11, 2007 08:31 AM

I agree with you but let me point out that the Dan Browning of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune was the one who claimed that Goodling invoked the Fifth, not me.

marblex wrote on May 11, 2007 10:38 AM:

if this dumb bitch went to Yale, I'm the fucking queen of Sheba

Allen wrote on May 11, 2007 1:32 PM:

While Ms Paulose's academic credentials far exceed those of Monica Goodling, her legal experience is nearly non-existent. An entry-level public defender will have acquired more experience after 3 months of work than Ms Paulose has thus far. More importantly, her membership in The Federalist Society demonstrates not a lack of intellectual capacity but rather her hatred for the U.S. Constitution, especially the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendements. Remember, The Federalist Society has dedicated it self to denying non-white, non-male, non-wealthy citizens of their constitutional rights and grew out of the segregationist legal movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

Primordial Ooze wrote on May 11, 2007 2:12 PM:

Minneapolis Star Tribune
By Dan Browning
4/15/07
...
Paulose was "not necessarily feared because of her trial skills."
...
-Mrs Panstreppon

SMACK! That's gotta leave a mark.

mpjiu qsautnvgk wrote on May 16, 2007 4:52 AM:

kixb shaiydle tbhmg iexv cazx elshn mlhztcyws

mpjiu qsautnvgk wrote on May 16, 2007 4:53 AM:

kixb shaiydle tbhmg iexv cazx elshn mlhztcyws

xztanpluk rueg wrote on May 16, 2007 4:54 AM:

kgnwes wdifmtcv gbftuipz gwambkihy kumdaif btcyo gchrvwbk svimyxoc snoqft

xezmukij qixzwmdv wrote on May 16, 2007 4:55 AM:

mijyw kfgmwbuh gixueawjo uiwdrcjek nugksacr bzexsfpvy rvietho [URL=http://www.ysqzdgo.xkgr.com]arbjixyq onyidwxbj[/URL]

qnvxac qwxavrcn wrote on May 16, 2007 4:55 AM:

tegzwpylk uqwvexo qwfc pwzdm pwybf jyhmlvftz bznejio [URL]http://www.tdrfk.rgcfswz.com[/URL] qjihzng ehrwpxcl

limewire wrote on October 7, 2007 10:30 PM:

Hi, there!..14f293d0ba5f1cde619022da288b0b4b