WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.160 --> 00:00:03.279
<v Speaker 1>What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the

2
00:00:03.279 --> 00:00:06.839
<v Speaker 1>Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to dive right

3
00:00:06.879 --> 00:00:10.199
<v Speaker 1>back in to the Kathy Ruhmler transcript from her trip

4
00:00:10.240 --> 00:00:15.039
<v Speaker 1>to Congress. Mister Submaranium, I may have missed this, but

5
00:00:15.880 --> 00:00:18.480
<v Speaker 1>were you ever Jeffrey Epstein was never a legal client

6
00:00:18.519 --> 00:00:22.600
<v Speaker 1>of yours in any way, Miss Rumler. He was not questioned?

7
00:00:23.160 --> 00:00:26.280
<v Speaker 1>So you never had any kind of agreement with them

8
00:00:26.320 --> 00:00:30.839
<v Speaker 1>or an engagement? Answer? I did not. Question did you

9
00:00:30.839 --> 00:00:35.200
<v Speaker 1>ever receive any compensation from him? Answer? No? Question did

10
00:00:35.240 --> 00:00:38.799
<v Speaker 1>you ever receive any cash from him or any transfer

11
00:00:38.920 --> 00:00:42.759
<v Speaker 1>money transfer from him? Just gifts? Answer? Yeah, I did

12
00:00:42.799 --> 00:00:45.560
<v Speaker 1>receive gifts from him, but I did not receive compensation.

13
00:00:46.719 --> 00:00:50.240
<v Speaker 1>Question but not any money from them? And then did

14
00:00:50.280 --> 00:00:53.200
<v Speaker 1>you ever you weren't representing them, But did you ever

15
00:00:53.240 --> 00:00:57.320
<v Speaker 1>attend any of his court proceedings? Answer? As we discussed,

16
00:00:57.320 --> 00:00:59.000
<v Speaker 1>I was present, you know, as a member of the

17
00:00:59.000 --> 00:01:03.240
<v Speaker 1>public at his are in July of twenty nineteen. Question

18
00:01:03.359 --> 00:01:06.079
<v Speaker 1>thank you and apologies if this has already been asked.

19
00:01:06.319 --> 00:01:09.159
<v Speaker 1>But the reason for that was because of your friendship

20
00:01:09.719 --> 00:01:13.480
<v Speaker 1>or was there a reason for you attending that? Answer?

21
00:01:13.719 --> 00:01:16.120
<v Speaker 1>The reason was this is someone that I had dealt

22
00:01:16.120 --> 00:01:18.400
<v Speaker 1>with over you know, the prior period. I mean the

23
00:01:18.439 --> 00:01:21.319
<v Speaker 1>prior you know, five year period, and he was he

24
00:01:21.400 --> 00:01:24.000
<v Speaker 1>was and remained at the time, well up until that time,

25
00:01:24.359 --> 00:01:27.640
<v Speaker 1>a primary advisor for an important client of mine, and

26
00:01:27.680 --> 00:01:30.319
<v Speaker 1>I wanted to understand exactly, you know, I wanted to

27
00:01:30.400 --> 00:01:32.920
<v Speaker 1>understand what was going on and what he was charged

28
00:01:32.920 --> 00:01:35.959
<v Speaker 1>with and what the conduct was. And I anticipated that

29
00:01:36.000 --> 00:01:39.560
<v Speaker 1>my client would also want to understand that. Question do

30
00:01:39.599 --> 00:01:42.040
<v Speaker 1>you believe he ever used the relationship you had with him?

31
00:01:42.200 --> 00:01:45.680
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's not a friendship, I guess a business relationship.

32
00:01:45.719 --> 00:01:49.159
<v Speaker 1>Perhaps when reaching out to other people. We've heard from

33
00:01:49.200 --> 00:01:52.040
<v Speaker 1>other folks that he would use the name name drop essentially.

