Skip to content

Month: July 2019

Love it or leave it?

Love it or leave it?

by digby

Says the man whose inaugural address has been named the “American Carnage Speech.”

More from our president:

He’s doubling down on the racism because he knows it’s what his people want. If you don’t believe me, listen to the deafening silence from all Republican officials.

.

So much for Trump’s populism

So much for Trump’s populism

by digby

Kevin Drum has some bad news for America’s workers:

The Wall Street Journal reports that Donald Trump’s tariffs are, um:

U.S. manufacturers are shifting production to countries outside of China as trade tensions between the world’s two biggest economies stretch into a second year….The biggest beneficiaries of that decline have been other countries in Asia where production costs are low, such as Vietnam, India, Taiwan and Malaysia. 

Wait. What about America?

There is little evidence, though, of U.S. manufacturers bringing production from China back to the U.S., a move the Trump administration hoped the tariffs would encourage. While imports from other Asian countries have climbed, U.S. manufacturing output has declined 1.5% through May from a recent peak reached in December, according to the Federal Reserve. The Institute for Supply Management said earlier this month that its manufacturing index slipped again in June to the lowest level since 2016.

US imports in 2019 from China and the other top ten losers total $39.5 billion less than last year. However, imports from the top ten winners total $38.5 billion more:

Kevin notes:

Anyone who wants to pretend this is great news for American workers is just joining in the Trump con. Tariffs on China might eventually force them to change some of their bad trade behavior—if Trump is smart enough to cut a serious deal—but that’s all. It will do nothing to bring low-value manufacturing back to the United States.

Well, that works out just fine for the corporations, doesn’t it?

Trump is a Republican after all.

*and no Trump isn’t smart enough to cut a serious deal.

.

The racism is the strategy

The racism is the strategy

by digby

My Salon column this morning:

If you doubted that the 2020 presidential campaign will be the ugliest you’ve ever experienced, the past few days should have disabused you of that. It’s been a descent into grotesque racism and xenophobia on a level we haven’t seen in our national politics for many decades. And it’s not just a matter of Donald Trump acting out and having one of his regular tantrums. There’s a rationale behind his behavior that’s extremely disturbing.

As everyone is well aware by now — or should be — the refugee camps at the border are a national disgrace. If this was happening in another country (and if we had a different president) the United States would be leading the charge to condemn what was happening. The plight of families, particularly the kids, is an ongoing nightmare and Trump seems determined to exploit the pain and suffering of these vulnerable people to keep the country in a constant state of hysteria.

I noted last week that Trump had mentioned in passing that he wanted to take reporters to a recently cleaned-up facility featuring happy, well-fed children to prove how “fake” the reports of cruel and disgusting conditions were. So last Friday officials rounded up the vice president and a couple of senators, including Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, and brought them in for an “inspection.” The propaganda ploy was exactly as one might expect: The kids were in a new, air-conditioned facility and seemed to be well cared for.

But even after observing and writing about the Trump administration’s depraved use of xenophobia, racism and general fear-mongering for years now, I’m never quite prepared for the depths to which they will sink. I assumed they were doing this because they believed they needed to reassure their own voters of their basic humanity. I was wrong. The visit to the kiddie-camp was a little sop to some embarrassed churchgoers and the press. What Team Trump really wanted their voters to see was another camp — the one with hundreds of single, dark-skinned men in overcrowded cages, sleeping on concrete floors, desperately trying to get the attention of the exalted visitors from Washington to let them know what was going on.

As I see it, Trump officials wanted to reassure their voters that they were treating the scary brown people with much cruelty as they could get away with.

The Washington Post described it like this:

When Vice President Pence visited a migrant detention center here Friday, he saw nearly 400 men crammed behind caged fences with not enough room for them all to lie down on the concrete ground. There were no mats or pillows for those who found the space to rest. A stench from body odor hung stale in the air. When reporters toured the facility before Pence, the men screamed that they’d been held there 40 days, some longer. They said they were hungry and wanted to brush their teeth. It was sweltering hot, but the only water was outside the fences and they needed to ask permission from the Border Patrol agents to drink. 

