Why Israeli Spy Jonathan Pollard And Former Kosher Meat King Sholom Rubashkin Are Rotting In Jail

"America's Rabbi" Shmuley Boteach thinks he knows why Pollard and Rubashkin are "rotting in jail," and he's telling you – truth be damned.

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Shmuley Boteach – the slurping, slobbering, self-aggrandizing fool who bills himself as "America's Rabbi" – is not known for his honesty or his scholarship. His recent book about Jesus – largely ripped off from the long discredited work of Hyam Maccoby – was indescribably bad, and his fawning and exploitative attachments to actual celebrities like the late Michael Jackson are notorious.

Boteach was once a Chabad shaliach (emissary) but was fired for repeatedly ignoring Chabad policy to stage events and take actions that – no surprise here – aggrandized Shmuley. (I tried to block Boteach's appointment as shaliach to Oxford for precisely these reasons after seeing him in action when he visited a friend in Philadelphia just before he left for Oxford. Unfortunately, while others who saw him in action agreed with me, no one was willing to tell the Rebbe that Boteach was not in any way suitable to represent him – a decision that certainly was later regretted just as I regret not doing what I knew was right and making that warning by myself.)

Boteach is a charlatan. He's a clergyman the way Tammy Faye Baker was an evangelist – money and fame come first, and God places a very distant third or fourth.

Earlier this week Boteach wrote a column that purports to explain why Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard and former kosher slaughterhouse macher Sholom Rubashkin are "rotting in jail."

I'll leave the discussion of Pollard to others and instead will briefly explain why what Boteach wrote about Rubashkin is both factually wrong and intellectually dishonest.

Boteach writes:

…In June 2010, after being acquitted of underage labor violations but found guilty of financial fraud, prosecutors unbelievably demanded a life sentence for Rubashkin but “compromised” for less. Rubashkin was a significant philanthropist and communal activist. He was the principal supplier of kosher meat to the American Jewish community. Driven by Chabad’s philosophy of increasing Jewish observance, he was more interested in people having a kosher home than in becoming a millionaire and was noted for his fair and reasonable prices. Of course, none of this excuses the crimes he committed in an effort to save his business from going bankrupt, for which he deserved to be punished.

But take a moment to contemplate the unprecedented nature of Rubashkin’s sentencing, and compare it with that of other white collar criminals. Rubashkin’s sentence is longer than those of Jeffrey K. Skilling, the former chief executive of Enron, and L. Dennis Kozlowski, the former chief executive of Tyco. Mark Turkcan, the president of First Bank Mortgage of St. Louis, misapplied $35 million in loans and was sentenced to one year and one day in prison.

Sholom Rubashkin, however, a firsttime offender, was sentenced to 27 years, scheduled for release at the age of 74 in 2033.

In the fall of 2012 the Supreme Court – ignoring six amicus briefs urging the court to review the case, including 86 former federal judges and Justice Department officials, two FBI directors, four deputy attorneys- general and one solicitor-general – formally declined to hear Rubashkin’s appeal. The decision let stand a draconian prison term that could lock up the 53-yearold for the remainder of his life, leaving his wife and 10 children impoverished and without a father.…

Here are the facts:

1. Rubashkin ran a bank fraud scheme over a long period of time.

2. He used Jewish charities he controlled (and allegedly other Chabad charities outside of Postville that he did not control) to launder money to deceive his lenders.

3. During this time he took large amounts of money from Agriprocessors for his personal use. (The government showed that Rubashkin had taken $1.5 million for himself over a very brief amount of that much longer fraud.)

4. Approximately 75% of Rubashkin's workforce was undocumented.

5. These undocumented workers were paid less than documented workers. Not only that, they made approximately $5 per hour, were forced to work regular overtime they were not paid for, were denied breaks, and were abused in other ways, as well.

6. Dozens of these undocumented workers were children forbidden by law from working in a slaughterhouse.

7. Child labor charges were brought by the State of Iowa. There was no question underage workers were employed by Agriprocessors, and the trial ended up hinging on what, if anything, Rubashkin knew about these children and when he knew it.

