Nicely said.All the bosses knew about it and took their cut.The main rule was deal drugs but dont get caught.End of discussion.

I hear you Alfa. I wouldn't rely solely on Hoover for anything. I'm very critical of Hoover in the book.

My answer is: I don't. My basic theory is to try to: (1) get as broad array of primary sources as possible; (2) corroborate them against other sources; and (3) test them against facts and logic. (Nothing original about this--it's what good mob historians like David Critchley and Mike Dash do, too).

So, the book cites to:

(1) Mob memoirs: Nicola Gentile's Vita de Capomafia, Henry Hill's classic Wiseguy, Joe Valachi's 1000-page handwritten memoir "The Real Thing," and a dozen others.

But I don't just swallow what these guys say either. I try to corroborate them with other sources whenever possible, and test them against facts and logic.

For example, Joe Valachi downplays his drug-dealing. However, there are FBN diaries going back to 1944 discussing none other than "Joe Cargo." So, I cite that against him.

(2) New York State Police reports and the Commission of Investigation: The New York State Archives in Albany has dozens of boxes of the State Police and the Commission of Investigation. It's pretty amazing stuff-- first-hand accounts of the roundup, and follow-up investigative reports (there was even a copy of the dropped business cards). I'll try to post some of the DD5s to this site.

(3) Trial testimony: I got a copy of the trial transcript of Joe Masseria from back in 1913. It's the first time I've ever seen the actual words from Joe the Boss.

(4) FBI wiretap transcripts: I DO think that FBI's wiretap transcripts are reliable-- it's the words of the wiseguys themselves. The Magaddino wiretaps are a goldmine. They're on the Mary Farrell website.

(5) FBI informants: Less reliable, but still important are the informant reports from the early 1960s.


(6) The 1963 McClellan Committee hearings: The charts are sometimes off, but this is a goldmine of information. There are all kinds of facts and records buried in the report that haven't gotten enough attention.

Incidentally, the 50-year-time limit for the seal on the 1963 hearings just expired. I'm told there are over 80 boxes.

HairyKnuckles, you speak with 100% certainty about things ("The other major issue was the banning of drugs, across the board"). What you don't reveal is that you're mostly just rehashing Joe/Bill Bonanno's romantic mythology almost word-for-word.

A Man of Honor was published back in 1983. Since then, there's been a lot of new source material that's come out. We can use those other sources to test Bonanno's claims against.

Yet, I've never heard you question a single substantive thing Joe/Bill Bonanno have ever said. I doubt you've ever stepped foot in an archive. That's what bothers me.

As for your "funny" assertion that I DO sometimes cite to Joe Bonanno, I know you're not that obtuse. But let me explain one last time:

(1) DISPUTING PROVABLE LIES: The majority of my cites to Bonanno are to dispute provable factual lies or romantic myths by him (i.e., he wasn't at Apalachin). There are assertions that we can disprove with facts and evidence, like at the New York State Archives.

(2) PROVABLE FACTS ABOUT MAFIA OPERATIONS: I do cite to Bonanno when he's talking about provable facts like the Mafia liked to achieve monopolies. There's no reason he'd lie about something like that, and plenty of evidence to support it (i.e., garment district racketeering).

(3) CORRABORATION FROM OTHER INSIDE SOURCES: I do cite to Bonanno on some of the basic facts when he can be corroborated by other sources. For example, Nicola Gentile's "Vita de Capomafia" and even Joe Valachi's handwritten memoirs corroborate much of the basic timeline of 1930-31. Gentile's and Bonanno's lineup of the members of the 1931 Commission are basically the same, too.

However, Bonanno's story that Joe Masseria was just a fat pig, and Maranzano a supreme physical specimen is provably false. The Medical Examiner autopsy reports show that Maranzano was actually fatter than Masseria.


Here's my bottom line: Mob memoirs are valuable, because they're rare, but I don't swallow everything they say as 100% true. When Bonanno can be corroborated by other sources, I use him. However, when Bonanno can NOT be corroborated, has a strong motive to lie and indeed can be disproven by other facts, then I don't use him.

It's called "interrogating the sources." It's exactly what good historians like Critchley and Dash have done, too. Not too complicated HK.

Alfa, you've said the same thing to me, that I just rely on FBI files as sources. I don't know where you're getting this from. Alex even wrote an article in Informer taking on Hoover for disputing the existence of the Mafia, and he points out that he later regretted his denial.