Pence appeared to scrunch his nose when entering the facility, stayed for a moment and left.

The men told reporters they hadn’t been allowed a shower for as long as 40 days in some cases. There have been reports that the CPB officers’ uniforms are so inundated with the smell of hundreds of unbathed humans in a small space that the local townspeople avoid them.

Pence objected to media coverage of this event over the weekend, complaining that they failed to show the nice pictures of the happy children and instead focused on the misery of all those men caged up like animals. But you’ll notice that he immediately turns to the claim that many of the men were criminals, a charge Trump himself made over the weekend as well.

I’ll say it again: If they hadn’t wanted people to see those men being held in inhumane conditions, they wouldn’t have gone there with the press in tow.

Lindsey Graham made it very clear what they were up to. “I don’t care if they have to stay in these facilities for 400 days,” he said. “We’re not going to let those men go that I saw. It would be dangerous.” That’s right: Apparently he could tell that they were dangerous just by looking at them.

He must be as psychic as acting Border Patrol head Mark Morgan, who told Tucker Carlson, “I’ve been to detention facilities where I’ve walked up to these individuals that are so-called minors, 17 or under. I’ve looked at them — and I’ve looked at their eyes, Tucker — and I’ve said, ‘That is a soon-to-be MS-13 gang member.’ It’s unequivocal.”

So it’s no coincidence, I’m sure, that in the same week Trump announced that ICE would be conducting raids around the country to round up alleged criminals who have managed to avoid being thrown in cages, after which they will either be jailed or deported or both. Reports from major cities show that immigrant communities are now living in the grip of a terrible fear, which is half the point of doing it. The other half is to make Republican voters believe that Donald Trump is as tough and macho as he constantly proclaims himself to be.

I was prepared to call Pence’s border tour the most insidious public demonstration of bigotry we’d seen in many a moon. But Trump took it to a whole other level on Sunday with his openly racist tweets about the four freshman Democratic women of color, in which he basically told them to go back to their shithole countries.

This escalation of bigotry is no coincidence. I’m not saying that Trump sat down and strategized all this. He doesn’t do that. But he has a well-honed feral instinct about the ugly underbelly of American life and he knows how to make it work for him. As Peter Baker of the New York Times put it:

His assumption that the House Democrats must have been born in another country — or that they did not belong here if they were — fits an us-against-them political strategy that has been at the heart of Mr. Trump’s presidency from the start. Heading into next year’s election, he appears to be drawing a deep line between the white, native-born America of his memory and the ethnically diverse, increasingly foreign-born country he is presiding over, challenging voters in 2020 to declare which side of that line they are on.

Democrats can argue among themselves about ideology over the next year or so if they wish. But essentially, that’s what the 2020 election is going to be about whether they like it or not. Trump welcomes it because he believes that most Americans are as racist as he is and that he will be rewarded for this indecency with a second term. Expect this bigoted talk to ratchet up to levels we never imagined could be uttered in 21st-century America before this is all over. It already has.

Take his racism seriously but not literally — or should we take it literally but not seriously?

Take his racism seriously but not literally — or should we take it literally but not seriously?

by digby

Roy Edroso unpacks Salena Zito’s latest Trump voter whispering:

The latest This Is Good News for Trump story from White Working Class Whisperer Salena Zito is “Why America’s tariff-hit farmers still support Trump.” The farmers she quotes are eloquent about how hard they work, but not so great at explaining why they love the President (“I’ve been very pleasantly surprised with a lot of the policies and a lot of the actions that he’s taken” is typical). And it’s not even clear from Zito’s stats that dairy farmers really are hanging in with MAGA:

In 2016, rural Americans, a category that includes all of America’s farmers and ranchers, overwhelmingly voted for Trump; he earned 62 percent of the vote compared to Democrat Hillary Clinton’s 34 percent, according to Pew Research analysis…  

Yet, despite a flurry of national stories warning that farmers are moving away from Trump because of his trade policies, a recent Gallup survey showed that 53 percent of rural residents approve of the job the president is doing.