8. The judge decided to view the law narrowly and ruled as such. This meant that the state had to prove that Rubashkin – who acted as Agriprocessor's CEO but carried the title of VP – knew each underage worker was underage and that he did nothing to act on that knowledge rather than showing that as a CEO who was on the plant floor daily and who was actively involved in employee issues, he should have known they were underage. The judge also chose to block the state from bringing into evidence no-match letters from the federal government that showed that Rubashkin knew many of his employees were using fake IDs. He also blocked other related evidence that clearly showed that Rubashkin was intimately aware of the nature of his workforce.

9. Because of those rulings, Rubashkin was acquitted.

10. In response, Iowa's legislature re-wrote its child labor law to prevent judges from ruling that way in the future and to make sure that any future Rubashkin would not escape punishment.

11. Rubashkin was convicted in federal of 86 fraud related charges.

12. He was not tried on federal immigration charges becuase those charges had been separated from the fraud charges at Rubashkin's request, meaning two trials would have been necessary, not one. Because the fraud charges carry heavy prison time and the immigration charges do not, the government brought the fraud charges first. After Rubashkin was found guilty of them, from the government's perspective, there was no reason to prosecute the immigration charges because they would add little to no time to Rubashkin's already long sentence but would cost lots of money and take lots of time to prosecute. (There were very compelling moral reasons to prosecute those immigration charges, however, as I and others have previously noted.)

13. The US Sentencing Commission Guidelines called for a sentence of 22- to 30-years in prison. If upward enhancements were considered – Rubashkin's obstruction of justice, for example – and other factors were interpreted more strictly, those guidelines would have called for an even longer sentence (the "life sentence" Boteach mentions).

14. The judge – who is one of the toughest sentencing judges in the federal judiciary – chose not to do that. Instead, she sentenced Rubashkin to 25 years in prison for the fraud charges plus two more years for blatantly perjuring himself in court – roughly in the middle of what the guidelines call for.

15. The men Boteach compares Rubashkin to all either pleaded guilty and made restitution or were convicted before the Sentencing Commission Guidelines were made more strict in response to white collar criminals like some of those Boteach mentions.

16. Rubashkin, however, has consistently refused to make restitution. He also hid assets, obstructed justice, and lied to federal investigators.

17. In other words, Boteach is misleadingly comparing apples to oranges, not apples to apples. People who plead guilty, show real contrition and make restitution often get much lighter sentences than people like Rubashkin who do none of those things.

18. The real reason Rubashkin is serving an obscenely long sentence – besides his guilt and lack of remorse – are the US Sentencing Commission Guidelines, which clearly need to be revised and made much more humane. There are literally thousands of people imprisoned in the US for obscenely long periods of time for nonviolent offenses. This is almost always wrong and in my opinion, it must be stopped.

As for Boteach, facts matter little to him. In fact, I would argue that little beyond Shmuley actually matters to Shmuley. What Shmuley cares about is puffing up Shmuley, making himself great in his own eyes and, he hopes, in the eyes of others. Rubashkin and Pollard, like everyone and everything else in this world, are merely vehicles he can use to achieve that twisted goal.

Comments

[Fleishike Kishke]

America’s Rabbi is playing the Rubashkin card to flatter his way back into the good graces of the “street” of the Chabad movement, seeing as some of its Rabbis have banned him for publishing Kosher Jesus.
It’s the Bureau of Justice’s job to fight and prevent hate crimes. Jonathan Pollard (and Sholem Rubashkin to a much lesser, but very serious extent) didn’t just commit crimes. Pollard especially, committed the kind of crime that would have caused massive pogroms in a previous time. Pollard’s financially motivated spying set back Jewish integration into America 100 years. Pollard’s continued incarceration protects the U.S. Jewish community more than anyone else. Jews will rue the day Pollard gets out and has the opportunity to run his mouth (may it never come to pass). I hope they deny his parole in 2015. Even after 30 years in prison, he’s still a menace to (Jewish) Society.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Smiley Botox.

