Maybe I should have said that the statement in the article, although Scott Did NOT write it this way, can be open for interpretation that ether: George is surrounding himself with union thugs, and is gonna corrupt them OR: a couple of guys George hangs out with are in the union.

I choose to believe the latter. You brought up labor racketeering. I'm not sure if a convicted mobster taking action from some blue collar guys constitutes racketeering. If so, is it because he's a mobster? Because there is gambling? Or both? Without George, gambling happens all day every day on jobs. For example, the paycheck lottery, football pools, etc. there's fights, drug dealing, all kinds of nonsense.

I would hesitate to believe that borgesi, or anyone from philly is infiltrating these unions here. I am very close with someone who is in a very high position in the union. He flat out told me that they have a lot of mob corruption in north jersey but none down in philly or south jersey, for this particular trade. And he was pretty confident that other trades were clean too; at least down here. He would know, you just have to take my word on that.

Look at the iron workers case recently with Dougherty. No mob connection whatsoever.

I took a long path to explain why I think the statement can mean both ends of the spectrum. Based on what I know and see, I choose to believe George has friends who have union day jobs and do things with him, outside of their day job. If anything, they are getting book/shy clients. Not infiltrating the union. No union president or delegate currently in any position of power is gonna get jammed up on something major down here. They've been around too long. And these union guys down here have been fighting to survive for years. Most of them don't know or care about any gangsters. It's just another person they gotta prevent from stealing from their retirement.