SAC Ahearn adds: “SSA Connolly is also well-known for his long-time association with Senate President Bugler going back many years to the neighborhood from which they both came.” Aside from being incorrect, what is the purpose in putting this into a memo that deals with the DEA distrust of the FBI with respect to Whitey? What bearing would it have on any decision which would be made?
The only reason I can think of is that the SAC wanted Sessions to know that he better be careful in making any decisions regarding Whitey or Connolly because Bill Bulger is somehow involved. That makes no sense. There is no showing Bill knows Whitey is an informant. He might be friendly with Connolly but he had no say over the FBI’s actions whatever they may be regarding him. Implicating him in this was plainly wrong. .
I have always believed Bill Bulger never knew that Whitey was an informant. First, he wrote in his book While The Music Lasts how much he loathed informants. Second, no one in the FBI ever suggested that he did. Connolly denied Bill knew it. Connolly said that was one of the conditions Whitey had in becoming an informant. The inability of the SAC to show that Bill knew tells me he did not know or else it would have been stated. This deepens the mystery of why Bill’s name is mentioned at all. Whatever happened with respect to Whitey’s relationship with Connolly would not concern him. .
It would have been simple for the SAC to say that DEA fears FBI leaks to Bulger whether justified or not and that was why they kept the FBI out of the loop. But that would have run up against the FBI’s image of itself as this totally incorruptible organization and if anyone thought otherwise then that person must have ulterior motives. The only response by the FBI to such people is to attack them believing it is protecting the FBI.
SAC Ahearn notes that others in law enforcement even in the FBI are jealous of FBI Agent Connolly because of his accomplishments. He then wrote Connolly embarrassed DA Delahunt in an investigation (probably the Myles Connors matter) and Delahunt is a close ally of Flanagan. Actually, they weren’t allies but had an arm’s length if not an estranged relationship which Ahearn would have known nothing about. He simplistically and naively concluded because both were DAs therefor they must be close. It was best to do this because it served the needs of the FBI to make this into some unjust attack on the FBI rather than a legitimate fear that the FBI was leaking things to Whitey
The SAC then wrote about allegation the FBI compromised the Lancaster Street matter as the basis for the reluctance to include the FBI in the investigation. The SAC said that matter “was investigated exhaustively by previous SACS and found groundless.” Which is a lie as I have shown in other posts. That prior investigation involved questioning corrupt agent John Morris and then, as here, suggesting some political or ulterior reasons for the complaint. Morris, as was his wont, lied through his teeth so badly that within weeks he was changing his story and entangling himself in his web of lies ever more firmly. Yet it passed the FBI truthfulness test.
Then again the SAC lied. He said “and we have, ,in fact, indicted a MSP [Massachusetts State Police] officer in an unrelated matter who was advising OC figures of the location and identity of FBI wiretaps.” This referred to Trooper Naimovich who was indicted for taking money from a local bookie in exchange for information. It had nothing to do with FBI wiretaps. He would be acquitted. The person who was advising OC figures of that information was an FBI employee.
Again see how curve balls are thrown up against the existing problem that the FBI has been leaking stuff to its informants. Ahearn avoids dealing with it. He writes, “because of jealousies, rumors and unfounded distrust, DA FLANAGAN chose not to involve the FBI in this investigation, possibly with the purpose in mind of public embarrassment to the FBI.” None of that was shown but it was conjectured out of thin air.