Actually, to be specific, Hoover denied the existence of the Mafia in America as a nationwide conspiracy. Hoover had access to material that should have convinced him that it was a conspiracy, such as the 1928 Cleveland meeting, but he chose to ignore its implications. There are a lot of reasons for that and I suggestion you read the article to see for yourself.

Alex's book, by the way, as he pointed out, uses all kinds of sources from informants confessions to state police to other government agencies to trial transcripts. Junk history books don't tend to make the New York Times bestseller lists, and unlike a previous generation of Mafia books that are full of claims and assertions without putting out their sources, Alex has dozens of pages of sources, just like Critchley did in his book and Dash in his. I dare you to go through his endnotes or my endnotes and find the use of FBI file after FBI file. It's just not true and I wish you'd stop throwing that out there.

And for the record, since you seem to be so down on FBI files, they do not just consist of the opinions of agents but often have actual recorded conversations of the mobsters themselves in their natural setting. Isn't that what we want?

*^^^^ True Shit... In today's age don't you think these old head's go doctor shopping and are hooked on perks. It's almost a crime to put the guys in their 80's in 90's in prison given their health issues. I think Matty Madonna was caught on a wire saying he hadn't shit in over a week because of the goddamn beans. I always thought that was some hillbillie term for Roxicodone I could be wrong maybe JB m BB had the patent all this time and only let certain people know like the hairy guy abroad

alexhortis5, and faithful 1

your gentlemans knowledge is impeccable, you truly
are factual researchers and authors. and I know you
both have done exhaustive research on o.c. and I never
fail to read either of your posts, ive learned a lot
from your work. personally I don't think alfa meant to
criticize your work. however don't you both think
you may be to gentle on hoover. this man aided and abetted
organized crime in America. and any reference to him is surely going to cause many of your readers to question your
conclusions, a say this with due respect to both of you.
tell it like it is about hoover don't sugar coat him.

Binnie, thanks for the good words. I wrote The Mob and the City because I'm genuinely fascinated by Cosa Nostra, and I was tired of all the shoddily-research "mob books." Half of these mob books make up stories out of thin air.

The book documents every single thing I say, and I cite the source in endnotes for the reader to judge for himself. Half of these mob books don't even have endnotes.

As for the charge I somehow "sugar coat" Hoover, I plead: absolutely, positively Not Guilty.

Frankly, I'm baffled your assertion. I'm about as hard on Hoover as anyone in print. Here's what I've actually written:

"During the Cold War, Hoover turned the FBI into more of an internal security ministry than a law enforcement agency. He poured resources indiscriminately, and he dangerously blurred the line between actual enemies of the state and political dissidents." Mob and the City, p. 217.

"Hoover's tunnel vision came at a cost to other FBI functions." Mob and the City, p. 217.

"As late as 1959, the FBI's New York field office had only 10 agents assigned to organized crime compared to over 140 agents pursuing a dwindling population of Communists." Mob and the City, p. 217.

"But Hoover was a federalist when it suited him. He exploited high-profile crime issues to increase funding for the FBI." Mob and the City, p. 218.

"Due in part to his own intransigence, Hoover got his way, and Congress passed no new federal laws for the FBI. The Mafia emerged unscathed again." Mob and the City, p. 220.

"The Federal Bureau of Investigation had virtually no intelligence on the Mafia families, the largest crime syndicates in the United States, through the late 1950s." Mob and the City, p. 220.

"In fact, between 1924 and 1957, the director of the FBI never publicly uttered the word 'Mafia' or 'La Cosa Nostra.'" Mob and the City, p. 221.

"The Federal Bureau of Investigation should have investigated stories corroborating the existence of the Mafia far more seriously. 'It's inexcusable for them to say they couldn't have been using that [intelligence] function to at least be aware of what the hell is going on,' said William Hundley, a top lawyer in the Justice Department." Mob and the City, p. 222.


The book also reproduces, for the first time, the only handwritten note from Hoover in which he admits denying the existence of the Mafia. It reads:

"I have in my mind that I was originally advised by Rosen that the Mafia or anything like it in character never existed in this country. I have been plagued ever since for having denied its existence. H" [Dec. 30, 1970].

Mob and the City, p. 222.


