When Tom asks Michael if he wants to “wipe out everybody,” Michael replies: “Just my enemies.” Frank Pentangeli qualified as an enemy because he ratted out Michael to the FBI and was ready to testify against him at a Senate hearing. But, arguably, several mitigating factors might have made Michael consider giving Frankie a pass:
--Frankie (through the Rosato brothers’ ambush) was, like Michael and Fredo, a victim of Roth’s preternatural treachery.
--Michael put Frankie in harm’s way. After telling Roth that “Frank Pentangeli is a dead man,” Michael, in a coldly calculating manipulation of the loyal Frankie, forced him to “settle these troubles with the Rosatos.” It was a win/win for Michael: if Frankie and the Rosatos settled, it’d be one less administrative headache for him; if Roth ordered the Rosatos to kill Frankie, it’d be one more confirmation that Roth was behind the Tahoe shootings.
--Through shame and possibly fear of what might happen to his family in Sicily, Frankie disavowed his affidavit against Michael. Coupled with his buffoonish behavior, it got Michael off the perjury hook and invalidated Frankie as a witness against Michael.

So, did Michael need Frankie’s death? IMO, yes—if you look at it from Michael’s criminal perspective:

To maintain his “legitimate” façade, Michael had no Mafia family in Nevada. Only Neri and Rocco were real Mafiosi; his other security was simply rent-a-cops. His NYC operation under Frankie served as a deterrent to other Mob families that might have seen his Nevada empire as fair game. With Frankie’s demise, his deterrent may have been damaged. So, by muscling Frankie to commit suicide, Michael was sending a message: “No one gets a pass from me, and I can get to anyone, anywhere—even on an Air Force Base.”

The other reason: Though Frankie was useless as a witness against Michael, the FBI wasn’t going to keep him in Club Fed for the rest of his life just because he was a good pool and Hearts player. They’d continue to pump him for information about Michael, and about people around Michael, that might be used in the future against Michael, or to compromise people who could hurt Michael. Even if Frankie couldn’t testify, he’d be a potential liability that Michael had to eliminate.

Your thoughts?

What you said.

Like Fredo, Frankie was pretty much of no use to anybody once Michael emerged victorious.

Unlike Fredo, Frankie knew the game, knew what he had done and the price he had to pay...and in the end, did not blame anybody for his plight.

Ironic, isn't it...that it is these two men whose joyous reunion we witness at the beginning of the film. Two generations, two traitors to their Don.

Agreed, Frankie was not another button, he was a boss; what he did undermined the fundamental trust and loyalty the mafia families was built on!
There were two messages, not one; the first was a public message that Michael can get to your loved ones even if they were an ocean away. The second was -like you pointed out, An Airbase and Federal 24/7 watch was not enough to keep the Godfather from getting to you.

The problem with the Senate hearings was that they were a public event, an images was damaged. Like I said in another thread; Mike is no longer a respected figure, he was now merely a gangster who out-smarted the senate and feds, yet nevertheless a gangster... if that is the case, and he's a gangster again after all his attempts to become respectable, he might as well be good at it, and that's why he had to wipe out everyone... including Frankie and Fredo.

People generally believe what they want to believe. In America, though you're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, many people watching the hearings probably assumed that Michael was a gangster simply because of the organization chart, and Cicci's testimony. But Frankie's recanting of his affidavit and his explanation that "it was all lies" may have convinced a lot of other people that Michael wasn't guilty.

The real purpose of the hearing was to destroy Michael's "legitimate" image. The perjury trap was a brilliant innovation. If Frankie had testified, Michael could have been indicted for perjury, and, if found guilty, would have faced a five-year prison sentence on each count. But even if he wasn't convicted, his reputation would have been shot. Then Roth, who was a Nevada casino owner far longer than Michael, would have petitioned the Gaming Commission to revoke Michael's casino licenses--and hand them over to Roth.

Yes TB, much of what you posted is true. However, what all of these posts regarding Mike's pursuit of legitimacy fail to acknowledge is that he was and had been for years the Don of the most powerful Mafia family in the country, and, among people who care about such things, it was known that he was and had been. Senate hearings or not, exculpation or not (per Frankie's retraction), Mike could not escape his past. If by 1979 Michael is still trying to achieve legitimacy but hasn't ("Everyone knows you're like the Supreme Court"), then surely he was no where near it back in the late 50s early 60s.

All true, Olivant. But, no matter how many people "in the know" who knew about Michael's background, he had to maintain the "legitimate" facade to maintain his gaming licenses. By 1958, the Nevada legislature had taken control of gambling out of the Tax Commission and put it into a new Gaming Commission (whose first chairman, Harry Reid, is now Senate Majority Leader). The new commission had the power to bar anyone from even entering a casino, much less owning or running one, on the basis of a past criminal record, or even an unsavory past or reputation. Had Michael taken the Fifth on any of those questions, he'd have confirmed that the reason his answer "might tend to incriminate me" was that the accusation was true. From there: a hop, skip and jump to the Gaming Commission yanking his licenses--and the Las Vegas Sun running an expose on his past. Nevada tolerates a lot, but they don't like bad publicity--bad for the almighty gaming industry.

Good points by everyon, and I agree with all of them. The bottom line IMHO, however is a simple one. Omerta is Omerta, and whoever breaks it regardless of mitigating circumtances has to die. Giving Frankie a pass would send a message of weakness to the illegitimate world in which Michael still played a major role. To the pezzanovante trying to wanted to crush Michael, it would have been seen as a sign of strength.

That said, Michael sort of did give Pentangeli a pass. In exchange for his suicide there was a promise that his family (which I take to mean his wife,etc.) would be taken care of
if he killed himself. Even Frankie saw this as a "good break," and he pressed Tom on this by saying only the really big shots in Rome got such treatment after a plot against the emperor failed. Tom reasured him and the deal was done.
I am pretty sure none of the Corleones "took care" of Paulie's family after he betrayed Vito.