34
00:01:52.359 --> 00:01:56.519
<v Speaker 1>Do you feel that that happened to you? Answer? I

35
00:01:56.519 --> 00:01:58.840
<v Speaker 1>didn't know that at the time, but I know now

36
00:01:59.040 --> 00:02:01.680
<v Speaker 1>because I've seen, you know, references in documents that have

37
00:02:01.799 --> 00:02:04.560
<v Speaker 1>been released where he name drops me. But I didn't

38
00:02:04.599 --> 00:02:07.079
<v Speaker 1>know he was doing it at the time. Question and

39
00:02:07.159 --> 00:02:09.599
<v Speaker 1>I apologize if this was already asked, But were you

40
00:02:09.680 --> 00:02:13.840
<v Speaker 1>aware that you were designated as an executor of his estate? Answer?

41
00:02:14.120 --> 00:02:16.319
<v Speaker 1>I learned that later that I was listed as a

42
00:02:16.360 --> 00:02:21.199
<v Speaker 1>backup executor. Question did you consent to that? In any way. Answer,

43
00:02:21.280 --> 00:02:23.639
<v Speaker 1>I didn't know about it. Question okay, so there was

44
00:02:23.680 --> 00:02:29.000
<v Speaker 1>never a conversation about this answer with Epstein? Question or anyone.

45
00:02:29.879 --> 00:02:32.719
<v Speaker 1>Answer I don't remember having a conversation with Epstein about it.

46
00:02:32.960 --> 00:02:35.159
<v Speaker 1>I was surprised when I saw the document when it

47
00:02:35.199 --> 00:02:38.319
<v Speaker 1>was released last year. Question have you done anything with

48
00:02:38.400 --> 00:02:44.439
<v Speaker 1>his estate? Gets cut off by Rumler? No association? Answer no.

49
00:02:45.960 --> 00:02:49.280
<v Speaker 1>Question when was your name removed? Answer? I don't know exactly,

50
00:02:49.360 --> 00:02:51.800
<v Speaker 1>but that was in a draft That was, you know,

51
00:02:52.080 --> 00:02:55.199
<v Speaker 1>a draft document, and the final document does not. I'm

52
00:02:55.199 --> 00:02:59.960
<v Speaker 1>not identified. Question when did you learn about your name

53
00:03:00.280 --> 00:03:04.520
<v Speaker 1>being an executor? Rumler? Again, I believe the document was

54
00:03:04.520 --> 00:03:07.520
<v Speaker 1>provided to this committee and then made public. I believe

55
00:03:07.560 --> 00:03:11.199
<v Speaker 1>in twenty twenty five. Question do you have any sort

56
00:03:11.240 --> 00:03:13.400
<v Speaker 1>of speculation as to why your name or you were

57
00:03:13.479 --> 00:03:17.560
<v Speaker 1>named as an executor? Answer? My only speculation is that

58
00:03:17.639 --> 00:03:20.199
<v Speaker 1>I'm a lawyer, and I think someone who believed to

59
00:03:20.240 --> 00:03:23.599
<v Speaker 1>be an honest person. Question okay, that's all I have.

60
00:03:26.240 --> 00:03:30.319
<v Speaker 1>Question redacted? Did you ask to be taken off the will? Answer? No,

61
00:03:30.960 --> 00:03:34.159
<v Speaker 1>mister men if he asking questions now, good afternoon. I

62
00:03:34.199 --> 00:03:36.400
<v Speaker 1>was kind of struck by your statement here that you

63
00:03:36.439 --> 00:03:39.879
<v Speaker 1>and mister Epstein only had a professional relationship. You know,

64
00:03:39.960 --> 00:03:42.120
<v Speaker 1>since I've been sitting here, we've seen a number of

65
00:03:42.120 --> 00:03:46.400
<v Speaker 1>emails in twenty fourteen where he says to you, girl, careful,

66
00:03:46.680 --> 00:03:50.639
<v Speaker 1>I will review an old habit. In twenty fifteen where

67
00:03:50.759 --> 00:03:53.120
<v Speaker 1>you say to him, darling, I'm not one of your things.

