Mike Mancuso put a contract on Cammaranos

[Antiliar]

Is Fiordilino legit or another nobody pretending he was LCN?

Frank was a Bonanno associate whose father was a captain and who has a long pedigree going way back in Castellammare.

[OcSleeper]

Is Fiordilino legit or another nobody pretending he was LCN?

Frank was a Bonanno associate whose father was a captain and who has a long pedigree going way back in Castellammare.

Wasn't his father legit? It was his extended family who were involved with the life.

[Antiliar]

Is Fiordilino legit or another nobody pretending he was LCN?

Frank was a Bonanno associate whose father was a captain and who has a long pedigree going way back in Castellammare.

Wasn't his father legit? It was his extended family who were involved with the life.

Correction: Frank's uncle. Credit to B for the reminder.

[Wiseguy]

Lavechia said he wanted to do a story on it but couldnt get any sources at all that knew anything about it.

Lavechia needs to contact Per Sources. That guy has all the info.

[B.]

Three of Frank's relatives were Bonanno captains, two of his first cousins are current Bonanno members, and other relatives were made in CDG. He's also a cousin of Dino Calabro of the Colombos.

[Antiliar]

Lavechia said he wanted to do a story on it but couldnt get any sources at all that knew anything about it.

Lavechia needs to contact Per Sources. That guy has all the info.

This bullshit is getting old. Yes, Scott has sources. He's a journalist, an author, a podcaster, and an attorney. A lot of us who write have insider sources whose names we can't reveal because it would endanger their lives. He's putting out there what his sources are telling him, which he doesn't have to do. That shouldn't be news. I've known Scott for a long time and he doesn't lie in his articles. Does it mean that everything is necessarily 100% accurate? Not even the New York Times is close to 90% accurate. It means he accurately reports what his sources tell him. You don't have to agree with what they say, but don't disparage Scott's integrity.

[mr white]

I agree its definitely old...and nobody is really ever going to start believing in Scott having street sources in NYC while he lives in Michigan. Its fuckin' silly. Its all hearsay and the guys reading these boards have been getting better gossip for decades.. And it seems like most of the board has a hard time believing in the way Scott B. uses his sources or dont even think he has actual sources. I think he does have sources....such as other amateur historians, writers, podcasters, Pennisi and his types, etc....all just rumors and hearsay and Capeci remains the authority on NYC and sources...and his are the cops and feds that won't talk to Scott...

[Angelo Santino]

Despite this, there's other sources claiming it is going on. I don't care either way.

Thanks. Who are the other sources?

Sources I can't go into. But the source I mentioned earlier saying it was all BS was Frank, I'll reveal it now since he went public. He has relatives still in that life and, if "mobtube" has taught us anything these guys aren't living under the threat of death like the documentaries would have us believe, they all still have contacts to their neighborhoods and some have even moved back and faced no reprisals. I posted the Frank video because I'm trying to be objective and its part of this.

Do I agree? Ain't the question, in time it'll be revealed whether this "war" is true or not. I don't need it to be one way or the other.

Here's another article written about this war, but the writer went off of what Scott previously wrote so it adds nothing new- https://www.barstoolsports.com/blog/345 ... -right-now

[SonnyBlackstein]

Lavechia said he wanted to do a story on it but couldnt get any sources at all that knew anything about it.

Lavechia needs to contact Per Sources. That guy has all the info.

This bullshit is getting old. Yes, Scott has sources. He's a journalist, an author, a podcaster, and an attorney. A lot of us who write have insider sources whose names we can't reveal because it would endanger their lives. He's putting out there what his sources are telling him, which he doesn't have to do. That shouldn't be news. I've known Scott for a long time and he doesn't lie in his articles. Does it mean that everything is necessarily 100% accurate? Not even the New York Times is close to 90% accurate. It means he accurately reports what his sources tell him. You don't have to agree with what they say, but don't disparage Scott's integrity.

No Antiliar. You're wrong.

Scott made outrageous claims without supporting evidence. He opened hinself up to not only skepticism, but justified ridicule. He wants the clicks? Fine. Go to town on your literary license. But don't cry poor when people call you out. Bullets flying and t-shirts? And you call bullshit on us.

Yes Scott is relaying sources, but at his own prerogative. Per sources tell him Santa is on a hit team and Scott washes his hands? Sure. It's all the 'sources' fault.

You publish for clicks, you take responsibility.

And I'll eat my words if I'm wrong.

[Ivan]

Here's another article written about this war, but the writer went off of what Scott previously wrote so it adds nothing new- https://www.barstoolsports.com/blog/345 ... -right-now

New thing in that article is the claim that Cammarano indeed lives on New Woods Road, where the shooting happened. Someone on here said he actually lived on a different road. I looked it up on google maps and it's two miles away from New Woods Road.

[Wiseguy]

Lavechia said he wanted to do a story on it but couldnt get any sources at all that knew anything about it.

Lavechia needs to contact Per Sources. That guy has all the info.