[sifter]

I think your characterization of Boteach is awefully harsh. Ad hominem attacks like Drooling Fool do nothing to further your argument.

[Moisheb]

I have a issue with point # 15 - if he would of pleaded guilty he would of gotten a much higher sentence than those Enron guys, even the plea deal he was supposedly offered was much higher than those other guys. Our justice system in the U.S is one of the worst in the world there are people languishing in prison with crazy sentences on frivolous crimes. Don't over complicate things if you look at the case at face value with a non biased mind you can smell the corruption. I am not claiming in any way anti Semitic motives ( although that is arguable ) but don't try to justify this gross miscarriage of justice

[Shmarya Rosenberg]

The sentencing guidelines were changed and made much more strict in RESPONSE to the Enron scandal.

So your issue doesn't really make sense.

[Moisheb]

My issue makes alot of sense forget for one second that S.R is lubavitch, there are murderers getting out in 10-15 years , there are prisoners doing 25-to life under the 3 strike law in California.so a guy who stole candy and cigarettes 3 times is doing life out west. S.R falls somewhere in the middle he got shafted ,crimes like his belongs in a civil court most lawyers argue. Again when it comes to our judiciary system states and some districts are worse than some African or middle east courts its one area the U.S has not evolved. I know you are on a crusade to bury S.R but do some research on our penal system and you will be unpleasantly surprised

[Robert J. Barron, Attorney-at-Law]

@Moisheb -----> Don't over complicate things if you look at the case at face value with a non biased mind you can smell the corruption. I am not claiming in any way anti Semitic motives ( although that is arguable ) but don't try to justify this gross miscarriage of justice.

Gross miscarriage of justice? You can smell the corruption? Arguable anti Semetic motives?

If this isn't more minimizing, I don't know what is.

Moisheb, there's a reason that (I would estimate) 99.9% of our Jewish brethren never even see the inside of a (criminal) Courtroom; much less the inside of jail or prison.

It's because 99.9% of our brethren (who are in business) are honest and upright businessmen. Rubashkin wasn't. He got caught. He exercised his 6th Amendment right to a trial. He was able to get the full range of protections offered by the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments to the US Constitution. He rolled the dice by going to trial. He lost.

Yes, there are significant problems with our penal system. But I don't think those problems will be solved by minimizing the seriousness and the gravity of Mr. Rubashkin's offenses.

[Shmarya Rosenberg]

moisheb –

No. You are wrong. Murder is a STATE crime. Rubashkin's case was federal. You are comparing apples to oranges.

And you have been told this many times before.

[Shmarya Rosenberg]

I should also add that "most lawyers" do NOT think Rubashkin's case should have been a civil suit.

He committed ongoing, widespread crimes that included stealing a ton of money.

The problem is that you are in a cult, and your cult refuses to face reality for this or for many other things – including the death 20 years ago of your leader.

[Moisheb]

Robert I respect your comments and opinion but 27 years doesn't feel right.

[SkepticalYid]

Posted by: Moisheb | April 02, 2014 at 01:43 PM

The federal penalty for 1st degree mureder is life without parole or the death penalty, In New York the penalty is life imprisonment without parole.

[Robert J. Barron, Attorney-at-Law]

@Moisheb ----> Robert I respect your comments and opinion but 27 years doesn't feel right.

I appreciate the compliment/respect, and to a certain extent I can see where you are coming from; in that his crime(s) was/were non-violent; and yes, 27 years is more than some criminals get who commit crimes of violence.

But 27 years is what (I am assuming) his Sentencing Guidelines range was; and while the Sentencing Guidelines are no longer mandatory; they are still advisory and are accordingly relied upon by a many (if not most) federal judges.

(However, that is an assumption of mine. I have not done federal criminal defense since around/about 2009 or so.)