68
00:03:53.520 --> 00:03:56.360
<v Speaker 1>In twenty sixteen where he says that Griffin may be

69
00:03:56.439 --> 00:03:59.639
<v Speaker 1>interested in women and you say, I ain't. No affirmative action,

70
00:04:00.319 --> 00:04:03.800
<v Speaker 1>so that's an unprofessional way of having a conversation. He says,

71
00:04:04.000 --> 00:04:08.080
<v Speaker 1>I meant romantically and new reference Russians, and then it

72
00:04:08.120 --> 00:04:11.280
<v Speaker 1>all culminates in twenty nineteen when he says, I very

73
00:04:11.360 --> 00:04:15.599
<v Speaker 1>much appreciate your friendship. So your statement here today is

74
00:04:15.639 --> 00:04:19.720
<v Speaker 1>that you all weren't friends. Roumler, No, I didn't say that.

75
00:04:20.079 --> 00:04:22.720
<v Speaker 1>I said I knew him professionally, and I say friendly

76
00:04:22.920 --> 00:04:25.680
<v Speaker 1>in that context. But the foundation of my dealings with

77
00:04:25.759 --> 00:04:29.040
<v Speaker 1>him were was that I was a lawyer in private practice,

78
00:04:30.360 --> 00:04:32.720
<v Speaker 1>and that's why he dealt with me, and that's why

79
00:04:32.759 --> 00:04:35.040
<v Speaker 1>I dealt with him, And in that context I was

80
00:04:35.079 --> 00:04:38.279
<v Speaker 1>friendly with him. And I believe this effort or attempt

81
00:04:38.319 --> 00:04:41.319
<v Speaker 1>to create a binary construct you're either friends or you're

82
00:04:41.319 --> 00:04:44.600
<v Speaker 1>a professional, is just not real life, and there are

83
00:04:44.800 --> 00:04:47.439
<v Speaker 1>you know, you probably you're working with other members as

84
00:04:47.480 --> 00:04:50.720
<v Speaker 1>a professional relationship, but you're probably friendly with him too,

85
00:04:51.959 --> 00:04:54.279
<v Speaker 1>And that's the way it was with him. But again,

86
00:04:54.639 --> 00:04:56.759
<v Speaker 1>I didn't have a number of personal friends who I

87
00:04:56.800 --> 00:04:59.360
<v Speaker 1>spend time with on the weekends. We go out to dinner,

88
00:05:00.079 --> 00:05:02.639
<v Speaker 1>go to concerts, we might go on vacation, we might

89
00:05:02.680 --> 00:05:05.040
<v Speaker 1>go to a spot together. And those are the people

90
00:05:05.439 --> 00:05:07.639
<v Speaker 1>who I count as my friends. So I have tried

91
00:05:07.680 --> 00:05:10.800
<v Speaker 1>to be as precise and descriptive as I can about

92
00:05:10.839 --> 00:05:14.000
<v Speaker 1>really the nature of my interactions in dealing with them,

93
00:05:14.319 --> 00:05:18.120
<v Speaker 1>mister Menifee, So more of a hybrid situation. I practiced

94
00:05:18.160 --> 00:05:20.639
<v Speaker 1>at a large law firm too. I never called anybody

95
00:05:20.759 --> 00:05:23.920
<v Speaker 1>darling in a communication, So this would be more of

96
00:05:23.959 --> 00:05:28.399
<v Speaker 1>a hybrid situation where maybe not completely professional, maybe not

97
00:05:28.519 --> 00:05:33.399
<v Speaker 1>completely personal. Answer. What I would say is I was friendly.