So, no, I absolutely do NOT "sugar coat" Hoover.

Great work AlexHortis5, Credit where credit is due.

thank you, alex hortis5.... I take back my assertion that you were sugar coating hoover, I have to absolutely get your book!
I guess its because of my repugnance to hoover that I make mistakes in judgement. in any sense my apologies for my
accusations of your assessment of hoover.

Thanks Alfa. Look, this was an underworld crime syndicate. There's going to be major gaps in the evidence. There's no "Gambino Family Archives."

I don't pretend to have all the answers-- I wish we go back in time, and drop a bug at the Nuova Villa Tammaro in 1931. I do try to find original sources, and argue from facts and logic. I prefer my own interpretations obviously, but I don't begrudge other people having fact-based theories to the contrary.

Cosa Nostra history is fascinating to debate.

Yes

Regarding the banning of drugs at Apalachin, tell me Alex, how did you "interrogate the sources" that made you come to the conclusion that Bonanno´s claim is just a myth? What other sources did you use while "interrogating"? So far you´ve only come up with "Ormento and other participants were convicted drug dealers" and "there is just no evidence of this myth". Instead of bitching, why don´t you come up with anything substantial showing that banning of drugs was NOT on the agenda at Apalachin?

Nothing against you HK but theres no need for a langwich like that.Its just a discussion and dont get offended by opposite opninions...just sayin

I think Alex is a big boy enough to be able to deal with my "langwich". There is no need for you to jump in here. You´re not helping. Just sayin....If YOU feel offended, you can always call the moderators.

Know what my lady back at home acts like ^^^this when shes offended by someone elses different opinion...you are destroying a very informative thread with your bad language and disrespectful attitude and you know that.

LOL-- HairyKnuckles, you're the one who marches onto these boards, and proclaims with 100%-factual-certainty that: "The other major issue was the banning of drugs, across the board".

What you never reveal is that you're just regurgitating, almost word for word, whatever Joe/Bill Bonanno say for popular consumption. Why? You're a fanboy of the Joe/Bill Bonanno "My Tradition" mythology.

Then, you start "bitching" (a good self-characterization of your comments HK), whenever people call you out on it. Grow up HK-- if you're going to spew things as 100% fact, you can take a little scrutiny, too.

Since you're dishonestly misrepresenting me (no surprise there), let's start with what I've actually written:

"For other attendees, Apalachin was another opportunity to discuss more traditional issues of territory and cooperation. Former Teamsters president testified of a conversation he had with Nick Civella after the mobster was caught at Apalachin. 'Civella told me that, among other things, territory and cooperation was discussed,' Williams recounted. 'Civella said he had Kansas City as his territory. He had working relations with other areas. He had friends in Chicago, he had friends in Cleveland, and he had friends in New Orleans.'

Others claim narcotics was on the agenda. After fibbing about his presence, Joe Bonanno tried to spin its purpose: "Another item on the Apalachin agenda was supposed to be the narcotics issue,' said Bonanno. 'If the 1957 meeting had gone according to plan there no doubt would have been a reaffirmation of our Tradition's opposition to narcotics.' Journalist Selwyn Raab asserts an 'emergency item on the agenda was setting policy on copying with the stricter new federal law--the Boggs-Daniel Act--and dealing with the Sicilian heroin importers.' The author Gil Reavill goes further, writing that New York bosses (without Commission member Tommy Lucchese even present) did reach an agreement that morning in Apalachin. Supposedly, they agreed that 'the American Mafia gets out of the wholesale heroin smuggling business' by spinning off importing and smuggling to 'the Corsicans,' while 'retail street distribution, that's another matter.'

The notion that the Apalachin summit's focus was to be on drugs is dubious. The Mafia had been heavily involved in narcotics trafficking since the 1930s. Three attendees--John Ormento, Frank Cucchiara, and Joseph Civello--were already convicted narcotics offenders. Moreover, the Boggs-Daniel Act was enacted to great fanfare in July 1956, three months before the October 1956 meeting of the Commission. It is difficult to understand why mafiosi would travel from all over the country, again, for an 'emergency item' that had been in the news prior to the 1956 meeting. Meanwhile, Reavill's questionable account fails to appreciate long-term historical trends: as we saw earlier, the American Mafia had relied on Corsican drug smugglers since the 1930s, and it had been moving away from 'risky street distribution' and toward wholesaling for decades."

