There's more than 8 in Buffalo and more than 3 in Ontario. Been over this at nauseum.
Yes, we have. And the best any can come up with is a handful of guys who "could be member," a "possible member," or "either a member or associate."
No chart means they aren't a priority, they don't kill, like they use to, kidnap or push fentanyl or blow up federal buildings. That's what it tells me.
Of course no chart couldn't possibly be the result of there being no hierarchy left to chart.
I would know that because they haven't said so.
First, why would you assume there have been multiple ceremonies over that time period? Second, maybe they haven't commented because there has been little to comment on. And the little there has been to comment on, like Violi or the Bonanno ceremony, they HAVE commented on.
I'm not speaking for EVERYONE. I didn't say everyone. The fact you think that shows your broadsweeping attempt to group everyone together. I know I speak for more than zero.
Then why do you phrase things like "the rest of ours?" Why are you speaking in the plural or collective? You do that a lot. Learn to stand on your own two feet.
The FEDS can't even protect a president from an attempted assassin yet they know everything about a Mafia family? Nah. That's what speaks volumes. Common sense to me. The fact you can't correlate certain things speaks volumes
First, that's just a godawful comparison, even for you. Second, nobody said the feds know everything. But they know far more than the sources you routinely take at face value. You say they can't be trusted, yet you swallow every last bit of internet rumor as long as it's to your liking.
If Sciortino is in fact boss he is recognized by other families. Just like Papalardo in Cleveland is. Falzo in Tampa is. Etc. The fact you still don't get it or use your own logic to stretch into other topics is telling.
I agree there would be a technical, formal recognition as far as it goes. But there isn't much of any evidence anyone left in Kansas City is interacting with anyone else where such recognition would be necessary.
If they've been arrested at all in the last decade they are a priority. Just not the top priority. Indictments don't prove viability or Buffalo never existed. As stated above by Nickle
No, what we've seen - not just over the past decade but over the past 25 years and more - is a relative handful of cases, almost all of which have been the typical ad-hoc crimes committed by individuals with varying degrees of connection to the now extinct mob family in Kansas City. The most significant one was the bookmaking bust in 2010, that included some familiar surnames and one of the few remaining living members (who has since died), but no evidence of it being overseen by, paying tribute, or answerable to a formally structured mob family.
[quote]There's more than 8 in Buffalo and more than 3 in Ontario. Been over this at nauseum.[/quote]
Yes, we have. And the best any can come up with is a handful of guys who "could be member," a "possible member," or "either a member or associate."
[quote]No chart means they aren't a priority, they don't kill, like they use to, kidnap or push fentanyl or blow up federal buildings. That's what it tells me.[/quote]
Of course no chart couldn't possibly be the result of there being no hierarchy left to chart.
[quote]I would know that because they haven't said so.[/quote]
First, why would you assume there have been multiple ceremonies over that time period? Second, maybe they haven't commented because there has been little to comment on. And the little there has been to comment on, like Violi or the Bonanno ceremony, they HAVE commented on.
[quote]I'm not speaking for EVERYONE. I didn't say everyone. The fact you think that shows your broadsweeping attempt to group everyone together. I know I speak for more than zero.[/quote]
Then why do you phrase things like "the rest of ours?" Why are you speaking in the plural or collective? You do that a lot. Learn to stand on your own two feet.
[quote]The FEDS can't even protect a president from an attempted assassin yet they know everything about a Mafia family? Nah. That's what speaks volumes. Common sense to me. The fact you can't correlate certain things speaks volumes[/quote]
First, that's just a godawful comparison, even for you. Second, nobody said the feds know everything. But they know far more than the sources you routinely take at face value. You say they can't be trusted, yet you swallow every last bit of internet rumor as long as it's to your liking.
[quote]If Sciortino is in fact boss he is recognized by other families. Just like Papalardo in Cleveland is. Falzo in Tampa is. Etc. The fact you still don't get it or use your own logic to stretch into other topics is telling.[/quote]
I agree there would be a technical, formal recognition as far as it goes. But there isn't much of any evidence anyone left in Kansas City is interacting with anyone else where such recognition would be necessary.
[quote]If they've been arrested at all in the last decade they are a priority. Just not the top priority. Indictments don't prove viability or Buffalo never existed. As stated above by Nickle[/quote]
No, what we've seen - not just over the past decade but over the past 25 years and more - is a relative handful of cases, almost all of which have been the typical ad-hoc crimes committed by individuals with varying degrees of connection to the now extinct mob family in Kansas City. The most significant one was the bookmaking bust in 2010, that included some familiar surnames and one of the few remaining living members (who has since died), but no evidence of it being overseen by, paying tribute, or answerable to a formally structured mob family.