Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Al Sharpton - FBI Snitch?

Al Sharpton - FBI Snitch?
Thread Tools
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2014, 08:32 AM
 
Are they going to re-invent Sharpton now? Saint Tawana Sharpton...

Al Sharpton's Secret Work As FBI Informant | The Smoking Gun
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2014, 01:51 PM
 
He says the "Smoking Gun" report is "erroneous" but doesn't deny working for the FBI. I understand that this story has been around for awhile. If true, I'm surprised the Mob hasn't dealt with him.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
BadKosh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2014, 02:32 PM
 
That's what I was thinking. Maybe they didn't want to be labeled as racist...
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2014, 04:07 PM
 
Any reason to out an informant? That's usually a low-class move in my book.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 08:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Any reason to out an informant? That's usually a low-class move in my book.
I'm inclined to agree. While "Nice try, but we gotcha" Sharpton is a bottom-feeding charlatan of the highest order and his past not as an informant, but as a "connected-guy" with the mob is tantalizing with all the hypocrisy inherent in it, it does no good to bring it up now and I don't believe the sentence for Sharpton's shenanigans should be death.
ebuddy
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 02:51 PM
 
This is really old news. Mentioned ... perhaps only in part ... by Sharpton himself in his 1996 book ""Go and Tell Pharaoh". In the early 1980s Sharpton and some associates were trying to get into the music business which at the time had been infiltrated by the Genovese crime family. The wiseguys didn't like the competition and some low-level mobsters threatened them if they continued. Sharpton approached the FBI and told them about the threats. The FBI then asked him to record conversations with various mobsters with a bug planted in his briefcase. Sharpton cooperated with the investigation which eventually led to the the convictions of famed music industry executive Morris Levy ... who by the way was renowned for cheating his black R&B music artists out of their royalties for decades ... and Genovese crime family Boss Vincent Gigante ... the guy who notoriously used to wander around NYC in a bathrobe pretending to be mentally ill.

And for the record, a "snitch" is someone who is A) engaged in illegal activity, B) gets caught by the legal authorities, and C) subsequently informs on the illegal activities of his criminal cohorts to the legal authorities in exchange for a reduced sentence, dropped charges, etc. This is by no means the situation with Sharpton's involvement with the FBI. And for this website to expose his confidential cooperation with the FBI could potentially endanger his life and that of his family if the mobsters involved weren't already aware of his involvement.

OAW

PS: And people wonder why those that live in crime-ridden areas aren't too eager to act like "Johnny B. Goodcitizen" and help the cops solve crimes. Not when they can be thrown under the bus later by someone with an axe to grind.
     
BadKosh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 03:09 PM
 
But you said Sharpton had talked about this in his book. Maybe they just don't care?
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 03:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
But you said Sharpton had talked about this in his book. Maybe they just don't care?
I also said "perhaps only in part". IOW, I haven't read the book myself but what if he mentioned that the mobsters made the threats ... but didn't mention that he subsequently cooperated with the FBI and recorded conversations? If that's the case these revelations could quite literally endanger his life. But if he did mention that part then chances are they don't care. But this is the Mafia we are talking about here. Which scenario would you bet your next paycheck on?

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 03:57 PM
 
It was a long-ass article, but I seem to recall from it he got busted facilitating a drug deal, which would make him a snitch.

But, umm, regardless of the title, I think helping to put vicious murderers away is what is known as the parlance as a good thing.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 03:59 PM
 
By far, the more interesting part of the article was learning Rodney Dangerfield was both "connected" and a felon.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 04:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It was a long-ass article, but I seem to recall from it he got busted facilitating a drug deal, which would make him a snitch.

But, umm, regardless of the title, I think helping to put vicious murderers away is what is known as the parlance as a good thing.
Yeah, but to many in the AA community, any cooperation with the FBI is a bad thing.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 04:13 PM
 
Well, that's the government program which got us J. Edgar, so talking to them is something of a mixed bag. This is true across all communities.

IMO, the key is what is told to them.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 07:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It was a long-ass article, but I seem to recall from it he got busted facilitating a drug deal, which would make him a snitch.