98
00:05:33.519 --> 00:05:36.319
<v Speaker 1>You know, I knew him professionally, I was friendly with them,

99
00:05:36.720 --> 00:05:38.759
<v Speaker 1>and you know, with respect. You may not like the

100
00:05:38.759 --> 00:05:41.759
<v Speaker 1>words I used, and as I said before, I regret

101
00:05:41.800 --> 00:05:44.360
<v Speaker 1>it that I even knew this guy much less was

102
00:05:44.399 --> 00:05:46.920
<v Speaker 1>emailing with him. But I tend to be a pretty

103
00:05:46.920 --> 00:05:51.680
<v Speaker 1>casual person. I sometimes am a bit irreverent. I'm sometimes

104
00:05:51.680 --> 00:05:54.959
<v Speaker 1>a bit sarcastic, and those references that your appointing to

105
00:05:55.040 --> 00:05:59.199
<v Speaker 1>are an example of that. Mister Menefee, I'm introducing what's

106
00:05:59.240 --> 00:06:02.560
<v Speaker 1>marked as my already exhibit G. It begins with bates

107
00:06:02.639 --> 00:06:06.879
<v Speaker 1>number EFTA zero two six one zero seven seven nine,

108
00:06:07.680 --> 00:06:09.839
<v Speaker 1>And we have copies that are being passed around now

109
00:06:10.519 --> 00:06:13.680
<v Speaker 1>bottom of page one, going into page two. And this

110
00:06:13.720 --> 00:06:17.600
<v Speaker 1>is an email from you dated December sixteenth, twenty eighteen.

111
00:06:18.160 --> 00:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>The subject line is my edited version. Am I capturing

112
00:06:21.680 --> 00:06:26.720
<v Speaker 1>that correctly? Answer? Yes? Question? So it looks like that

113
00:06:26.879 --> 00:06:30.199
<v Speaker 1>you edited a draft written article written by mister Epstein's

114
00:06:30.240 --> 00:06:33.959
<v Speaker 1>lawyer Ken Starr. Is that this answer. I don't recall

115
00:06:33.959 --> 00:06:37.319
<v Speaker 1>who drafted who drafted this originally, but I was asked

116
00:06:37.319 --> 00:06:40.279
<v Speaker 1>to look at it. But again, I believe this was

117
00:06:40.279 --> 00:06:43.240
<v Speaker 1>something that was going to be provided in response to media.

118
00:06:43.519 --> 00:06:45.959
<v Speaker 1>It was a media response and I was asked to

119
00:06:45.959 --> 00:06:50.839
<v Speaker 1>look at it to either provide my thoughts question. So

120
00:06:51.040 --> 00:06:56.519
<v Speaker 1>EFTA zero two six one zero seven seventy nine reflects

121
00:06:56.519 --> 00:07:00.759
<v Speaker 1>a statement for mister Epstein's benefit that you edited answer.

122
00:07:00.839 --> 00:07:04.639
<v Speaker 1>It was what I understand that was being contemplated here

123
00:07:05.079 --> 00:07:08.040
<v Speaker 1>was that I don't remember the specifics, but there were

124
00:07:08.079 --> 00:07:11.240
<v Speaker 1>allegations in the media that mister Epstein had received the

125
00:07:11.279 --> 00:07:14.319
<v Speaker 1>so called sweet Art deal in Florida, arising you know,

126
00:07:14.399 --> 00:07:18.120
<v Speaker 1>from the federal and state prosecutions. And so this was

127
00:07:18.199 --> 00:07:21.360
<v Speaker 1>contemplated by the media response that would be ultimately signed

128
00:07:21.639 --> 00:07:25.360
<v Speaker 1>or authored by his attorney, of which who I was

129
00:07:25.360 --> 00:07:29.040
<v Speaker 1>not one? Mister Menifee. Question, so, can we look down

130
00:07:29.040 --> 00:07:31.839
<v Speaker 1>at the bottom of page two, the last full paragraph,

131
00:07:32.040 --> 00:07:34.319
<v Speaker 1>So the second to last paragraph on the page there,

132
00:07:34.519 --> 00:07:38.480
<v Speaker 1>the second to last sentence starts with Jeffrey accepted full

133
00:07:38.519 --> 00:07:44.040
<v Speaker 1>responsibility for his conduct. Do you see that? Answer? I do? Question? Okay,

134
00:07:44.120 --> 00:07:47.000
<v Speaker 1>the last sentence on the page for over ten years,

135
00:07:47.120 --> 00:07:50.759
<v Speaker 1>that being mister Epstein has lived a good and all

136
00:07:50.759 --> 00:07:54.920
<v Speaker 1>abiding life. Do you see that answer? I do. Question.