This bullshit is getting old. Yes, Scott has sources. He's a journalist, an author, a podcaster, and an attorney. A lot of us who write have insider sources whose names we can't reveal because it would endanger their lives. He's putting out there what his sources are telling him, which he doesn't have to do. That shouldn't be news. I've known Scott for a long time and he doesn't lie in his articles. Does it mean that everything is necessarily 100% accurate? Not even the New York Times is close to 90% accurate. It means he accurately reports what his sources tell him. You don't have to agree with what they say, but don't disparage Scott's integrity.

Then he needs better sources. None of this is personal. Scott seems like a genuinely nice guy. But I could go through a laundry list of his, well, inaccuracies.

[Antiliar]

Lavechia said he wanted to do a story on it but couldnt get any sources at all that knew anything about it.

Lavechia needs to contact Per Sources. That guy has all the info.

This bullshit is getting old. Yes, Scott has sources. He's a journalist, an author, a podcaster, and an attorney. A lot of us who write have insider sources whose names we can't reveal because it would endanger their lives. He's putting out there what his sources are telling him, which he doesn't have to do. That shouldn't be news. I've known Scott for a long time and he doesn't lie in his articles. Does it mean that everything is necessarily 100% accurate? Not even the New York Times is close to 90% accurate. It means he accurately reports what his sources tell him. You don't have to agree with what they say, but don't disparage Scott's integrity.

No Antiliar. You're wrong.

Scott made outrageous claims without supporting evidence. He opened hinself up to not only skepticism, but justified ridicule. He wants the clicks? Fine. Go to town on your literary license. But don't cry poor when people call you out. Bullets flying and t-shirts? And you call bullshit on us.

Yes Scott is relaying sources, but at his own prerogative. Per sources tell him Santa is on a hit team and Scott washes his hands? Sure. It's all the 'sources' fault.

You publish for clicks, you take responsibility.

And I'll eat my words if I'm wrong.

No, I'm not wrong. What supporting evidence would you like? You want him to bring a camera up to Mancuso Chuck Goudie-style and ask him if he has out for Joe C? Or do you want Joe C to go on Scott's podcast and say, "Yup. Everything Scott wrote is true"?

In the meantime, what evidence do you have that I'm wrong or that Scott is?

[Angelo Santino]

The Scott bashing really needs to be toned down. You don't like the guy, you think his writing sucks, you think he has no credibility. OK, WE GOT IT. Loud and clear. Constructive criticism or skepticism is fine but when its page after page with unproductive criticisms and mockery it's become redundant and reflects poorly on this forum.

If he's wrong then it'll come out and then what? Saint Capeci has made mistakes in the past that he's had to correct, had Scott wrote that Amuso and Gotti were replaced and then two years later issued a retraction and correction there'd be a 10 page thread.

[Guest]

It doesn't take a genius to see the incentive for more content as well as more sensationalized reporting with the addition of the GR pay wall. This whole "war" is perfectly timed with his new revenue stream. Frank F was right but if he knew the pay wall angle he could have been more credible. Tom LaCuckia is still and always will be an absolute fucking jerkoff.

[jimmyb]

Ok, I'll take the bait. I'm posting this for people on the forum who are undecided or inclined to give Scott benefit of doubt. Joey C could show up to a Scott haters' home and tell them this is all true, and they still wouldn't believe it because Scott reported it. But if you have an open mind, you may find this useful.

In terms of Scott having NY sources, how can a guy in Detroit establish NY sources? First of all, Scott was in NY last week. Is it that crazy to think a reporter can travel between different cities? There's also this thing called email, social media, and phones. Believe it or not, people in Detroit can communicate with people outside of Michigan.

I'm only speaking for myself, but I talk to underworld sources from time to time. In some cases made guys. I don't care if you believe it or not. And no, they're not all in Detroit. In fact, most are not. Some share gossip with me. I admit I don't spend much time verifying it because it's not part of my research agenda. I'm not a reporter. I will privately share some things with trusted members of this forum and we speculate on the validity of the intel, but that's as far as I take it. If it turns out the source was misinformed or bullshitting, then whatever because I didn't talk about it publicly anyhow.

Now is Mancuso trying to kill Joe C? I don't know. I don't feel comfortable saying much, but I am friendly with people who know the Cammaranos. The skeptics can believe it or not. People with zero experience in field research can believe what they want. I have seen visual evidence that confirm these relationships with Joe and his brother. I have shared that evidence (more than one piece of evidence, mind you) with some friends on this forum. In one specific case, I showed a picture to someone and asked them not to talk about it. They wrote about it anyhow and I got into trouble with my source. Of course, now that specific image is a source of ridicule on this thread. You can do the math in terms of what image I'm talking about.

Now if the skeptics think I'm going to out my sources on a public forum, you're fucking stunad. My overall point is: people who research this for a living develop underworld sources. I find it interesting that people without any field experience find this so puzzling. Are these sources always reliable? Of course not. Scott is the first to admit he gets bit sometimes (by underworld and LE sources). So we'll see what happens. But he's not making this up. Are his sources misinformed or misleading him? Idk. Again, not my research agenda.