The Mob and the City, pp. 272-73.

I can break it down for HK some more in bold:

(1) Unlike HK, I never said with 100% certainty whether Apalachin 1957 was about drugs. I said it was "dubious," and then detailed my reasons for doubting the story.

(2) If it didn't happen, it's hard to disprove a negative! Since you're the idiot who runs around on these boards proclaiming it as 100% fact, I think you've got the burden.

(3) Joe/Bill Bonanno are your ONLY source, and they have major credibility problems (to say the least) on the narcotics question:

First, Joe Bonanno claimed there was a longstanding "Tradition" against narcotics-- even though they weren't made illegal until 1914 (and 1923 in Italy). The Families were huge into heroin by the 1930s, if not sooner.

Second, Joe Bonanno's high-level caporegime Carmine "Lilo" Galante was perhaps the biggest smuggler of heroin from Montreal during the 1950s. Yet, when Galante is arrested in 1959 for heroin trafficking, boss Joe Bonanno of "My Tradition" does nothing to him.

Third, Joe Bonanno's "boy of the first day" (how Bonanno describes him in Man of Honor, p. 142) Natale "Diamond Joe" Natale was CONVICTED of narcotics trafficking in 1959. Again, Bonanno does and says nothing, except to lionize Evola.

(4) Joe Bonanno lied about being at Apalachin with his ridiculous hunting-trip story (we can go into the evidence from the New York State Archives or you can read my book). So, the man's already lying about Apalachin!

(5) Three CONVICTED narcotics traffickers John Ormento, consigliere Frank Cucchiara, and boss Joseph Civello, went as delegates. Not to mention Vito Genovese, Natale Evola, Carmine "Lilo" Galante and other known drug traffickers. If anything, they'd be discussing better drug operations--not banning it!

(6) If the July 1956 Narcotics Act was such a major development, I still don't understand why the Commission wouldn't have "banned" drugs at the October 1956 meetings? Your (factually unsupported) theory is they needed a "face-to-face" meeting of everyone-- a requirement I've never heard of the Commission. (By the way, the 1956 meeting DID have a lot of wiseguys present, including Carmine "Lilo" Galante).

(7) These high-level meetings of Cosa Nostra were not easy to arrange-- if you look at the ticket receipts and travel plans from the New York State Archives, it was a major endeavor. But your other theory is that the 1956 Narcotics Act somehow slipped their minds in October, so they said: "Hey guys, let's come back again next year, we forgot to read up on the law!" I find that dubious.

(8) Drugs never came up (either discussions to ban them or expand them) as an issue in the FBI wiretaps that went up shortly after Apalachin. Remember, the Chicago office had Giancana and Magaddino on wiretap talking about Apalachin.

(9) There were other sources and informants talking about OTHER real purposes of Apalachin, including Roy Williams/Nick Civella.

(10) The Families had been steeped in narcotics trafficking since the mid-1930s-- more than 20 years before Apalachin. The idea that they'd have one grand meeting in November 1957 to settle it all is a ridiculous fantasy scene drawn from The Godfather. That's just not how the narcotics trade worked--- it was a lot of wiseguys, moving a lot of heroin, in often-sporadic deals and connections.

(11) The story is just all-too-convenient, familiar storytelling by Joe/Bill Bonanno. The ONE national meeting supposedly to ban drugs was broken up by the State Police-- "If the 1957 meeting had gone to plan there no doubt would have been a reaffirmation of our Tradition's opposition to narcotics." (Man of Honor, p. 272). Do you see how convenient this sounds? Blame the damn Staties for us not stopping ourselves!

(12) If it was so important to the bosses, why didn't the Mafia issue a national ban on drugs in 1958? 1959? 1960? etc.? They could ONLY do it at this one meeting?


So, those are my various reasons for being "dubious" of Joe/Bill Bonnano's Apalachin-was-to-ban-drugs story. But hell, make up your own mind. (And HK can go back to enjoying his Joe/Bill Bonanno novels).

This is a misleading statement. If you read Virgil Peterson's testimony at Kefauver in 1950, he and other agents definitely knew what was going on at some level. At the Federal level, the FBN had tons of intelligence and were feeding that information to the senators on the Kefauver panel. The FBN and FBI probably weren't sharing information. As far as national security, Hoover set top priorities elsewhere like the growing threat of Marxist Communism and Nazi spies during WWII etc. People who lean far to the left minimize or ridicule the Communist threat.

