Chicago Outfit Soldier Sentenced

[Tonyd621]

So what makes them viable? An arrest? The FBI says so?I dont get what you to want hear.

[Wiseguy]

Good points. I think there are two separate questions here. I don't see anyone making the claim that the Outfit is "running drugs in Chicago". I think the question of interest is whether drugs make up a non-negligible proportion of the operations of whatever is left of the Outfit today.

The evidence over the past 20 years shows the Outfit's involvement in drugs is sporadic and low-level (i.e. associates). So, there's not much evidence that drugs make up a "non-negligible" portion of the organization's overall income. Maybe reselling drugs they stole was a big portion of the Vena crew's income...for as long as it lasted.

So what makes them viable? An arrest?

Ongoing cases, over time, is a big factor. An arrest, not necessarily (see Kansas City in 2010 or Buffalo in 2017).

The FBI says so?

Yes.

[Tonyd621]

Good points. I think there are two separate questions here. I don't see anyone making the claim that the Outfit is "running drugs in Chicago". I think the question of interest is whether drugs make up a non-negligible proportion of the operations of whatever is left of the Outfit today.

The evidence over the past 20 years shows the Outfit's involvement in drugs is sporadic and low-level (i.e. associates). So, there's not much evidence that drugs make up a "non-negligible" portion of the organization's overall income. Maybe reselling drugs they stole was a big portion of the Vena crew's income...for as long as it lasted.

So what makes them viable? An arrest?

Ongoing cases, over time, is a big factor. An arrest, not necessarily (see Kansas City in 2010 or Buffalo in 2017).

The FBI says so?

Yes.

So if you dont get pinched your not commiting relevant crime?

[Wiseguy]

So if you dont get pinched your not commiting relevant crime?

If mobsters aren't getting indicted, how do we even know what they're doing in the first place? A crystal ball?

[Patrickgold]

Good points. I think there are two separate questions here. I don't see anyone making the claim that the Outfit is "running drugs in Chicago". I think the question of interest is whether drugs make up a non-negligible proportion of the operations of whatever is left of the Outfit today.

The evidence over the past 20 years shows the Outfit's involvement in drugs is sporadic and low-level (i.e. associates). So, there's not much evidence that drugs make up a "non-negligible" portion of the organization's overall income. Maybe reselling drugs they stole was a big portion of the Vena crew's income...for as long as it lasted.

So what makes them viable? An arrest?

Ongoing cases, over time, is a big factor. An arrest, not necessarily (see Kansas City in 2010 or Buffalo in 2017).

The FBI says so?

Yes.

Wiseguy, have you read the 1997 Chicago Crime Commission report? If not I highly recommend it. Tell me what it says about the Outfit’s involvement in the narcotics business. Or is the CCC not a reputable source like John Binder and Scott D, guys that actually research, have LE and Outfit contacts that give them inside info and publish books on the Outfit.

[Pogo The Clown]

Didn't that same CCC 1997 report also list the Outfit as having 70 made members and something like 700-1,200 Associates?


Pogo

[Confederate]

Didn't that same CCC 1997 report also list the Outfit as having 70 made members and something like 700-1,200 Associates?


Pogo

Yes.

[Wiseguy]

Wiseguy, have you read the 1997 Chicago Crime Commission report? If not I highly recommend it. Tell me what it says about the Outfit’s involvement in the narcotics business. Or is the CCC not a reputable source like John Binder and Scott D, guys that actually research, have LE and Outfit contacts that give them inside info and publish books on the Outfit.

First, that you're referring to a report from 23 years ago says something.

Second, there were some issues with that report - active crews, membership estimates, etc.

Third, regardless of what a 23 year old report says, look at the relative lack of drug cases involving the Outfit between then and now. That should tell you something.

Fourth, I'm not criticizing all of Binder's research. But there's little to no basis about his claims of the level of Outfit involvement in drugs.

Finally, I'm not sure where Scott D fits into this.

