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 @Kathryn1@mastodon.social.
The post OK, We Need To Talk About What These Kathryn Ruemmler/Jeffrey Epstein Emails Really Mean appeared first on Above the Law.