Not sure exactly how 62 percent of “farmers and ranchers” supporting Trump in 2016 correlates to 53 percent of “rural residents” supporting Trump in 2020, but it looks like a drop to me.

That’s not even the weirdest part. Zito writes:

The 32-year-old [dairy farmer] also manages the crew of 40 to 50 employees who make sure those of us at home can pick up a bottle of fresh milk, aged cheese or tangy yogurt at our local grocery. 

That is, of course, unless you have bought into the latest dietary fad and don’t consume dairy — a shift that has hit farmers’ bottom line with as much force as weather patterns and President Trump’s trade war with China.

A fad — like avocado toast! Maybe Millennials are killing the dairy industry, as they have so much else.

Where’s Zito getting this idea of fad diets killing the dairy industry from? Not from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, which shows that between 2016 and 2017, the last two years for which it has data, dairy product consumption went down a mere two pounds per capita — from 645 to 643 pounds — while over a ten-year period (2007-2017) consumption of dairy products actually went up 30 pounds per person, 613 to 643 pounds.

Zito may be thinking of fluid milk consumption (no cheese, no yogurt, etc.). Sales of fluid milk are down year-on-year, and down over ten years — and in fact down since the 1980s, which would be a weird definition of “the latest dietary fad.”

Zito may have been relying on a 2018 Fox News story which talked about the drop in milk sales (“Just three decades ago, America was a milk guzzling nation”) and cited “more milk substitutes on the market offering less fat and more flavor” and “the medical debate over milk’s health value” as factors. I could see how someone might look at that and say, “sure, fad diets are killing the dairy industry, not verkakte trade policies” — though I can’t imagine that same person thinking for more than a few seconds after that, remembering Mexico’s recent 10 percent retaliatory hike in its tariff on American cheese, and not thinking better of the idea. But then, maybe that person would have a reason for portraying a big hit to a major American business as the fault of silly almond-milk-slurping hippies.

A disheveled and confused Salena Zito appeared on CNN on Sunday to try to explain why it’s no big deal that Trump just blurted out his most racist statement yet on twitter. She said she wished she had stayed in church although it really appeared as if she might have had a very long night. And she tried to go with the White House line that Trump wasn’t saying they should go back to their shithole countries as an insult — he sincerely meant they should fix the problems in their homelands and then come back here to tell us all how they did it — but even she couldn’t quite deliver such a fatuous line.

I’m surprised she didn’t reprise her famous line, “they take him seriously not literally” but with racism that distinction doesn’t really fly does it?

The best Republicans have to offer by @BloggersRUs

The best Republicans have to offer
by Tom Sullivan

The world has condemned the acting U.S. president’s racist tweets Sunday morning in which he told Democratic congresswomen they should go back to the countries they came from.

Donald Trump was responding to four congresswomen of color, and likely a fifth. Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Deb Haaland of New Mexico criticized the president and his policies Saturday morning at the annual Netroots Nation conference in Philadelphia. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) did not attend, but is frequently considered among the young freshmen legislators of The Squad (except Haaland). All except Omar (born in Somalia) are native born Americans. Haaland is Native American. Ocasio-Cortez was born of Puerto Rican parents in the Bronx just miles from Trump’s birthplace.

The women, he said, “originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world.” For four out of the five, that would be Trump’s own. The “many terrible things they say about the United States” must not go unanswered, Trump added.

“This from the guy who constantly says the US has been a weak, stupid country led by weak stupid leaders for the last 60 years,” Digby observed.

“The president* of the United States is the kind of racist you find in a neighborhood saloon in which everybody moves to the other end of the bar,” responded Esquire’s Charlie Pierce. Trump’s is the kind of ignorance that broadcasts itself even more belligerently when challenged.

This is how the GOP’s infamous Southern Strategy ends. A fool and a bigot occupies the Oval Office intent on deporting anyone non-white. A U.S. president separates migrant families and cages non-white migrants and legal asylum seekers, small children among them, in overcrowded and unsanitary detention camps condemned by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Homeland Security’s own review calls the camps dangerously overcrowded. Multiple children have died in government custody. A president who in 2018 condemned Oakland, Calif., Mayor Libby Schaaf for alerting residents to immigration raids publicizes them himself. It gets his face on TV.