[Confederate]

Wiseguy, have you read the 1997 Chicago Crime Commission report? If not I highly recommend it. Tell me what it says about the Outfit’s involvement in the narcotics business. Or is the CCC not a reputable source like John Binder and Scott D, guys that actually research, have LE and Outfit contacts that give them inside info and publish books on the Outfit.

First, that you're referring to a report from 23 years ago says something.

Second, there were some issues with that report - active crews, membership estimates, etc.

Third, regardless of what a 23 year old report says, look at the relative lack of drug cases involving the Outfit between then and now. That should tell you something.

Fourth, I'm not criticizing all of Binder's research. But there's little to no basis about his claims of the level of Outfit involvement in drugs.

Finally, I'm not sure where Scott D fits into this.

The CCC is basically an organization of prominent business men who try to make the public aware of the effects of Organized Crime. Their information is okay at best & not anywhere near the level of accuracy of the F.B.I. In addition, their estimation of 700 to 1,200 "Associates" made no sense at all & nobody knows how they came up with that highly exaggerated figure. Who knows what they were counting as "Associates"??
About 10 years later (I think it was around 2007), the Feds said there were 28 Made Men in the Outfit (including guys in prison & Inactive men) & about 100 "Associates". That ratio is more in line with reality.

[Patrickgold]

Wiseguy, have you read the 1997 Chicago Crime Commission report? If not I highly recommend it. Tell me what it says about the Outfit’s involvement in the narcotics business. Or is the CCC not a reputable source like John Binder and Scott D, guys that actually research, have LE and Outfit contacts that give them inside info and publish books on the Outfit.

First, that you're referring to a report from 23 years ago says something.

Second, there were some issues with that report - active crews, membership estimates, etc.

Third, regardless of what a 23 year old report says, look at the relative lack of drug cases involving the Outfit between then and now. That should tell you something.

Fourth, I'm not criticizing all of Binder's research. But there's little to no basis about his claims of the level of Outfit involvement in drugs.

Finally, I'm not sure where Scott D fits into this.

Well you love citing FBI reports and news articles about indictments than I would think even a 23 year old report from an organization like the Chicago Crime Commission would be relevant considering its history and how much time and effort this organization has devoted to investigating the Outfit. Also, have you ever thought about asking John Binder where he got his information from instead of discrediting him? In regards to Scott D, I meant to say Scott Bernstein, the one that has written books on the Outfit and has the website. Both these guys are on social media and I’m sure they could answer your question instead of you discrediting them because you don’t agree with them. No offense, but these guys have published books and actually have inside sources. Most people will believe them over you

[Patrickgold]

Wiseguy, have you read the 1997 Chicago Crime Commission report? If not I highly recommend it. Tell me what it says about the Outfit’s involvement in the narcotics business. Or is the CCC not a reputable source like John Binder and Scott D, guys that actually research, have LE and Outfit contacts that give them inside info and publish books on the Outfit.

First, that you're referring to a report from 23 years ago says something.

Second, there were some issues with that report - active crews, membership estimates, etc.

Third, regardless of what a 23 year old report says, look at the relative lack of drug cases involving the Outfit between then and now. That should tell you something.

Fourth, I'm not criticizing all of Binder's research. But there's little to no basis about his claims of the level of Outfit involvement in drugs.

Finally, I'm not sure where Scott D fits into this.

The CCC is basically an organization of prominent business men who try to make the public aware of the effects of Organized Crime. Their information is okay at best & not anywhere near the level of accuracy of the F.B.I. In addition, their estimation of 700 to 1,200 "Associates" made no sense at all & nobody knows how they came up with that highly exaggerated figure. Who knows what they were counting as "Associates"??
About 10 years later (I think it was around 2007), the Feds said there were 28 Made Men in the Outfit (including guys in prison & Inactive men) & about 100 "Associates". That ratio is more in line with reality.

