My final thoughts on this, and I'm not going into it again:
If Amuso turns out to be the boss----and let me be clear, I don't believe that's the case----then so what? Who's the real power? Who's living in the palatial estate? Anyone seen that house? Well, I have. And I have to imagine that the view is better than Amuso's.
Now please, let's move on.
And that's where we get into the old debate about who's really "the boss?" The guy with the title but sitting in prison cell or the guy without the title but running thins on the street. Some people would claim that Galante, for all intents and purposes, really was the boss of the Bonanno family for a time before he was killed.
Ivy, where did the FBI say Amuso is still boss, can you post a link?
I assume you mean recently, since they had him as the boss going back years.
Excerpts from the recent
Gang Land article:
The closest thing to an official confirmation about Amuso's status came in April from the testimony by FBI agent Kenneth Terracciano at the racketeering trial of Luchese mobster Nicodemo Scarfo Jr. in Camden Federal Court. Terracciano, a Newark-based G-man, offered a simple declarative sentence on the matter: Amuso, he said, "is the boss of the Luchese family.""There is no doubt, Vic is the man, end of story," agreed a second longtime mob buster who's been making cases against New York wiseguys for more than 20 years. "Vic has always been the (Luchese) boss," said LEO#2.All of that jibes with what one underworld source (call him UW#1) told us: "Vic is still in the chair, still running the show," he said. "They (Luchese mobsters) don't like the fact that he's still calling the shots, but he's not giving it up. He's the boss," said the mob associate, a longtime cohort of the Luchese and Bonanno crime families.I actually tend to trust someone who I thinks in the know on this subject you uptight bellend. You were unbearable with 'Ligambi is official boss, the FBI says so, honest'
I don't know if I can be fairly accused of being "uptight" simply because I give more weight to what the FBI says than what internet posters say. And we've been down this road before. As a poster on another forum pointed out, we had these same arguments when forum posters claimed Nick Corozzo was really the boss of the Gambino family, not Peter Gotti. They also claimed Jackie D'Amico was not the acting boss of the family. Well, what happened? Gotti was indicted as the boss, D'Amico as the acting boss, and Corozzo as a captain. People also claimed Tommy Gioeli wasn't running things for the Colombo family. Well, he was later indicted as the acting boss. Not that any of this matters to these forum posters. Crea could be indicted tomorrow as something other than the boss and they wouldn't believe it. I swear some would rather speculate and be wrong than simply believe what the feds say and be right.
Crea is very smart so IMO at the most Vic is just a front boss .
Any claim that Vic has the same type of authority as the Chin can also just be misinformation. .
The west side is known for leaking misinformation about their administration and it's very possible Crea is using the same tactics
That family is secretive . They are a poor mans Westside lol
But Crea is running the show with very little input from Vic
When Chin was in prison, he didn't run things on a day-to-day basis either. And nobody is saying Amuso is in a position to do that. But Amuso, like Chin, remains the boss of the family and has the final say. Otherwise, I imagine he's content to have Crea and Madonna run things and decide on issues he doesn't need to.
Now looking at the above the REASON, guys like DOM and myself think Crea is the boss, is because if you compare a guy who's been off the street for 25yrs, caused conviction upon conviction, murdered many of his own, has no blood ties to the current power structure to a guy who is and has been THE earner, was acting for MANY years, has the support of most of the HISTORICAL (and current) power base (Bronx vs 80's Brooklyn), powerful Jersey connections and above all has been on the street for (apart for a 5yr bid the turn of the century) the better part of 2 decades and as if not THE capo, then acting, what do you logically think is the most reasonable assumption?
I don't pretend to know all the ways Amuso has maintained his position and power. But I don't really need to. I'm content to believe the FBI does know and that's why they continue to consider him as the boss. If Crea was the boss, the FBI would likely know and say so.
Because Capeci and LE are ALSO assuming remember. So yes, TWO, LE 'sources' plus a funeral attendance point to VIC. But LOGICALLY, considering the above, you can see why the 'evidence' points STRONGLY to Crea.
I know it's not posted here and I really am starting to wonder if you guys have even read the article. As I posted above, Capeci mentioned FBI agent Kenneth Terracciano, who testifed at the Nicky Scarfo Jr. trial that Amuso is still the boss. He then listed 2 other law enforcement sources that confirmed that Amuso is the boss. He then mentioned a fourth law enforcement source who seemed to agree and used the wake of Amuso's wife as circumstantial evidence. He then mentioned an underworld source who also confirmed that Amuso was still the boss.
So that's 5 sources saying the same thing. But I suppose a dozen more sources could come out, all saying Amuso was the boss, and it wouldn't make any difference to you guys.
By the way, what makes you think law enforcement is assuming? You guys seem to think that the feds just guess all of this, like throwing darts, when they are very careful about their intel. Too many people here sell the feds far short and don't give them the credit they deserve. Without them and their info, whether directly through indictments or indirectly through articles like Capeci's, we would all be in the dark for the most part.
@Ivy,
Because what rubs guys like Dom, myself and PB the wrong way is we take info from Capeci, the FEDS, with a HUGE amount of respect. But we also take it into context.
And on the ODD occasion whereby there's a VERY good case to disagree with Capeci or the FEDS, we only do it with a VERY good reason.
We give that source of information a huge modicum of respect, but end of day it's also fallible.
And what IRKS us beyond belief is when we have good reason (see above) to make a case that that source is wrong, you label us as selective fanboys only hearing what we choose to.
Which in knowing PB (which you do), a somewhat reputable poster such as myself and a very reputable poster such as DOM, this is not only wrong and disrespectful, but also and more importantly, wrongly dismissive of several very level headed contributors who may have something to offer you.
We are not saying we're right Ivy, just that our case is more than plausible and worth more than your dismissive responses.
Apol if Ive spoken out of place for PB and Dom.
But I think not.
Actually, while you may not be among them, there are many people on these forums who have a history of readily dismissing what the feds or a guy like Capeci has said on any number of issues. I mentioned above about Corozzo, Gotti, D'Amico, and Gioeli. Others did the same thing regarding Chin and Fat Tony. If they did it only now and again, and with good reason, that would be more excusable. But they don't. They are almost always deferring to their own assumptions rather than people who are actually in a position to know. And I haven't come across a poster yet who, in disagreeing with the feds, didn't think they had a good reason.
As far as posters on the forums who have something to offer me, I'll say what I just said on another forum. Looking back in hindsight over my nearly 8 years on these forums, if I simply went with the varying opinions and claims of other posters, and ignored disagreeing info by the feds, I would have ended up wrong the vast majority of the time. That's been proven time and time again. Now, does that mean I just dismiss what others have to say; especially the handful of credible guys like PB? Not at all. Most of the time, I'm happy to take what a guy like PB says at face value. But, in the end, the feds are in a better position to know than
anyone on these boards. And that's why I ultimately defer to them.