But, umm, regardless of the title, I think helping to put vicious murderers away is what is known as the parlance as a good thing.
What this all boils down do is the Post hoc logical fallacy. IOW ... "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X."

Actually what happened was that the FBI tried to entrap Sharpton in a drug "sting" that bore no fruit. He was never cooperating with the Feds because there were any charges hanging over his head. See for yourself ...

The report states that agents approached Sharpton after he was caught speaking to an undercover agent about drugs, though he did not explicitly offer to arrange a drug deal. That tape surfaced in 2002 in an HBO show as he was thinking about running for president.

In an interview on CNN’s “Crossfire” that same year, Sharpton explained the tape and denied he did anything wrong.

“One first would have to ask the question, Why would the FBI be trying to entrap me and then 19 years later come out with part of the tape, rather than coming out with the end of the situation, where we clearly said we wouldn't do drugs,” he said, adding that the HBO show should have aired more of the tape, which would have told the whole story.

He added at the time that he didn’t know the dealer was an FBI agent until “later” when “they came and said that he was an undercover agent.”

Asked if he became an informant, Sharpton, as he’s done this week, fired back and disputed that being an informant is a bad thing.

“To cooperate with the government is - in those cases, informant? I don't think so,” he said.

Sharpton reiterated Tuesday that the situation was being misconstrued, and he cast blame on the media for drawing conclusions that Sharpton's assistance to the FBI had derived from legal troubles.

"And I guess the message (the media) want to give is 'Don't do that because some wanna act like you a turncoat, like you are a criminal.' We're not criminals. We're not thugs. We are not those that find comfort having them in our community," he said.
Sharpton denies any wrongdoing in FBI informant role – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Think about it guys. The FBI has a long-history of targeting black activists. COINTELPRO anyone? MLK and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference ... Elijah Muhammad, Malcolm X, and Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam ... Marcus Garvey ... W.E.B. DuBois ... NAACP ... Congress of Racial Equality ... Black Panthers ... etc. And yes Al Sharpton and the National Action Network too. This man was a candidate in the 2004 Presidential election for God's sake. Does anyone here really think that if there was actually some dirt on him involving real drug charges it wouldn't have come out by now? Notice that even with this re-hash of old news there are still no reports that Sharpton was ever facing such charges. It just wants those who are inclined to view him negatively ... legitimately or otherwise ... to jump to the conclusion that he must have been. Why else would he be cooperating with an FBI investigation right? And this "news" drops right before President Obama is scheduled to speak at the Annual Convention of the National Action Network in NYC. Interesting ...

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 08:21 PM
 
Why would you put it past the FBI to use the threat of prosecution as leverage?
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 08:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Why would you put it past the FBI to use the threat of prosecution as leverage?
That's what I'm saying about "real drug charges". Something that the FBI could actually prosecute or even threaten to prosecute. They simply weren't there. The so-called "sting" they tried to get Sharpton on fizzled out and produced nothing. As the tape he alluded to demonstrates. When you listen to it in its entirety that is.

OAW
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 09:33 PM
 
Forgive me if I missed something here. How does him saying he won't do drugs (which I understand is what's at the end of the tape) change the "I will get you drugs" in the earlier part of the tape?
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2014, 11:00 PM
 
The part I quoted him saying in the article isn't what was said on the tape verbatim. The point was that the tape showed that the "sting" resulted in nothing because he wasn't engaged in anything criminal. Again, if there was these reports that are coming out including these confidential documents would STATE that rather than IMPLY it.

OAW
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2014, 08:15 AM
 
Agents showed Sharpton a video they made of him attempting to make a drug deal with an undercover agent posing as a South American drug-lord and he folded. The "Rev" was flipped, plain and simple. This wasn't some noble attempt by softy to rid the neighborhood of a mob-crime family.

Ridiculous. He was stung and went stool-pigeon to save his own ass. Period.
ebuddy
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2014, 02:50 PM
 
I'm still lost here.

If you tell an undercover agent on tape you can get them large quantities of drugs, expect a hard time to follow.
     
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:38 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2