137
00:07:55.040 --> 00:07:59.000
<v Speaker 1>Turn the page the final paragraph. We're looking at the

138
00:07:59.000 --> 00:08:02.920
<v Speaker 1>third sentence. It begins with but Jeffrey an exemplary employer.

139
00:08:02.920 --> 00:08:06.519
<v Speaker 1>Do you see that answer? I do? Question? So, were

140
00:08:06.560 --> 00:08:09.519
<v Speaker 1>you trying to change the public's perception of mister Epstein

141
00:08:09.560 --> 00:08:14.360
<v Speaker 1>in this document? Answer? No, Again, what this was was

142
00:08:14.399 --> 00:08:16.639
<v Speaker 1>something that had been drafted by one of mister Epstein's

143
00:08:16.680 --> 00:08:19.600
<v Speaker 1>lawyers to respond to suggestions in the media at the

144
00:08:19.639 --> 00:08:22.519
<v Speaker 1>time that mister Epstein had received the so called sweetheart

145
00:08:22.600 --> 00:08:25.399
<v Speaker 1>deal in Florida, and that the reason what I recall

146
00:08:25.519 --> 00:08:28.879
<v Speaker 1>during this time is that the media implication, or actually

147
00:08:28.920 --> 00:08:31.720
<v Speaker 1>the media assertion, was that the sweetheart deal was the

148
00:08:31.759 --> 00:08:35.799
<v Speaker 1>result of something of undue influence or some type of corruption.

149
00:08:36.600 --> 00:08:39.000
<v Speaker 1>And this was intended to be a response authored by

150
00:08:39.000 --> 00:08:42.399
<v Speaker 1>his lawyers who were involved in that very resolution, setting

151
00:08:42.440 --> 00:08:45.679
<v Speaker 1>forth the facts as they understood it. And I was

152
00:08:45.720 --> 00:08:49.320
<v Speaker 1>not involved in that investigation in any way, shape or form,

153
00:08:49.519 --> 00:08:51.360
<v Speaker 1>and I was just asked to read it and give

154
00:08:51.399 --> 00:08:55.159
<v Speaker 1>my thoughts for sort of tone and style. Question, But

155
00:08:55.360 --> 00:08:57.559
<v Speaker 1>as you sent this back, did you believe at the

156
00:08:57.600 --> 00:09:01.080
<v Speaker 1>time that mister Epstein had accepted for responsibility for his

157
00:09:01.159 --> 00:09:04.080
<v Speaker 1>conduct and that he had lived a good and law

158
00:09:04.120 --> 00:09:08.639
<v Speaker 1>abiding life in the preceding ten years. Answer at the time, Yeah,

159
00:09:08.759 --> 00:09:13.200
<v Speaker 1>that's what I understood. Question Do you believe that today? Answer? Today,

160
00:09:13.440 --> 00:09:16.559
<v Speaker 1>we have a very different understanding. And again, what I

161
00:09:16.600 --> 00:09:19.799
<v Speaker 1>know is what he indicated in July of twenty nineteen,

162
00:09:20.159 --> 00:09:23.519
<v Speaker 1>and that those prosecutors had presented evidence to a grand jury.

