A former U.S. attorney who resigned last year amid a DOJ investigation into unethical conduct and who was once a top candidate touted by Joe Biden and Democrats, now has even more trouble coming her way.
Former U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins was forced to resign in disgrace in May from her position as a U.S. attorney for Massachusetts after the Department of Justice launched a corruption investigation into her, WBUR reported at the time. And now, a year later, she has lost her law license.
Rollins’s beginning was far more auspicious when in July of 2021, Joe Biden and his Democrats nominated her for the position in the Old Bay State.
When the Biden administration nominated her for the position, for instance, Democratic senators Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren praised Rollins as “a great choice” who they were “proud to recommend.”
“District Attorney Rollins is a national leader on transforming the criminal justice system and shifting away from an approach based on punishment and penalization to one that combats the root causes of injustice, whether it be poverty, substance use, or racial disparity,” the two senators said, according to a 2021 report in the Boston Globe.
The media also jumped in to push for the left-wing Rollins to be elevated to the Massachuetts DA’s office.
“Rollins has been among President Biden’s smartest appointments, and if her nomination is finally approved in the Senate she would become the top federal prosecutor in Massachusetts, handling cases involving national security, white-collar crime, public corruption, cybercrime, gang violence and civil rights violations,” the Los Angeles Times’ editorial board wrote at the time.
But only two years later, Rollins was left fleeing from her position in disgrace after the DOJ revealed “hundreds of pages” of accusations that she “abused her authority as U.S. attorney,” WBUR noted.
In one case, for instance, she was charged with purposefully leaking privileged Justice Department information to help Democrat Ricardo Arroyo get elected Suffolk County district attorney. The DOJ said Rollins leaked sensitive information about Arroyo’s opponent in the race, Kevin Hayden. Arroyo lost to Hayden anyway.
Should Rollins be allowed to practice law again?
And as Fox News reported, the DOJ said Rollins lied to federal investigators about her actions. The DOJ said Rollins “falsely testified under oath during her OIG interview when she denied that she was the federal law enforcement source that provided nonpublic, sensitive DOJ information to the Herald reporter about a possible Hayden criminal investigation.”
The U.S. Office of Special Counsel called Rollins’ actions “an extraordinary abuse of her power,” WBUR said in a separate report.
She became the toast of the Democrats ahead of her nomination to the U.S. attorney’s office in Massachusetts for refusing to prosecute most criminals that came through her office as the Suffolk County DA. But her dedication to this “social justice” concept made for a contentious confirmation process in which the U.S. Senate was split 50 yeas to 50 nays. Vice President Kamala Harris stepped in to supply the final yea to push Rollins into the DA’s office.
But what was supposed to be a four-year term barely reached two years after the DOJ revealed its long list of corrupt practices they accused Rollins of committing.
Still, even with all the allegations hanging over her head, Biden’s DOJ declined to prosecute Rollins after she agreed to resign from the AG’s office.
This did not stop the Massachusetts Office of Bar Counsel from reviewing her case, though.
Now, the state’s Board of Bar Overseers has recommended that Rollins’ license to practice law be suspended for nonpayment of fees. And the state Supreme Judicial Court approved the suspensions, WBUR noted.
Naturally, as with many of these corrupt Democratic officials, despite her long list of ethics violations, the Soros-backed prosecutor was the lucky recipient of a cushy landing after resigning from disgrace. She landed a job as the special projects administrator at Roxbury Community College, where she is making $96,000 a year. Democrats never face consequences, do they?