Trump’s party — now it is Trump’s party — is determined to rig both the census and legislative districting. One nation under Trump schemes to secure power for white conservatives by turning minorities into “three-fifths” people under-represented in government, if not barred from voting altogether.

The Republican party abandoned the Constitution and democracy for racism, authoritarianism, nativism and xenophobia decades ago. The war crimes of the George W. Bush administration once appeared to be the crowning achievement of “greed is good” conservatism. Yet, below Bush was Trump. That pit is bottomless.

Never-Trumper Bill Kristol reacted to Trump’s Sunday tweets by asking GOP leaders, donors and voters if they could do no better than Trump:

As if in answer, Trump toady Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina confirmed the party could not. CBP’s Transport, Escort, Detention and Search standards provide that “[d]etainees should generally not be held for longer than 72 hours in CBP hold rooms or holding facilities.” Responding to the humanitarian crisis the Trump administration has created on the southern border, Graham told Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business Network he didn’t care if Trump held migrants in camps for 400 days.

Does a soulectomy hurt, senator?

The racism goes all the way back to his privileged childhood

The racism goes all the way back to his privileged childhood
by digby

This oral history of Trump’s racism is worth listening to:

The first quotation from Donald Trump ever to appear in The New York Timescame on October 16, 1973. Trump was responding to charges filed by the Justice Department alleging racial bias at his family’s real-estate company. “They are absolutely ridiculous,” Trump said of the charges. “We have never discriminated, and we never would.” 

In the years since then, Trump has assembled a long record of comment on issues involving African Americans as well as Mexicans, Hispanics more broadly, Native Americans, Muslims, Jews, immigrants, women, and people with disabilities. His statements have been reflected in his behavior—from public acts (placing ads calling for the execution of five young black and Latino men accused of rape, who were later shown to be innocent) to private preferences (“When Donald and Ivana came to the casino, the bosses would order all the black people off the floor,” a former employee of Trump’s Castle, in Atlantic City, New Jersey, told a writer for The New Yorker). Trump emerged as a political force owing to his full-throated embrace of “birtherism,” the false charge that the nation’s first black president, Barack Obama, was not born in the United States. His presidential campaign was fueled by nativist sentiment directed at nonwhite immigrants, and he proposed barring Muslims from entering the country. In 2016, Trump described himself to The Washington Post as “the least racist person that you’ve ever encountered.”

There has never been any doubt that the man is a full-blown racist. Today’s temper tantrum was just his bigoted id losing control.

You can listen to the podcast here.

Republican officials are beside themselves with glee at the prospect of tens of millions losing their health care

Republican officials are beside themselves with glee at the prospect of tens of millions losing their health care

by digby

They are so excited that this ludicrous lawsuit might just succeed. Sure, it will kill people but that’s why it’s so good:

Republicans have no real plan to establish a new health care system if the courts strike down the Affordable Care Act before the 2020 election. But plenty of them are rooting for its demise anyway — even if it means plunging the GOP into a debate that splits the party and leaves them politically vulnerable.

After a decade of trying to gut Obamacare, Republicans may finally get their wish thanks to a Trump administration-backed lawsuit. Its success would cause chaos not only in the insurance markets but on Capitol Hill. And Republican senators largely welcome it — even if they don’t know what comes next.

“I’m ready for it to succeed,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). “I would love to get back in and actually deal with health care again.”

“Do I hope the lawsuit succeeds? I do,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “What I wish is we had some idea where we are going if it does succeed, as it looks more and more like it might.”

Even Republicans not known for taking a hard line are eager for a forcing mechanism to take on Obamacare.

“I have a plan that I would be delighted to have Congress pick up and go forward with,” added Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) of a proposal to protect pieces of the law. “Necessity is the mother of acceptance. I hope that we reach that necessity and that would propel my proposal to see a good deal of support.”