163
00:09:24.039 --> 00:09:27.320
<v Speaker 1>The allegations were not proven, but they certainly presented evidence

164
00:09:27.320 --> 00:09:29.720
<v Speaker 1>to a grand jury. And a grand jury agreed that

165
00:09:29.759 --> 00:09:33.039
<v Speaker 1>there was evidence that he had intentionally enticed and recruited

166
00:09:33.039 --> 00:09:37.360
<v Speaker 1>miners for commercial sex. That is a very different, very

167
00:09:37.360 --> 00:09:40.799
<v Speaker 1>different set of allegations than I understood he had that

168
00:09:40.919 --> 00:09:45.559
<v Speaker 1>there was evidence of when he resolved this case in Florida. Question. Okay,

169
00:09:46.279 --> 00:09:50.240
<v Speaker 1>mister Lynch, let's pick up right there. However, as you

170
00:09:50.279 --> 00:09:53.519
<v Speaker 1>indicated earlier, you know of mister Epstein's offenses, he was

171
00:09:53.559 --> 00:09:58.440
<v Speaker 1>a registered sex offender from those previous offenses Ms. Rumler,

172
00:09:58.559 --> 00:10:03.559
<v Speaker 1>that's right, question by mister Lynch, which are very very serious.

173
00:10:04.360 --> 00:10:06.720
<v Speaker 1>One of the other aspects of this, again focusing on

174
00:10:06.759 --> 00:10:10.720
<v Speaker 1>your relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. During the investigation, we find

175
00:10:10.759 --> 00:10:15.039
<v Speaker 1>people who are very very close to Jeffrey Epstein, friends, indeed,

176
00:10:15.200 --> 00:10:18.399
<v Speaker 1>co workers who work several feet from him, yet when

177
00:10:18.440 --> 00:10:20.639
<v Speaker 1>they come before the panel, they didn't know him. He

178
00:10:20.720 --> 00:10:23.360
<v Speaker 1>was a stranger. And you know, reading all these emails,

179
00:10:23.399 --> 00:10:26.840
<v Speaker 1>as my colleagues have already identified, you know, their references

180
00:10:26.879 --> 00:10:30.120
<v Speaker 1>to you, calling them darlin uncle, Jeffrey sweety and then,

181
00:10:30.480 --> 00:10:34.480
<v Speaker 1>which would indicate a much closer relationship. And also you

182
00:10:34.519 --> 00:10:38.000
<v Speaker 1>may call it humor, but dismissing his offenses by saying

183
00:10:38.200 --> 00:10:41.559
<v Speaker 1>referring to Jeffrey's type of massage, which refers back to

184
00:10:41.600 --> 00:10:44.559
<v Speaker 1>his abuse of those younger women for which he was

185
00:10:44.559 --> 00:10:47.720
<v Speaker 1>a registered sex offender. There's a connection there as well

186
00:10:47.759 --> 00:10:50.720
<v Speaker 1>as when you sort of dismiss you dismiss those offenses

187
00:10:51.080 --> 00:10:53.720
<v Speaker 1>by joking about it, you know, joking about the Russians

188
00:10:54.159 --> 00:10:57.759
<v Speaker 1>or your young things or victims rights. My ass sort

189
00:10:57.799 --> 00:11:00.600
<v Speaker 1>of dismissing the attorneys and the legal team who are

190
00:11:00.600 --> 00:11:03.759
<v Speaker 1>trying to defend the accusers and the victims. Is that

191
00:11:03.840 --> 00:11:08.519
<v Speaker 1>the way that you gained his trust? Answer? I appreciate

192
00:11:08.559 --> 00:11:11.240
<v Speaker 1>that question, and I understand why. You know, sitting here

193
00:11:11.279 --> 00:11:14.679
<v Speaker 1>today in twenty twenty six, the emails could come across

194
00:11:14.720 --> 00:11:17.840
<v Speaker 1>as if there's a callousness to the victims. That's not

195
00:11:17.919 --> 00:11:20.080
<v Speaker 1>what I intended at the time, and it wasn't my

196
00:11:20.159 --> 00:11:23.519
<v Speaker 1>state of mind at the time. I feel terrible that

197
00:11:23.559 --> 00:11:25.840
<v Speaker 1>he victimized women and girls. And you know, if I

198
00:11:25.840 --> 00:11:28.720
<v Speaker 1>could have done anything, travel back in time stop them

199
00:11:28.720 --> 00:11:30.919
<v Speaker 1>from doing that, I would like to think I would have.

