A collection of long-form reporting about criminals, frauds and forgeries of various types. I would like to start off by noting that I haven't finished this book (and may not), so the following is based off those sections I have read as indicated below.

I loved Say Nothing and was fascinated and infuriated by Empire of Pain. I'm not sure these magazine length stories go into enough depth to leave me satisfied.

• The Jefferson Bottles (2007), Palm Beach, Florida
Bill Koch's (brother to the conservative funders) purchased certain bottles of wine claimed to be part of a stash belonging to Thomas Jefferson. When he discovered he had most likely been duped, he grew determined to hunt down and imprison anyone who scammed him - and his first target was the legendary Hardy Rodenstock - a German collector who had an apparently remarkable knack for finding extremely rare bottles, throwing elaborate generous tastings and having wine critics in his pocket for providing the opportunity to taste elusive and expensive wines.

I'd heard about this story before (The Billionaire's Vinegar and Sour Grapes documentary), and the wine industry and fraud therein (especially the lack of verification and provenance at reputable auction houses such as Christie's and Sotheby's - despite in this case doubts raised by Monticello) interests me a great deal. But a member of the Koch family as a vengeful anti-fraud crusader because he got scammed is...not exactly Batman...

• Crime Family (2018)
About Dutch mobster Willem Holleeder, who was on trial for several murders (and was convicted of kidnapping the Heineken head), brought there by testimony from his lawyer sister Astrid who lives in hiding and disguise in Amsterdam.
He examines a bit the fiction Wim maintained of being the "knuffelcrimineel" rooted in xenophobia and racism, but on the whole this family drama feels more like an invitation to read Astrid's memoir. It lacks urgency and a definitive POV.

• The Avenger (2015)
Follows Ken Dornstein on his search to find the Lockerbie bombers as a means to grieve his lost brother David (and make a documentary). He eventually links the bombmaker - also thought to be responsible for a Berlin night club bombing - despite the turmoil of the revolution making it dangerous for him to go. The most damning part is where even Keefe acknowledges Dornstein's need for narrative flair when he films himself asking his kids about going to Libya to find the bombers. That feels so gross and exploitative.

Read for my book club. I almost always finish a book I've started but this was so disappointing and since the chapters didn't relate to one another, after a hundred pages or so, I had no investment in it and did not bother to finish it.

So many things turned me off. The chapters did not tell stories in a coherent way. For example, the Swiss banker traipsed confusingly around the country and never seemed to be clear whether he was truly bad or incompetently good. Article could have made the point - instead it just wandered.

The wine chapter was a similar mess. It's hard to have interest in people buying priceless (or fraudulent) bottles of wine that I don't drink nor can I savor by rhetoric. This was the opening chapter in the book - you'd think it would have been the strongest. If it was, that was a bad omen for others. I persevered for a few more chapters.

Some stories I already knew. For example, Trump's rise to his candidacy has been told many times. I didn't need to read it again and skipped it. In contrast, I had never read Bourdain's books so figured I'd learn something about him. It was some bright moments but how did it get into the book in the first place? Bourdain hardly measured up to the subtitle's promise ("True Stories of Grifters, Killers, Rebels and Crooks") since Bourdain was none of them. But what I found particularly annoying was the chapter ended with one sentence about him ending his life - no explanation why even though I had just finished reading pages and pages of how he worked and what he obsessed about. Yeah, I get the chapter was originally published when Bourdain was still alive but the book is new. He couldn't update the material?

In summary, the book was an obvious attempt to do as little work as possible using repurposed articles that had already their day. And even then, the writing style was lacking coherency. The author would throw out tons of facts, much of which were largely irrelevant, sometimes adding his own opinions, and burying the lede - obviously intentionally - otherwise, these stories could have been much shorter.

Yes, I get that he had put a lot of work into the long-form articles earlier and it's nice to give them a 2nd life. That just wasn't enough to justify this book. He should have been more selective or revised, slimmed down, and rewrote much of the material.

Of the 5 people who attended our book club for this book, 4 (including me) disliked the book and the remaining person liked it but admitted that she knew the author personally as a childhood friend so that likely biased her opinion. ( )

Thoroughly enjoyable and well researched book. ( )

Patrick Radden Keefe (The New Yorker) is a master of long form journalism. Most of these true stories were fascinating. They definitely show that truth is stranger than fiction. Very easy reading as you can dip into medium length stories. ( )

I really love Patrick Radden Keefe, but thought this collection was uneven. Rogues would've benefited by being literally cut in half, only including The Jefferson Bottles, The Avenger, A Loaded Gun, The Hunt for El Chapo, The Worst of the Worst, and Journeyman.

Also, fuck Steven Cohen. ( )