Both Cramer and Romney said GOP discussions were picking up about how to step in if the law falls after a U.S. appeals court indicated last week it could kill all or part of the law, though the Supreme Court would have the final say. Democrats and Republicans are also working on a modest package of bills intended to lower health care costs.

But when it comes to major changes to Obamacare, the parties aren’t talking.

Democratic leaders have no intention of working with the GOP since they want the Affordable Care Act to survive. And there’s no reason to think that Senate Republicans could unify on a replacement to the law after previously failing to do so.

“If it did succeed, I would be very concerned,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) of the lawsuit. “I don’t think there’s a plan in place to take care of individuals who’ve been using the exchanges to purchase their insurance or who have been covered under the Medicaid expansion. I’m just hoping the court doesn’t strike it down.”

Democrats are ready to hammer Republicans if the law gets taken down because of the GOP lawsuit. Democrats took back the House last year in large part because of their focus on health care.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the GOP’s stance “repeal without a replace.”

“Every plan Republicans have put forward has failed to maintain the protections offered under the current law,” he said. “It’s pretty simple: If you care about maintaining protections for people with preexisting conditions, you don’t demand they be taken away.”

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), a close Schumer ally, added, “They better do something. If not, this is all on them. This is all on Mitch McConnell.”

Narrator: Even if they wanted to, which they don’t, they don’t know what to do.

Republicans may be wagering that Democrats would jump into negotiations to protect popular provisions in Obamacare and somehow forge a new compromise health care law — all in the heat of the presidential campaign. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has said Congress would act immediately on pre-existing conditions if the courts strike down that part of the law.

I’m sure McConnell will put some piece of garbage on the floor and hold a gun to Democrats’ heads. The problem is that when the require insurers to cover pre-existing conditions they will also allow insurers to charge whatever they want. So sure, rich people and people with great employer insurance will be able to get coverage. Everyone else will be SOOL.

The exchanges will immediately be dismantled and the Medicaid funding will immediately dry up so that will be that. The suffering would be monumental for tens of millions of Americans. I think that’s a feature not a bug. Taking sadistic pleasure at the misfortune of others is now the main organizing principle of the Republican party.

But it’s also possible that the law would simply collapse and Congress play a blame game for months as millions of Americans struggle to deal with the fallout. Republican efforts to create a new law fell short in 2017, and Democrats are not exactly unified on whether to protect Obamacare or embrace a larger role for government like with “Medicare for All.”

Please. Democrats are most certainly unified in protecting Obamacare through any transition to a different plan fergawdsakes!
I know Joe Biden has been fearmongering about this with Medicare for All but he’s full of shit. No Democrats will vote to just stop Obamacare with nothing to replace it. Until recently, nobody even thought the Republicans would do that. They have, of course, dived heard first of the side of Trump Mountain so they’re excited at the prospect of people dying.

The Democrats may be far gone, but they aren’t quite there yet.

.

Taxpayers are helping to keep Trump’s white elephant golf course afloat

Taxpayers are helping to keep Trump’s white elephant golf course afloat

by digby

There is no end to the grift:

The US State Department authorised the payment, worth more than £11,000, for rooms at Trump Turnberry over the next three weeks.

The US State Department has spent more than 75,000 pounds at Turnberry since last April. Picture: John Devlin.

It is the first such payment made by the US federal government to Mr Trump’s struggling property in nearly a year, and comes amid growing unrest in the US Congress over the spending of US taxpayers’ money at the president’s companies.

Since Mr Trump entered office, the State Department has made at least four separate payments to Turnberry’s corporate entity. The latest brings the total spend to more than £75,000.

Ethics watchdogs warned the American public was “effectively subsidising” Mr Trump’s company, which has yet to turn a profit under his ownership, and said the 73-year-old was becoming “more and more brazen about using the presidency to advance his businesses.”

However, the Trump Organisation told The Scotsman that it did not profit from US government custom at its properties.

The latest payment was made to SLC Turnberry Limited, which has just two directors – Mr Trump’s sons, Eric, and Donald Jr.