That’s hilarious. “Their information is okay at best”. Wayne Johnson, who was the chief investigator for the CCC from 1997 to 2001, helped put that 1997 report together and you say his information is okay at best? A guy who investigated the Outfit his entire LE career and Has written books on the Outfit and you say his information is ok at best? Wow. I’m glad to know you, wiseguy and pogo the clown have better information than him

[Wiseguy]

Well you love citing FBI reports and news articles about indictments than I would think even a 23 year old report from an organization like the Chicago Crime Commission would be relevant considering its history and how much time and effort this organization has devoted to investigating the Outfit.

Um, no, you were simply getting desperate and had to go that far back to find something you felt supports your position.

Even the best official reports, which this was not, become outdated eventually.

Also, have you ever thought about asking John Binder where he got his information from instead of discrediting him?

I wouldn't even know how to contact him. Besides, the last 20+ years shows he's wrong on that.

In regards to Scott D, I meant to say Scott Bernstein, the one that has written books on the Outfit and has the website. Both these guys are on social media and I’m sure they could answer your question instead of you discrediting them because you don’t agree with them. No offense, but these guys have published books and actually have inside sources. Most people will believe them over you

You're new here so you're probably not aware of past issues with Scott B. I give credit where it's due. For example, I really liked his Leonetti book. But he has a long history of sloppiness. It started with his ever-growing Detroit charts on the RD forum. Early ones had about 30 members. Later ones had nearly 60. And it was only after a lot of debate that Scott said he didn't differentiate between members and associates on his chart. His charts, by the way, which showed the 21st century Detroit mob as more hierarchical than General Motors. You can also look at a lot of his info regarding Chicago or Philly, info that is always "per sources,' and it often doesn't jive with official info at that time or comes out later.

Moreover, this isn't about me vs. Scott or Binder, as much as you may want to frame it that way. It's about how well their info stacks up to evidence from the FBI or the past 20 years.

I'm sorry if the Outfit in 2020 doesn't match up to what you thought (or wish) it did. But that's not my fault.

[Patrickgold]

Well you love citing FBI reports and news articles about indictments than I would think even a 23 year old report from an organization like the Chicago Crime Commission would be relevant considering its history and how much time and effort this organization has devoted to investigating the Outfit.

Um, no, you were simply getting desperate and had to go that far back to find something you felt supports your position.

Even the best official reports, which this was not, become outdated eventually.

Also, have you ever thought about asking John Binder where he got his information from instead of discrediting him?

I wouldn't even know how to contact him. Besides, the last 20+ years shows he's wrong on that.

In regards to Scott D, I meant to say Scott Bernstein, the one that has written books on the Outfit and has the website. Both these guys are on social media and I’m sure they could answer your question instead of you discrediting them because you don’t agree with them. No offense, but these guys have published books and actually have inside sources. Most people will believe them over you

You're new here so you're probably not aware of past issues with Scott B. I give credit where it's due. For example, I really liked his Leonetti book. But he has a long history of sloppiness. It started with his ever-growing Detroit charts on the RD forum. Early ones had about 30 members. Later ones had nearly 60. And it was only after a lot of debate that Scott said he didn't differentiate between members and associates on his chart. His charts, by the way, which showed the 21st century Detroit mob as more hierarchical than General Motors. You can also look at a lot of his info regarding Chicago or Philly, info that is always "per sources,' and it often doesn't jive with official info at that time or comes out later.

Moreover, this isn't about me vs. Scott or Binder, as much as you may want to frame it that way. It's about how well their info stacks up to evidence from the FBI or the past 20 years.

I'm sorry if the Outfit in 2020 doesn't match up to what you thought (or wish) it did. But that's not my fault.

