Ruemmler
(Photo
by
William
B.
Plowman/NBC/NBC
Newswire/NBCUniversal
via
Getty
Images)
The
relationship
between
Goldman
Sachs’s
top
lawyer,
Kathryn
Ruemmler,
and
the
late
sexual
predator
Jeffrey
Epstein
is
no
longer
something
you
can
politely
describe
as
“unfortunate
optics.”
The
latest
dump
of
Epstein
files
reveals
thousands
of
communications
between
the
two,
and
they
paint
a
picture,
not
of
arm’s-length
professionalism,
but
of
questionable
coziness
from
someone
whose
literal
job
description
is
reputational
risk.
Ruemmler
isn’t
some
inexperienced
legal
rube
who
brushed
elbows
with
a
toxic
client
once
upon
a
time.
She
is
the
top
attorney
at
Goldman
(chief
legal
officer
and
general
counsel),
a
member
of
the
management
committee,
head
of
the
firmwide
conduct
committee,
and
co-vice
chair
of
the
reputational
risk
committee.
Avoiding
the
sort
of
reputational
damage
that
could
arise
from
blurring
professional
and
friendly
relations
with
a
toxic
client
isn’t
just
expected;
it’s
the
whole
job.
Which
makes
emails
calling
Epstein
“sweetie”
while
advising
him
on
sexual
misconduct
allegations
feel
less
like
a
lapse
and
more
like
a
flashing
red
warning
light.
Then
there
are
the
pricy
gifts
from
Epstein
—
a
$9,400
Hermès
bag,
a
$4,200
Fendi
fur-trimmed
plaid
wool
coat,
and
a
$1,700
Fendi
bag
amongst
them.
And
she
dutifully
thanked
her
“Uncle
Jeffrey”
for
the
largesse.
Now,
a
spokesperson
said,
“Ms.
Ruemmler
didn’t
ask
for
anything
and
didn’t
want
anything,”
which
may
well
be
true,
but
surely
it’s
obvious
that
the
excessive
gifts,
and
referring
to
Epstein
as
family
(she
also
referred
to
him
as
an
“older
brother”
in
another
exchange)
is
not
exactly
a
master
class
in
character
evaluation.
It’s
worth
noting
at
this
point
that
Goldman
CEO
David
Solomon
has,
thus
far,
stood
by
Ruemmler,
even
in
the
face
of
unease
at
the
bank.
Ruemmler
herself
has
offered
the
now-familiar
Epstein
defense,
“I
was
a
defense
attorney
when
I
dealt
with
Jeffrey
Epstein.
I
got
to
know
him
as
a
lawyer
and
that
was
the
foundation
of
my
relationship
with
him.
I
had
no
knowledge
of
any
ongoing
criminal
conduct
on
his
part,
and
I
did
not
know
him
as
the
monster
he
has
been
revealed
to
be.” Fine.
But
that
framing
gets
harder
to
swallow
when
the
same
communications
show
her
venturing
beyond
legal
advice
and
seeking
Epstein’s
career
insights,
joking
about
“trading”
one
of
Epstein’s
“Russians”
for
a
better
compensation
package,
and
turning
to
him
for
personal
guidance.
These
aren’t
the
hallmarks
of
a
strictly
professional
relationship.
More
emails
reinforce
that
impression.
Epstein
described
Ruemmler
as
“an
arch
feminist
who
is
my
great
defender,”
someone
who
could
show
skeptics
like
Melinda
Gates
“the
other
side
of
[J]effrey.”
Of
this
latest
revelation,
a
spokesperson
said,
“Ms.
Ruemmler
had
no
control
over
how
Epstein
characterized
her
or
their
interactions.
She
was
not
his
defender.
She
never
advocated
on
his
behalf
with
any
third
party
—
not
Melinda
Gates,
not
the
press,
not
a
court,
not
a
government
official.”
That
may
be
so.
But
it’s
also
beside
the
point.
Epstein’s
entire
enterprise
relied
on
cultivating
powerful,
credible
people
who
lent
him
legitimacy
simply
by
being
close.
You
don’t
have
to
file
motions
for
a
predator
to
be
useful
to
one.
Remember,
at
the
time
of
all
these
interactions,
Epstein
was
already
a
registered
sex
offender!
When
dealing
with
the
criminal
element
—
especially
a
guy
who
served
time
for
procuring
a
child
for
prostitution
—
it
should
at
least
cross
one’s
mind
that
you
might
be
dealing
with
a
manipulator.
The
price
Ruemmler
paid
for
all
these
fancy
gifts
was
the
legitimacy
Epstein
sought
from
cultivating
a
relationship
with
one
of
the
most
highly
credentialed
attorneys
in
the
nation.
Grooming
isn’t
just
about
sex,
it’s
how
predators
see
the
whole
world.
That
lack
of
accountability
is
on
full
display
in
a
jaw-dropping
comment
a
Ruemmler
spokesperson
made.
A
spokesperson
told
the
Financial
Times,
“It
is
despicable
to
single
out
and
attack
a
highly
respected
female
professional
simply
because
of
her
benign
interactions
with
Jeffrey
Epstein.”
I’m
sorry
but
that
statement
broke
my
brain
a
little
bit.
The
thing
that
was
actually
despicable
was
Epstein’s
criminal
conduct
—
and
the
web
of
elite
enablers
that
allowed
it
to
persist
for
decades.
You
can’t
wave
the
specter
of
misogyny
just
because
there’s
finally
a
whiff
of
accountability.
Brad
Karp
is
no
longer
the
chair
of
Paul
Weiss!
Alan
Dershowitz
has
been
repeatedly
put
under
a
microscope
for
his
relationship
with
Epstein!
Donald
Trump’s
involvement
with
Epstein
is
the
top
political
news
story
in
the
world!
No
one
is
looking
to
single
out
a
woman
here.
And
I
can
assure
you
that
if
other
prominent
attorneys
are
discovered
in
the
Epstein
files,
Above
the
Law
will
be
writing
about
it
(even
if
it’s
us).
It’s
galling
that
Ruemmler
is
taking
this
position
in
a
vain
attempt
to
get
the
heat
off
of
her.
This
is
the
same
Ruemmler
who,
in
emails
with
Epstein,
scoffed
at
diversity
concerns,
writing
“I
ain’t
no
affirmative
action”
when
discussing
a
potential
job
opportunity.
(Which,
tbh,
has
big
pick-me-girl
energy.)
Now
we’re
supposed
to
accept
that
it’s
“despicable”
to
scrutinize
a
“highly
respected
female
professional”
for
maintaining
an
unusually
warm
relationship
with
this
guy?
Equity
isn’t
a
shield
you
can
wield
when
the
questions
get
uncomfortable.
Goldman
is
standing
by
Ruemmler
for
now.
But
the
Epstein
files
have
a
way
of
turning
“benign
interactions”
into
something
much
harder
to
explain,
especially
for
someone
whose
job
is
supposed
to
be
knowing
better.
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@[email protected].