Mr Trump himself stood down as a director of the firm in January 2017, but the way the business is structured ensures he remains its ultimate owner via a New York-based state grantor trust. It in turn has just two trustees – Mr Trump and Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organisation’s chief financial officer.

Turnberry has racked up millions of pounds of losses across each of the four years since Mr Trump bought the resort in 2014.

According to Companies House filings, its parent firm was in the red by almost £3.4m in 2017. The latest accounts are due to be published this autumn.

Federal procurement records seen by The Scotsman specify the new payment, worth $13,835 (£11,097), is for “hotel accommodation” at Trump Turnberry over the period of 3 July to 1 August.

As with previous payments made to SLC Turnberry Limited, the purchase order – described as a “simplified acquisition” – was sanctioned by the State Department, and approved via the US Embassy in London.

The money was routed on 3 July from the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, the body charged with implementing US. foreign policy and promoting US interests in Europe.

While Mr Trump is not expected to make a visit to the property this summer, the president’s second son, Eric, is a regular at the South Ayrshire resort in his capacity as executive vice president of development and acquisitions at the Trump Organisation.

The 35-year-old has effectively assumed responsibility for overseeing the company’s global portfolio of golf resorts since his father became president.

The Trump administration is facing a growing backlash stateside over US government payments made to properties ultimately owned by the president.

Last month, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programmes ratified an amendment to legislation which controls the State Department’s budget which, in theory, bans federal spending at Mr Trump’s firms.

Democrats on the House of Representatives sub-committee approved the measure by 231 votes to 187. The amendment also prevents payments to Mr Trump’s inaugural Scottish resort, Trump International Golf Links in Aberdeenshire.
[…]
However, the tweak to the State and Foreign Operations Bill will have to be approved by the Senate before it comes into law, a prospect regarded as unlikely given the upper chamber of Congress remains under the control of Republicans.

Last year, other leading Democrats, including senator Elizabeth Warren, who hopes to secure her party’s nomination for the 2020 presidential race, cited The Scotsman’s revelations about the first tranche of Turnberry payments when calling for a wide ranging investigation and audit of State Department and Department of Homeland Security spending at Trump properties.
[…]
Brendan Fischer, federal reform director at the Campaign Legal Centre, a Washington DC-based non-partisan political watchdog, said: “This appears to be a reminder of how the American people are effectively subsidizing the president’s family business, which creates the appearance of public resources being used for private gain.”

Last summer, The Scotsman, detailed a series of payments made by the State Department to SLC Turnberry Limited.

The first, for $10,113 (£8,112), was approved on 5 April 2018, followed by $39,602 (£31,768) and $30,074 (£24,125) on 10 and 11 July respectively.

The latter two payments were for hotel accommodation for Mr Trump and key members of his administration. The president was photographed playing two rounds of golf during his two night stay at Turnberry, part of his visit to the UK.

It is understood the April payment related to a visit to Turnberry by Eric Trump. the executive vice president of development and acquisitions at the Trump Organisation.

A spokeswoman for the Trump Organisation said: “The Trump Organisation does not profit on government business and bills all services at cost.”

It not clarify the ‘at cost’ rate, the details of the State Department booking, or the identity of the visiting party when asked by The Scotsman.

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment.

I love how they say they don’t charge above cost for any of the taxpayer’s expenditures at Trump golf clubs. What the hell difference does that make? They’re putting money in Trump’s wallet. And who decides what “cost” is? The Trump Organization!

Of course, they are honest as the day is long, so it’s no problem.

I don’t think anything will come of this. But I would like to know if anyone involved uses a personal email server. That would be serious.

The president and his closest advisers worship in their Church of Perpetual Racism on a Sunday Morning

The president and his closest advisers worship in their Church of Perpetual Racism on a Sunday Morning

by digby

Via Nicolle Belle at Crooks and Liars:

[A]fter a segment on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends,” in which they featured the “Squad,” the four freshmen Congresswomen (Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts) who have been loudly fighting against the inhumanity of the immigrant detention program, Trump just lost it.

