i cant help but notice the amount of intrigue that appears on sen geary's face during cicci's testimony and the look he gives after asking willie about the "buffers" in the family. it's as if he is answering his own personal questions in his head....possibly relating to the death of the girl he was sleeping with

You're absolutely right about Geary's look of "intrigue," but it was intrigue against Michael:
We think of Geary as dumb, with his coglioni in Michael's pocket since the brothel murder. But his actions in the Senate suggest otherwise. Two examples:
1. His little speech about Italian-Americans was a real two-faced political slide. He says, "These hearings on the Mafia are in no way a reflection on the great Italian-American people." Who did he mean by "the Mafia" if not Michael, who was right there in the witness chair? Then he says, "And it would be a shame, Mr. Chairman, if just a few bad apples are allowed to spoil the whole bunch." Who did he mean by "bad apple" if not Michael?
2. The committee was secretly holding Frankie Pentangeli as its star witness. Geary, as a committee member, knew it, but Michael didn't. Geary trapped Michael by asking Willie Cicci a question that was seemingly helpful to Michael: "Did you ever get a direct order from [Michael]? Or was there always a buffer?" "No, I never talked to him," replied Cicci. Michael relaxed: he thought Cicci was the committee's star witness. And since Cicci admitted that he never got a direct order from Michael, he believed that no one could implicate him directly, so he lied under oath instead of pleading the Fifth Amendment. Then the committee produced Pentangeli. Now the committee wouldn't have to prove that Michael committed any crimes that the committee had accused him of--they had him on five counts of perjury, each of which carried a five-year sentence. Geary had tricked Michael into committing perjury!

Don Turnbull:

I've always interpreted Geary's question as actually trying to help Michael's case by soliciting testimony that Michael had no direct connection with Cicci's criminal activity. Regarding Geary's grandstanding speech, Michael would understand the need for a fellow hypocrite to denounce the Mafia in public, while sleeping with them in private. Granted, the Chairman of the committee warned Michael about perjury and Tom was worried. So that supports Turnbull's point.

Nevertheless, Pentangeli's testimony alone would probably be insuffient for a perjury conviction. And, as far as we know, Pentangeli's word was all they had. In a reallife example, I think Sammy the Bull's testimony was a great help, but not enough to convict the Dapper Don. And in the Martha Stewart case, they apparently needed two pieces of evidence to convict her of lying.

Well-reasoned points, DA! Let me offer a few rejoinders:
In most felony cases, testimony from a corroborating witness is needed, in addition to the main witness, to obtain a conviction. But the word of one witness is sufficient to bring a charge of perjury to trial. Then it's the witness's word against the defendant's--plus whatever supporting or circumstantial evidence the prosecutor can bring to bear against the defendant. Then it's up to the jury to convict or not.
In Michael's case, the Senate committee had no jurisdiction over the crimes they accused him of (e.g., running all the gambling in the US, ordering the murder of the heads of the Five Families in 1950 [sic]). But they did have jurisdiction over lying under oath at their hearings. Frankie's testimony alone would have been sufficient to bring perjury indictments against Michael. Then his case would go to trial, and there'd be a reasonable chance he'd be convicted. Even if he wasn't, the simple fact of his being indicted and tried would have ruined him. Most people, alas, don't believe that you're innocent until proven guilty.
Since you mentioned other cases: Gotti beat several felony raps because the government's witnesses against him were a bunch of low-life convicts and heroin addicts. But the notoriety he gained through those trials (and his own publicity-mongering) made many people aware that a major gangster was getting away with murder. They'd had enough of him by the time of the Castellano murder trial. Even though Da Bull could hardly be called a sterling character or a credible witness, the jury was ready to believe him because, like Pentangeli, he was very close to the defendant and acted on his orders. The same could have happened to Michael.

i am assuming that pentangeli did come to realize it wasnt michael that tried to kill him........did frankie ever get the full story, or did he just accept the fact that his brother would not be associated with michael if he knew he tried to kill his brother

BTW, thanks for the input

robert

Robo, you should take a bow for asking a question that, to my knowledge, hasn't been asked before! Will wonders never cease?
It's not clear if Frankie knew, or was told by anyone, that Roth, not Michael, ordered the Rosatos to try to kill him. The feds certainly wouldn't have told him: it was in their interest to keep him thinking that Michael ordered the hit. And since they had him, airtight, on an Air Force base, there's no way he could have learned about Roth's role on his own. Hagen may or may not have told him during his visit. But Hagen's business with Frankie was to get him to commit suicide to atone for his betrayal of Michael--an event punishable by death, in Michael's eyes, whether or not Frankie ultimately learned that Roth was the culprit.

i thank you don turbull, and everyone on these boards for the mass of info that flows from those fingers of yours.

the assumption of frankie knowing who ordered the hit on him is based on the fact that frankie appears to have no conflict with hagen during their (brilliantly planned) conversation.
if he was still under the impression that it was michael's decision to have him killed and hagen being a trusted advisor, then i would think he would not be too friendly toward hagen during this meeting.

rob

Turnbull,

You raise great points to ponder. This is why GFII is so open to interpretation! I think your interpretation has an extra layer of depth. However, I would guess most viewers would think Geary was helping Michael. But this BB is advanced studies in GF! I'm still pondering.