Also bear in mind that Rubashkin could have taken a plea bargain. I do know (for almost-certain) that DOJ (Department of Justice) policy is to encourage the resolution of cases by plea; because trials can take a huge amount of time and resources.

(It's not so much the trial itself; it's the time and effort involved in preparation for trial.)

I think Shmarya would have a better read on this than I would; but I think if Rubashkin had taken a plea bargain, he would have gotten like eight years or something. Yah, that's not good, but it sure beats 27. But again, he exercised his 6th Amendment right to a trial.

[Moisheb]

Robert - if this is the case it's a big pity he didn't take the plea he would of almost been out by now

[m]

shmuley boteach is a phony , he cries poverty . he made millions from 23 books , and made more millions from TV shows and radio talk shows and still cries poverty , perfectly chabad .
he always complains he has 9 kids and does not have money .

he lives in a multi million dollar estate in a posh neighborhood in new jersey but never invites his children's friends to his house . boteach does not want reg teenagers who live in humble homes to be shocked by outstanding wealth . he keeps them away . it's safe for his children that way .

worse , shmuley boteach wants his eldest son mendy to attend west point military academy . how can a completely academically uneducated chabad yeshiva boy attend a top of the line military academy ? how can he go through the school ?

chabad sect members are not allowed to attend goyish schools . they are not allowed to be with goyim and eat their food . the military academy does not compromise . it is what it is .
the military academy does not allow special arrangement for kosher food for its student . in the case of mendy boteach , if he really claims to be chabad , it has to be chabad kosher food , not any kind of reg kosher food . shmuley boteach 's son is as phony as his dad .

it is not easy to get into the west point military academy . you need a letter from at least two politicians .
your congressman and another politician .
shmuley boteach managed to get his NJ congressman rothman to write a letter .

shmuley boteach never made public that his son is attending the academy . he kept it secret .

what can a chabad yeshiva boy do graduating from the west point military academy ? I 'd like to know .

[SkepticalYid]

Posted by: Moisheb | April 02, 2014 at 05:36 PM

Under the insane U.S. federal sentencing guidelines, additional time can be added to a sentence for NOT taking a plea. If one is found guilty, time can be added for so-called "obstruction of justice."

[JessicaR]

In my opinion, ten years should be the maximum for non-violent financial criminals. Seize their assets to pay back their victims, strip them of their professional licenses and forbid them from seeking employment in those fields in which they behaved dishonestly. Sentence them to prison, too, but for far shorter periods of time.

[dh]

moisheb, I can respect the fact that it just doesn't "feel right" to you. But you've got to respect the fact that it just doesn't feel right to me. I feel it is too short.

I wretch every time I think of what I chewed and swallowed and gave my family to chew and swallow that bore the stamp, and probably human semen, of that crime family. What ever crimes he is doing time for, whether white collar and / or enhanced because he is a lying fleeing dirtbag, did violence on our bodies. I didn't realize he could get out at 74. 27 years is too short.

His family still has a father. His wife still has a husband. They aren't suffering. They are enjoying the spotlight schnorring. No one is missing a match. He and they are revered. He's having a ball. In more ways than one, I'll bet.

[dh]

As far as Jonathan Pollard goes, I've been sick with some filthy upper respiratory thing. Last night I took my medicine and Kleenex and Googled two things. Jonathan Pollard and mucous. Very similar parallels.

And I agree. "Drooling fool" is beneath you, Shmarya. I've always preferred "Fooling Drool."

[Proud Chabadnik]

Robert, Moisheb,
SMR's plea offer was 12 years.

[Proud Chabadnik]

m,
There no such thing as "chabad kosher food", if it's Kosher then it's Kosher for all.

However:
Chabadniks - as well other Chasidim - are particular to eat only dairy that is Cholov Yisroel. So (U)D and (K)D would not be a sufficient hecsher.

When it comes to meat, many Chabadniks are particular to only eat Lubavitcher Shechita. I don't believe anyone attending West Point cares for that stringency.