His advisers enjoyed his racist insults:

I know I don’t have to point out that all four women are Americans. Only one, Omar, is foreign born. But the whole thing is so offensive that those facts aren’t even relevant.

The base loves it and that’s all that counts.

.

Where did Epstein get all that money?

Where did Epstein get all that money?

by digby

We know he is an admitted sex offender and accused sex-trafficker. We know he hob-nobbed with the rich and powerful.  But where did he get all that money? New York Magazine looks into the other burning question about Epstein:

Long before Jeffrey Epstein pleaded guilty to prostitution charges in Florida more than a decade ago, his fellow Palm Beach resident and hedge-fund manager Douglas Kass was intrigued by the local gossip about his neighbor.

“I’m hearing about the parties, hearing about a guy who’s throwing money around,” says Kass, president of Seabreeze Partners Management. While stories about young girls swarming Epstein’s waterfront mansion and the sex parties he hosted for the rich and powerful were the talk of the town, Kass was more focused on how this obscure person, rumored to be managing billions of dollars, had become so wealthy without much of a track record.

Kass was well-connected on Wall Street, where he’d worked for decades, so he began to ask around. “I went to my institutional brokers, to their trading desks and asked if they ever traded with him. I did it a few times until the date when he was arrested,” he recalls. “Not one institutional trading desk, primary or secondary, had ever traded with Epstein’s firm.”

When a reporter came to interview Kass about Bernie Madoff shortly before that firm blew up in the biggest Ponzi scheme ever, Kass told her, “There’s another guy who reminds me of Madoff that no one trades with.” That man was Jeffrey Epstein.

“How did he get the money?” Kass kept asking.

For decades, Epstein has been credulously described as a big-time hedge-fund manager and a billionaire, even though there’s not a lot of evidence that he is either. There appears little chance the public is going to get definitive answers anytime soon. In a July 11 letter to the New York federal judge overseeing Epstein’s sex-trafficking case, Epstein’s attorney offered to provide “sealed disclosures” about Epstein’s finances to determine the size of the bond he would need to post to secure his release from jail pending trial. His brother, Mark, and a friend even offered to chip in if necessary.

Naturally, this air of mystery has especially piqued the interest of real-life, non-pretend hedge-funders. If this guy wasn’t playing their game — and they seem pretty sure he was not — what game was he playing? Intelligencer spoke to several prominent hedge-fund managers to get a read on what their practiced eyes are detecting in all the new information that is coming to light about Epstein in the wake of his indictment by federal prosecutors in New York. Most saw signs of something unsavory at the heart of his business model.

To begin with, there is much skepticism among the hedgies Intelligencer spoke with that Epstein made the money he has — and he appears to have a lot, given a lavish portfolio of homes and private aircraft — as a traditional money manager. A fund manager who knows well how that kind of fortune is acquired notes, “It’s hard to make a billion dollars quietly.” Epstein never made a peep in the financial world.

Epstein was also missing another key element of a typical thriving hedge fund: investors. Kass couldn’t find any beyond Epstein’s one well-publicized client, retail magnate Les Wexner — nor could other players in the hedge-fund world who undertook similar snooping. “I don’t know anyone who’s ever invested in him; he’s never talked about by any of the allocators,” says one billionaire hedge-fund manager, referring to firms that distribute large pools of money among various funds.

Epstein’s spotty professional history has also drawn a lot of attention in recent days, and Kass says it was one of the first things that raised his suspicions years ago. Now 66, Epstein didn’t come from money and never graduated from college, yet he landed a teaching job at a fancy private school (“unheard of,” says Kass) and rose through the ranks in the early 1980s at investment bank Bear Stearns. Within no time, Kass notes, Epstein was made a partner of the firm — and then was promptly and unceremoniously ousted. (Epstein reportedly left the firm following a minor securities violation.) Despite this “squishy work experience,” as Kass puts it, at some point after his quick exit, Epstein launched his own hedge fund, J. Epstein & Co., later renamed Financial Trust Co. Along the way, he began peddling the improbable narrative that he was so selective he would only work with billionaires.

