Congressman Peters Supports Rubashkin, Will Contact Eric Holder

16

congressman-gary-petersOn Friday, August 6, Congressman Gary Peters (D-MI) of Michigan met with Rabbi Elimelech Silberberg of West Bloomfield, MI, at the Bais Chabad Torah Center of West Bloomfield to discuss theterrible injustice of the Rubashkin case.

Rabbi Silberberg called to schedule the meeting at the Congressman’s district office, but the Congressman insisted on coming to meet him at the shul.

Rabbi Silberberg delivered a presentation on the background of the case, the viciousness of the prosecution and the new evidence that shows a strong impartiality on the part of Judge Linda Reade.

Congressman Peters had never heard of the Rubashkin case at all and he expressed outrage at the way the case was handled.

Congressman Peters agreed to contact the office of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder at the Department of Justice to express his concern, and the concerns of his constituents, regarding the case. The Congressman also took a tour of the Bais Chabad and he expressed his support for the community and the wonderful work at the Bais Chabad.

“The message here,” exclaimed Rabbi Silberberg, “is that we assume that everyone knows about the Rubashkin case. However, the fact is that many politicians are completely unaware of the case. This year, being an election year, presents a unique opportunity to contact the local politicians and exert influence on the Department of Justice.”

{Noam Amdurski-Matzav.com Newscenter}

16 COMMENTS

  1. This is just more Ruba-spin. Peters never heard of the case; then the shaliach gives him his version and we get a headline: Congressman Peters supports Rubashkin. Do you really think a congressman can interfere (even if he wanted to) in a criminal trial after conviction and sentencing? But I guess it makes “matzav” feel good. And all the responses (which you print) will come out with cliches – at least one refering to the necessity of the IMMEDIATE appearance of the moshiach. Gimme a break – and of course erase my comments.

  2. So why did 6 attorneys general send a letter to Judge Reade? They would not sign their prestigious names to a lost cause. And Nat Lewin, an esteemed attorney,no matter how much he may want to help Rubashkin, would not put his career on the line.
    Did the shaliach contact every lawyer, statesman, congressman also?
    In your words, Gimee a break. Rather, give a break to facts and all people involved in politics, not Chabad Houses, who are outraged over the sentence.

  3. yankel[1],
    Yes. The system of law is one thing, and PR presure is another. These people are human beings, and every kind of public presure helps. Sorry to be so simple, but you obviously need it…

  4. Yankel dear So are you happy now that your nonsense was publicised. Why do you begrudge Matzav the mitzva of pidyon shvuiim
    Did you ask a ???? ????? if a ??????? (which I doubt R’ Sholom Mordecahi is being a talmid of ??? ???’ ??? ) is not included in ?????? ??????

  5. yankel (poster #1) is 100% on the mark. No congressman has the power to undo a case that has been duly adjudicated… nor would he risk his political career to do something that might be perceived as undue interference. the visit to the chabad house is nice, great publicity, makes for nice headlines, but is totally worthless for rubashkin

  6. Yankel i think you are out of your mind. of course a congressman have an influence when somebody is mistreated. thats why the US is built on a system of “checks and balances” that each branch of goverment should be abla to check on the other.

  7. yankel,
    you have waaaay too much faith in the fairness of the US criminal justice system. That causes you to make 2 wrong assumptions – 1. that if a court of law found rubashkin guilty then it must be so, and 2. that the attorney general cannot (under pressure from a congressman) interfere with an appeal in a criminal case.

  8. Hey, #2, aka Ehrliche Yid, I read your comment, “Comment # 1 (Yankel) may you have a refua Sheleima B’Soch Sh’ear Choleh Yisroel”, and I sincerely thank you for your good wishes. How did you know I had a kileh? It’s on the left side and I hope to have it operated on soon. About 10 years ago I had one on the right side, operated, OK now. So the right was before left, i.e. yemin ol smol. And to #12, aka dovid, pills don’t help when you have a hernia – and a kileh is not really serious.

  9. Hey, #2, aka Ehrliche Yid, I read your comment, “Comment # 1 (Yankel) may you have a refua sheleima B’Soch Sh’ear Choleh Yisroel”, and I sincerely thank you for your good wishes. How did you know I had a kileh? It’s on the left side and I hope to have it operated on soon. About 10 years ago, I had one on the right side, operated, OK now. So the right was before left, i.e. ???? ?? ????. And to #12, aka dovid, pills don’t help when you have a hernia – and a kileh is not really serious.
    Censor: Pretty please, let this go through. Please. Anyway, have a nice day – and smile.

  10. There are some misconceptions here. Mr. Holder can’t do anything on the order of pressuring the judge. There is a legal procedure to be followed – the appeals process. Mr. Rubashkin’s lawyers can theoretically appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court, but it has to be done according to legal procedures. Congressmen can’t do anything, the head of the Justice Department can’t do anything. The Supreme Court is independent of both of them – that’s the “checks and balances” of the Constitution.

    Also, nobody here seems to understand Middlewesterners. We don’t like being pressured by anybody, particularly Easterners (like New Yorkers) and Washingtonians (like the Feds). Making a lot of noise and publicity will just make the local judges angry, and they also won’t want to be seenby their neighbors as “caving in” to outsiders.

    The best thing to do is just keep the level down. Do it by the legal book, and there’s a chance of success.

  11. Rachel, have you read congressman weiners letter ? He points directly to the stevens case where the “justice dept.” dropped all the charges not the judge.
    He ask him to do the same in this case and that how the checks and balances work that the courts can’t do what they want.
    The AG is completely in top of the prosecution.
    Imagine the judge ruling something unfair, the defense file an apeal, ans the prosecution says “of course” the deffense is 100% right’ what do you think the apalate court will rule ?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here