Valid polints 90Caliber. At least you back up your opinions with fact from the movie.
[1] Do you believe that if Michael would have suspected Rocco as being the traitor who almost had him killed, where his wife slept, where his children played with their toys, that he would have kept him on the compound, where his wife lived, where his children played with their toys, for so long?
[2] Would Michael have let Rocco sit in on a meeting where they were planning how to get to Roth?
I just don't believe that he would have. Michael trusted no one after the hit attempt. He even tells this to Tom. So there is absolutey no way, as far as I'm concerned, that Michael would have let Rocco live had he suspected him, let alone give him free reign around the compound.
Good points, but I think there is a way to account for these concerns:
1) After the assassination attempt on Michael, he immediately left for Miami. Thus having Rocco on the compound posed no threat to Kay and the kids, since they are civilians, and it's Michael they were after.
2) It's important to note that Michael was not immediately certain who the traitor was. As far as he was concerned, it could have been Rocco or Neri -- as he tells Tom, both are "businessmen," with "their loyalty based on that." To put it a different way, I think your point #1 is invalidated by the fact that Michael knows right after the assassination attempt that there is a traitor in his Family, but he still leaves for Miami and Cuba knowing that the traitor, whoever it is, will be on the compound "where his wife sleeps" and "where his children play with their toys." But again, this is not a problem for him while he is away, because his wife and children are "civilians" whom Roth has no interest in killing.
3) When Michael gets back from Cuba, he is knee deep in the Senate Committee hearings. It seemed then that he was going to end up in prison for a long time, and the fact that the whole proceedings were being viewed by 50 million Americans made it problematic to have him killed at this time. If he were assassinated while he was such a highly visible figure, there would have been a lot of pressure to find out who it was, which would put Roth at great risk. Roth already failed to kill him once, so why not just wait for what to all appearances was the likelihood that Michael would be indicted and imprisoned?
4) But Roth had problems of his own. After Michael gets off the hook with the Senate, we learn that Roth and the Rosatos "are on the run." At this point Michael doesn't have to worry about someone helping Roth to kill him. Michael is now back on top, and a "businessman" would be loyal to him, not to Roth, who can't even bribe corrupt politicians to let him find a permanent residence, let alone conduct his business.
I think my points 1), 2), and 4) are the strongest. 3) still needs some work, I think.