But why would Geary sellout the guy that has so much dirt on him? One thought... As we know from Fredo, Senator Quisenart(sp?) was in Roth's pocket. Once Geary became a whore, he had to always be at least someone's whore. To paraphrase Moe Greene, perhaps Geary thought: " The Corleone's are being chased out of Vegas by Roth...I talk to Roth. I can do the deal with Roth and still keep my hotel."

good points.....and it raises more interpretations(at least on my part)
geary either completely sold out the corleone family and set them up for a possible downfall and perhaps secured himself in the governmental role.......but thats assuming that he was in good with roth.
or.....
he felt that if michael sees him as a prosecuter then he could screw his life over with all the info he has on geary, so he better start kissing ass now and reassure michael that he has no input on the prosecution against the corleone family!

rob

I've never really understood Senator Geary's role in GFII at all.

What has he got to do with the deal with Roth and Cuba etc?

Does he murder the prostitute or is that done by the Corleone family.
A bit about the hearing I don't quite get. I always looked at Geary's speach as being a lie but he's doing it to help Michael by saying it and then leaving. I thought he done this as Hagen helped him out with the murdered prostitute. Which then leads me to think that they set him up and then helped him so he would return a favour.

I could be way off the mark there

The Corleone Family did kill the prostitute. they set it up beautifully, notice how Tom knew SO MUCH about her, as if he had done his research.

Hagan-"This girl has no family -- nobody knows that she worked here. It'll be as if she never existed. All that's left is our friendship."

Now they have Geary in the Palm of their hands.

The Corleones certainly set Geary up by drugging him in the whorehouse that Fredo operated, then having Neri kill the prostitute (notice him washing his hands, like Lady Macbeth--"out, out, damned, spot--out I say" ), then having Geary wake up with the dead, bloody hooker in his bed--and no memory of how it happened.
Geary had a minor role in the Michael/Roth fandango. Roth, pretending to be Michael's kindly surrogate father, has Johnny Ola tell Michael that if he wants take over Meyer Klingman's piece of the Tropicala hotel that Roth secretly owns with the Lakeville Road Boys, Roth won't object. Since Roth planned to have Michael killed that very evening, he was, in effect, giving away the sleeves of his vest. Both Roth and Michael knew that Geary was the most politically influential man in Nevada, and that Michael would need Geary's permission to "get on the license" as Klingman's successor. Michael contacted Turnbull, who was undoubtedly Geary's political bagman, to arrange Geary's permission. But Geary held out for $250k plus 5% of the gross of all of Michael's hotels.

Now a nice question presents itself: Did Geary try to hold up Michael for all that money just because he was greedy and disliked Italians? Or did Roth influence him to put the bite on Michael? I'm guessing it was a combination of the two. Geary certainly was greedy and prejudiced. But I also think that he must have been tight with Roth, since Roth was already established in Nevada and had undoubtedly done plenty of satisfactory business with Geary and Turnbull. Roth, clever fellow, probably played on Geary's greed and prejudice by telling Geary: "Hey, look, this Corleone guy is a bigshot Mafioso; he's loaded with money and he can pay you a lot more than he negotiated with Turnbull. You oughta get more, too, since you're being so nice by giving a dirty outfit like the Mafia a foothold in this 'clean country'." Meanwhile, Roth was manipulating Geary to put a stumbling block in Michael's plan to acquire an interest in the Tropicala--so that even if Michael had been assassinated, his successors still wouldn't have an interest in Roth's hotel.

Thanks for clearing that up for me about Geary and the dead prostitute.


I was going to ask on the IMDb boards, but after a quick look at some of the posts it looks like a lot of them don't have a clue. One of them even said it wasn't Roth who ordered the hit on Michael it was Fredo.

Oh, one of our favorite conundrums. My take on Geary is slightly different. I embrace both motives of the Senator - a truly self-serving libido driven ego-tist. I believe Geary's speech in the hearing was his typical fence-sitting position. He was protecting both sides of his career - the political/legitimate and the illegitimate. A devious mind like his would not want to jeopardize either lucrative relationship. His speech was carefully worded so that he could deny or defend, depending on the outcome. There was enough ambiguity and enough accusation for anyone to argue whose side he was on - as we're doing here. Geary was a slime-ball of the highest degree.

I agree.

Was he referring to Michael as one of the bad apples spoiling the whole barrel, or was a Willi Cicci one of the bad apples spoiling the rest of the barrel that Michael was in?

turnbull brought up good points in posts above. i am really starting to think, and somewhat agree with turnbull, that sen. geary was going against michael at the time of the hearing.
from the beginning geary was never really fond of michael or his "kind". if he had to work with him and the tropicala then he was going help his discomfort of the partnership by "squeezing" him for more money. the corleone family sets him up (wonderfully) to a point where geary has no other choice but to cooperate with whatever the corleone family asks. but just because geary is under the corleone family "thumb" doesnt mean that he was in fact a devoted partner. as the hearings came around i think geary underestimated michaels wit (he figured it was all over for michael) and believed roth would help him get out from under the corleone family "thumb". and in fact turned on michael during the hearings.
rob

You guys brought up some terrific and interesting points about Sen. Geary. It didn't occur to me that Geary sold Michael out by helping to conceal Pentageli.

Now I'm curious why Michael didn't have Geary assassinated for his betrayal. Any thoughts, anyone?

The most likely answer is that Geary was still of some use to Michael. He probably figured out that Geary was part of the Senate Committee's effort to trap him into committing perjury. At minimum, Geary could have told Michael that the committee had Pentangeli, but he didn't. But: Michael still needed to do business in Nevada, where Geary was all-powerful. And since he still had leverage over Geary due to the brothel murder, killing Geary would have been the equivalent of cutting off his nose to spite his face.