As far as Appalachin, it forced Hoover to change his focus, but there were plenty of people in law enforcement who knew exactly what was going on years before. The notion that no one knew anything prior to Appalachin is a big lie.

How is it misleading? He clearly wrote that the FBI had virtually no intelligence on Mafia Families, which is true and admitted by former FBI agents at every level, including Hoover himself. You are correct that the FBN and the FBI didn't share info and Hoover had other priorities. Alex didn't dismiss the fact that Hoover had other priorities and took on Communism, just that he underestimated the Mafia. A (intel on OC) has nothing to do with B (intel on Communism).

As for Virgil Peterson, he was an ex-FBI agent but at that time he was the head of the CCC and had access to all their files, which at that time was far more than what the FBI had on the Chicago Syndicate. He was able to give an excellent summary of the Outfit's history, but he had no idea about the actual structure of the Outfit, how it was divided into different crews, what those crews were, who had what rank and position, except for a few individuals and in a vague way. That did not come until later when the FBI developed informants and planted listening devices, and that only happened after Hoover realized his error.

I am talking about one thing (the banning of drugs at the Apalachin meeting, which in reality never worked) and you are talking about a complete different thing (the Mafia was into drugs since the 1920s...). I am surprised that you don´t see the difference. Perhaps I shouldn´t be? You tell me.

If you want to continue bitching, moaning and being bothered about the FACT that one of the major issues at the Apalachin meeting was indeed banning drug involvement, be my guest. But you will have to come up with better arguments, stronger and with more substance than the ones you've posted above. The ones you posted do absolutely not shed any light on whether or not the participants talked about banning drugs. You do realize that don´t you?

In addition to fanboy, you´re now calling me an idiot too. Show me you´re not an asshole and send me an apology in a PM. Maybe I´ll accept it.

I'm referring to a big picture perspective. Many, if not all of the major mob bosses were known to law enforcement. Many were called to testify on national television in 1950-1951. It was known that these bosses had top lieutenants, foot soldiers and rackets they controlled. It was also known that they were meeting and conferring with one another.

This was discussed a while back, but I think Hoover preferred the mob to be dealt with at the state and local levels. Maybe he also deferred some things to the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Hoover had to do spin control, but I think he was right to focus his limited resources on the communist threat. As bad as the mob may have been, Communism was a far greater threat to the US and he was an American hero for devoting his energies against the growing menace. Same goes for Nazi's.

Ht2, do you know how to read, or are you intentionally lying about what I wrote?

I wrote: "THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION had virtually no intelligence on the Mafia families, the largest crime syndicates in the United States, through the late 1950s." Mob and the City, p. 220.

That is absolutely true. Don't believe me? Try doing a FBI FOIA request for records on any mafiosi prior to November 1957. Outside of Luciano and a few others, you'll be lucky to get newspaper clippings from the FBI.

For counterevidence, you cite to Virgil Peterson, who was on the local Chicago Crime Commission, and the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Those are not "the Federal Bureau of Investigation."

If anything, TC you're being misleading in outright misrepresenting what I wrote.

Lol--this is a new phenomenon: people criticizing books they haven't read.

TC, as for your other lie that I "ridicule" the Communist threat, on pages 217, I describe in detail Hoover's national security priorities:

"Hoover was not always chasing ghosts though. During World War II, the FBI captured Nazi spies and saboteurs, and it began tracking secret agents of the Soviet Union. In 1943, the FBI recorded a Soviet diplomat paying a leader of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) to develop intelligence on the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb. In 1947, the National Security Agency disclosed to FBI officials that under its 'VENONA project,' NSA cryptologists had decoded messages indicating that Soviet espionage had penetrated the United States government."

Mob and the City, pp. 217 and 338 n.47.

If you read the endnotes, I then cite to John Earl Haynes, Harvey Klehr and Alexander Vassilev, Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009), pp. 84-85. Haynes and Klehr are perhaps the leading scholars on Soviet espionage in the United States.

So TC please don't say I supposedly "ridicule" the Communist threat. My family came from a country that barely escaped Soviet domination. I resent you misrepresenting me with total bullshit, when you haven't even read when I wrote.

