The Rubashkins are happy they continue to go unpunished as their Latino flunkies are forced to take the rap!The Des Moines Register Reports:
Agriprocessors supervisor faces additional charge
GRANT SCHULTE gschulte@dmreg.com • August 19, 2008
A manager who allegedly helped hide illegal workers at Agriprocessors Inc. in Postville will plead guilty Wednesday to charges tied to his role in the secret operation that employed nearly 700 illegal immigrants, according to a court docket published Tuesday. Juan Carlos Guerrero-Espinoza will appear at a change-of-plea hearing at a temporary federal court in Cedar Rapids, according to the online court docket. The news came as U.S. Attorney Matt Dummermuth announced the 35-year-old plant supervisor will face charges that he conspired with his employer to hire the illegal workers. The plea bargain comes
three months after federal agents raided the plant at detained 389 immigrant workers. Teig said the investigation remains open, but declined to say whether authorities would charge any other managers.
GRANT SCHULTE gschulte@dmreg.com • August 19, 2008
A manager who allegedly helped hide illegal workers at Agriprocessors Inc. in Postville will plead guilty Wednesday to charges tied to his role in the secret operation that employed nearly 700 illegal immigrants, according to a court docket published Tuesday. Juan Carlos Guerrero-Espinoza will appear at a change-of-plea hearing at a temporary federal court in Cedar Rapids, according to the online court docket. The news came as U.S. Attorney Matt Dummermuth announced the 35-year-old plant supervisor will face charges that he conspired with his employer to hire the illegal workers. The plea bargain comes
three months after federal agents raided the plant at detained 389 immigrant workers. Teig said the investigation remains open, but declined to say whether authorities would charge any other managers. Two lawyers for Guerrero-Espinoza did not return phone calls seeking comment.Guerrero-Espinoza, who supervised the plant’s beef kill department, allegedly told a group of employees a few days before the raid that they needed new identification papers and Social Security numbers to stay employed. The supervisor allegedly asked workers for photographs and $200 to $220 for new documents.Later, according to the complaint, Guerrero-Espinoza told the employees that they could return to work.
Posts
11 comments:
You may be misinterpreting who the charges are against in regards to the supervisor and his "employer." Since a supervisor gets hired by a manager and not the owner, the conspiracy could have been between the supervior and the manager and not the owners and the manager was referred to as the "employer." It just doesn't make any sense if they have anything on the owners that they wouldn't be charged also.
The reason I question this is because in that same paragraph there is mention of possible charges being filed against "other managers".
Arizonian,
fyi
This is their actual picture and it is recent. They are Hasidic Jews and they wear long beards and dress this way. The only thing I added was the money bag to represent the high volume of donations they make to the GOP PACs.
Dee,
While I agree with you certainly that the Agriprocessors owners need to be held responsible for their actions, and while I agree with you that the Agriprocessors donations to political forces need to be exposed to the light of day, the imagery you are choosing to use here is unfortunate and evokes a lot of racist history. Nobody is questioning whether or not the photographs you use is actually a picture of the Rubashkins, but putting a Photoshop image of a moneybag in their hands evokes hundreds of years of anti-Semitic iconography. I am sure you didn't intend it that way, but the end result is very distracting from your overall intent, because it makes it look like your anger at the Rubashkins is caught up in anti-Semitism instead of in their crimes.
Writing about images of Jews, Eric Zafran wrote, "To a contemporary viewer, however, these depictions would have brought to mind the unpleasant character of the Jewish moneylender or usurer. The latter was an established type by the 13th century when one of the chief attributes of Jewish figures in the _Bible moralisee_was the money-bag. ... a despondent figure holding a large moneybag, with coins disbursed upon his desk."
The Nazis continued with this for centuries-old tradition of moneybag imagery in their propaganda posters and stories such as The Poison Mushroom. And Wecker's review of Deborah Strickland's book about monsters in medieval art says "You can easily identify the Jew in the central, most devastating spot in the cauldron: he wears a money bag around his neck. In general, Jews are easily identifiable by their profile views (the saints are frontal views), by hooked noses and funny hats and by their luggage such as money bags and the like."
All of which is just to explain that, while I'm sure you were just trying to connect the Rubashkins to the donations they've made to the Republican Party, you chose to do so in a way which inadvertently evoked centuries of anti-Semitic, racist canards. It was making much more comfortable if you would remove the image, or replace it with something which gets across your point without anti-Semitic implication. If nothing else, it would be a hell of a lot less distracting. And it would be much more conducive to your blog mission of creating an environment where people can discuss immigration "civilly, freely and safely thereby reducing the hate, anger and misunderstandings currently inherent in most of these discussions".
Again, I am not saying you are an anti-Semite. But I do hope you will see how the image you used played into dangerous anti-Semitic tropes, and this would be a safer space for discussion if you didn't use images like that.
I agree ditto.
Interesting Ditto and Arizonian.
I will change the pix and just show the Rubashkins, not that I had any intent, but just to prove that was NOT my intent.
Although I still believe they are not being charged due to their GOP PAC donations.
Ok Arizonian. I will bite. From YOUR perspective, why aren´t the Rubashkins being charged? You must know they knew and were complicit in the hiring of the Guatemalans. Why aren´t they being charge?
The owners probably haven't been charged because there isn't enough evidence to convict them of knowlingly having illegals employed in their company, duh!
Arizonian, They were low level supervisors. The guy who ran away to Israel was the manager. He was the person who had all those vehicles he sold to the illegal immigrants put in his name.
Rumor has it the Rubashkins helped him flee. The Feds knew about him. His name was in the warrant.
Interesting how they allowed him to get away with no charges.
Arizonian,
No one said these low level supervisors should not be charged.
What I said is the employers are still scot free.
The warrant listed the complicity of the employers and the person who fled. They knew then, had probable cause to arrest him then, but they didnt.
As the guy was packing up, various blogs posted that he was ready to leave. I posted it on my blog. It was all over. Even the Des Moines register had it. Yet, no one arrested him and he was allowed to flee to Israel assisted by the Rubashkins. At the same type they removed the Rubashkin as CEO to remove his culpability. Makes you wonder if it was the donations that motivated them to look the other way.
Arizonian,
I have no doubt the Rubashkins will never be charged.
Based on their history, I believe there is sufficient evidence for them to be charged, but I doubt they will be. Neither will the owners at Swift or Pilgrims Pride or any other Meat Packing company. They pay far too much PAC money to be charged.
As long as they are never charged, dont expect there will ever be an end to illegal immigration nor ever expect there to be Mass Deportation. As long as no one is serious about sanctioning the employers, all will stay status quo, just as Business and the Administration wants it.
The employers/owners will be held accountable with e-verify dee, yet you object to that! You are talking out of both sides of your mouth again!
Post a Comment