Funny how your trying to turn this into me being an Outfit fanboy, which is the only real subject that you get off at at night before you go to bed. Going after outfit fanboys!! The fact is, this is about you trying to discredit sources that don’t match up with your narrative. As I said, what does the CCC report say? That the Outfit is involved in the narcotics trade. Do you think Wayne Johnson pulled that out of his ass? When it comes to Outfit knowledge, this guy actually investigated Outfit guys since the 70s and knew them. So for you to discredit that report is wrong. You sure have a habit of trying to discredited sources that don’t match your narrative. I mean there is an entire Buffalo thread that is 300 plus pages because of you.

[Uncle Pete]

Wiseguy, have you read the 1997 Chicago Crime Commission report? If not I highly recommend it. Tell me what it says about the Outfit’s involvement in the narcotics business. Or is the CCC not a reputable source like John Binder and Scott D, guys that actually research, have LE and Outfit contacts that give them inside info and publish books on the Outfit.

First, that you're referring to a report from 23 years ago says something.

Second, there were some issues with that report - active crews, membership estimates, etc.

Third, regardless of what a 23 year old report says, look at the relative lack of drug cases involving the Outfit between then and now. That should tell you something.

Fourth, I'm not criticizing all of Binder's research. But there's little to no basis about his claims of the level of Outfit involvement in drugs.

Finally, I'm not sure where Scott D fits into this.

The CCC is basically an organization of prominent business men who try to make the public aware of the effects of Organized Crime. Their information is okay at best & not anywhere near the level of accuracy of the F.B.I. In addition, their estimation of 700 to 1,200 "Associates" made no sense at all & nobody knows how they came up with that highly exaggerated figure. Who knows what they were counting as "Associates"??
About 10 years later (I think it was around 2007), the Feds said there were 28 Made Men in the Outfit (including guys in prison & Inactive men) & about 100 "Associates". That ratio is more in line with reality.

Interesting about the CCC. Any idea as to what types of businesses and who funded these reports? Do these businesses get any sort of funding or percs for publishing this report? Just curious if they may have some sort of financial bias for being so off on the numbers

[Patrickgold]

Wiseguy, have you read the 1997 Chicago Crime Commission report? If not I highly recommend it. Tell me what it says about the Outfit’s involvement in the narcotics business. Or is the CCC not a reputable source like John Binder and Scott D, guys that actually research, have LE and Outfit contacts that give them inside info and publish books on the Outfit.

First, that you're referring to a report from 23 years ago says something.

Second, there were some issues with that report - active crews, membership estimates, etc.

Third, regardless of what a 23 year old report says, look at the relative lack of drug cases involving the Outfit between then and now. That should tell you something.

Fourth, I'm not criticizing all of Binder's research. But there's little to no basis about his claims of the level of Outfit involvement in drugs.

Finally, I'm not sure where Scott D fits into this.

The CCC is basically an organization of prominent business men who try to make the public aware of the effects of Organized Crime. Their information is okay at best & not anywhere near the level of accuracy of the F.B.I. In addition, their estimation of 700 to 1,200 "Associates" made no sense at all & nobody knows how they came up with that highly exaggerated figure. Who knows what they were counting as "Associates"??
About 10 years later (I think it was around 2007), the Feds said there were 28 Made Men in the Outfit (including guys in prison & Inactive men) & about 100 "Associates". That ratio is more in line with reality.

Interesting about the CCC. Any idea as to what types of businesses and who funded these reports? Do these businesses get any sort of funding or percs for publishing this report? Just curious if they may have some sort of financial bias for being so off on the numbers

They weren’t really off on the numbers. What they did was combine made men with top associates who were not officially made for a variety of reasons but for all purposes were full fledged members of the Outfit. Guys like Schweihs, Bock, Posner to name a few. They just used the term members if I remember correctly and not made members. Remember, even the FBI, with all its info and technology, at that time did not think the Outfit had making ceremonies like the East Coast families. This didn’t come out until Nick Calabrese flipped a couple years later. As for associates, if you actually read the report, it says that they used the estimation that each member had at least 10 associates hence the 70 members and at least 700 associates. And those associates did not mean that they were full time workers for the Outfit. It was a very loose term that could mean a variety of things.