I hope this won't turn into a political discussion, but I think both communist and anti-communist politicians are equally without scruples and don't hesitate to murder "for the greater good of the nation". The mafiosi would do exactly the same if they were in the White House or the Kremlin. I don't really buy the good vs evil stereotype referred to the Cold War. Communism is no more in Russia, but I assure you that what we have got now is no better. Well, it's surely better than Stalin's times, but the mob-controlled government is surely no better than what we had in 70s or 80s. At least most of the today's main mobsters spent the 80s in jail, while now they are considered "respectable businessmen" who everyone thinks is a honor to shake their hands with.

HK, I explained a dozen reasons for my doubt about the story you presented as 100% fact. You disagree. That's fine. People have heard enough to decide for themselves.

Like I said earlier, I wasn't trying to give you a hard time. I even agreed with you about the Lansky and Costello conspiracy. But you just wouldn't let it go, and started attacking me. So I responded in kind. Life is too short for this back and forth.

the fbi had nothing on the mafia before 1957, is an established fact. bobby kennedy was amazed the fbi under hoover was clueless about the mafia, when kennedy first took office he went to harry anslinger to get a briefing on the mob.
hoover was useless. he went after the few communists in this country purely for show. he aided and abetted the mob.according
to o.c. expert ralph salerno, hoover was the biggest obstacle
to o.c. in America. joe coffey nypd mafia detective, says
hoover was irrelevant in the fight with o.c. as he was against the kkk in the south. he was blackmailed by the mob for 4o years, he was truly the biggest fraud in u. s. history. a cross dresser, and homosexual, he shamed our nation.

AlexHortis5 is right, drugs never came up during the meeting. They might have if the staties did not interrupt the meeting, it has been reported that that day was going to be the main discussion of why everyone was called there at the meeting. We know from informants and wire taps that at least a half a dozen members from the sicilian mafia were there along with a couple members from Naples. The farthest they got were reminding the bosses of all families, that no other family could operate in their city or territory without the boss of that city giving permission to do so no matter how powerful that family or boss might be, this seems to be aimed at the Bonanno, Gambino, and Genovese families. In the Gambino family for instance, Albert Anastasia wanted a piece of Santo Trafficante's casino operations in Cuba, and Frank Scalise put a drug pipeline from New York City to the west coast through Chicago without even asking for permission from Chicago. Joe Bonanno had northern California in his grasp and was trying to muscle in on southern California, much to the dislike of Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, and the Los Angeles crime families. The Genovese family were encroaching on Boston and Elizabeth crime families as well. They also put ineffect that no new members could be made into the families, this does not seem to be a national enforcement, but only to the Tri-State area as to avoid any more violence or wars in the New York families, there is evidence that this was not heavily enforced as some members were made during the ban in New York.

There is a story that because of the violence in New York and territorial disputes, the bosses from around the country were meeting to decide to continue the Commission or to disband it. Another thing that keeps getting me thinking is that sometime in the 1950's, a rule was made were American members who were made in a U.S. family could not be made again in a different family from Sicily or Italy and via versa. I wonder if it was at this meeting that rule was put into affect. The fact of the matter is that we will never really know what the main reason for the meeting was.

Carmine Galante was registered at a motel, but was not caught as far as I know. Frank Garofalo along with his brother Vincent were able to escape due to having a small meeting with Jimmy Lanza and Joe Cerrito at their motel room which all four did indeed escape when they heard about the raid on the radio.

Well, I suggested that 20 posts back. But you just kept on going. You´re not giving me a hard time. First and foremost, you´re giving yourself a hard time.

I was making a general remark regarding attitudes about the threat of marxist communism, not you or your book in particular. Many people (not you) are ignorant of world history, focus on one aspect and ignore everything else that was going on. BTW.. who is TC?

Like everyone, Hoover had strengths and weaknesses. He was great on the communist threat and arresting Nazi's, but had a weak strategy on OC prior to 1957. I think he preferred it handled by state and local law enforcement (eg., Thomas Dewey). From 1957 until 1972 (about 15 years), the FBI did gather intelligence and aggressively went after the mob. People criticize Hoover as if those 14-15 years didn't exist..but they did exist!

Here's a question...why was the FBN so ineffective and why do historians seem to give them pass as far as responsibility?