Oddly, Epstein also claimed to do all the investing by himself while his 150 employees all worked in the back office — which Kass says reminds him of Madoff’s cover story. Though it now appears that Epstein had many fewer employees than he claimed, according to the New York Times:

Thomas Volscho, a sociology professor at the College of Staten Island who has been researching for a book on Mr. Epstein, recently obtained [a 2002 disclosure] form, which shows [Epstein’s] Financial Trust had $88 million in contributions from shareholders. In a court filing that year, Mr. Epstein said his firm had about 20 employees, far fewer than the 150 reported at the time by New York magazine.

Given this puzzling set of data points, the hedge-fund managers we spoke to leaned toward the theory that Epstein was running a blackmail scheme under the cover of a hedge fund.

How such a scheme could hypothetically work has been laid out in detail in a thread on the anonymous Twitter feed of @quantian1. It’s worth reading in its entirety, but in summary it is a rough blueprint for how a devious aspiring hedge-fund manager could blackmail rich people into investing with him without raising too many flags.

Kass and former hedge-fund manager Whitney Tilson both emailed the thread around in investing circles and both quickly discovered that their colleagues found it quite convincing. “This actually sounds very plausible,” Tilson wrote in an email forwarding the thread to others.

“He somehow cajoled these guys to invest,” says Kass, speaking of hypothetical blackmailed investors who gave Epstein their money to invest, but managed to keep their names private.

The fact that Epstein’s fund is offshore in a tax haven — it is based in the U.S. Virgin Islands — and has a secret client list both add credence to the blackmail theory.

So what did Epstein do with the money he did have under his management, setting aside the questions of how he got it and how much he had? One hedge-fund manager speculates that Epstein could have just put the client money in an S&P 500 index fund, perhaps with a tax dodge thrown in. “I put in $100 million, I get the S&P 500 minus some fees,” he says, speaking of a theoretical client’s experience. Over the past few decades, the client would have “made a shitload” — as would Epstein. A structure like that wouldn’t have required trading desks or analysts or complex regulatory disclosures.

Kass has kicked around a similar idea: Maybe Epstein just put all the client money in U.S. treasuries — the simplest and safest investment there is, and the kind of thing one guy actually can do by himself.

If the blackmail theory sounds far-fetched, it’s worth keeping in mind that it was also floated by one of Epstein’s victims, Virginia Roberts Giuffre. “Epstein … also got girls for Epstein’s friends and acquaintances. Epstein specifically told me that the reason for him doing this was so that they would ‘owe him,’ they would ‘be in his pocket,’ and he would ‘have something on them,’” she said in a court affidavit, according to the investigative series in the Miami Herald that brought the case back to the public’s attention late last year.

In the 2015 filing, Giuffre claimed that Epstein “debriefed her” after she was forced into sexual encounters so that he could possess “intimate and potentially embarrassing information” to blackmail friends into parking their money with him. She also said photographic and video evidence existed — an assertion that looms especially large now that federal investigators have found a trove of images in Epstein’s home safe.

It seems far-fetched. It may be that he really is something of a financial savant and a sex offender. But it is curious.

Update: Another shoe drops:

Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest is reverberating in Israel, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing Likud party are calling for a criminal probe into former prime minister Ehud Barak’s personal and business ties with the accused sex trafficker, Israeli media is reporting.

Barak, 77, served as prime minister from 1999 to 2001. This month he formed a new party to run for prime minister against Netanyahu, who called for new elections in September. Once political allies, Barak and Netanyahu have been sparring on social media, with Netanyahu producing a video raising Barak’s relationship to the multimillionaire New York financier, and Ohio billionaire Les Wexner, who has given money to Barak, the Times of Israel reported.

Barak was a close friend and business partner with Epstein for years. Now some of those business partnerships are being scrutinized amid questions about Barak’s own source of wealth. The Times reported Saturday that Barak is exploring whether to sever business ties with Epstein, 66, who was charged last week with sex trafficking underage girls.

Netanyahu has his own problems, of course. H may go to jail on corruption charges.

.