200
00:11:31.679 --> 00:11:34.159
<v Speaker 1>And you know, he clearly lied to me. I think

201
00:11:34.200 --> 00:11:36.759
<v Speaker 1>he lied to a lot of people. And as I said,

202
00:11:36.960 --> 00:11:39.879
<v Speaker 1>I regret you know, ever knowing him much less you know,

203
00:11:40.000 --> 00:11:42.720
<v Speaker 1>emailing with them. But I think one of the things

204
00:11:42.720 --> 00:11:45.039
<v Speaker 1>that's important to or I would ask you to at

205
00:11:45.120 --> 00:11:48.759
<v Speaker 1>least try to understand from my perspective, is that you know,

206
00:11:48.799 --> 00:11:51.519
<v Speaker 1>I had a very different understanding of the conduct at

207
00:11:51.519 --> 00:11:54.320
<v Speaker 1>the time when I was joking or seemed to be joking,

208
00:11:54.919 --> 00:11:58.759
<v Speaker 1>and I certainly never intended to be insensitive. Mister Lynch,

209
00:12:00.039 --> 00:12:02.279
<v Speaker 1>you knew he was a sex offender though a registered

210
00:12:02.320 --> 00:12:06.960
<v Speaker 1>sex offender Rumler, Yes, I did. I did, Lynch. Let's

211
00:12:06.960 --> 00:12:10.840
<v Speaker 1>move on Rumler again. As I said, I regret dealing

212
00:12:10.919 --> 00:12:15.159
<v Speaker 1>with him, much less emailing with him. Mister Lynch understood. So.

213
00:12:15.360 --> 00:12:19.039
<v Speaker 1>Leon Black, he's the former CEO of Apollo Global and

214
00:12:19.080 --> 00:12:22.720
<v Speaker 1>a longtime friend of mister Epstein's. During his transcribed interview

215
00:12:22.720 --> 00:12:25.279
<v Speaker 1>before this committee, he mentioned your name in a list

216
00:12:25.279 --> 00:12:27.840
<v Speaker 1>of people he claimed to have met through mister Epstein.

217
00:12:28.399 --> 00:12:32.879
<v Speaker 1>Do you believe that it's accurate? Answer that he met

218
00:12:32.879 --> 00:12:36.519
<v Speaker 1>me through mister Epstein. Question that he met he said

219
00:12:36.600 --> 00:12:38.919
<v Speaker 1>during his he mentioned your name in a list of

220
00:12:38.960 --> 00:12:41.639
<v Speaker 1>people that he claimed mister Black claimed to have met

221
00:12:41.639 --> 00:12:46.279
<v Speaker 1>through Epstein. Answer, Yeah, mister Epstein did introduce me to

222
00:12:46.320 --> 00:12:52.720
<v Speaker 1>mister Black. Question Okay, when did you first meet mister Black. Answer,

223
00:12:52.840 --> 00:12:56.879
<v Speaker 1>I don't recall what year it was. Question arrange between

224
00:12:57.799 --> 00:13:02.360
<v Speaker 1>answer probably in the two thousand and fourteen twenty fifteen timeframe.

225
00:13:03.240 --> 00:13:06.559
<v Speaker 1>Question I see, what was the frequency of your interaction

226
00:13:06.879 --> 00:13:12.200
<v Speaker 1>there between yourself and Epstein and mister Black. Answer I

227
00:13:12.200 --> 00:13:15.639
<v Speaker 1>only recall meeting mister Black on two occasions. And what

228
00:13:15.720 --> 00:13:18.519
<v Speaker 1>mister Epstein would typically do, as I said, He'd come

229
00:13:18.559 --> 00:13:20.840
<v Speaker 1>to New York where he didn't he had a house,

230
00:13:21.120 --> 00:13:24.320
<v Speaker 1>but it wasn't his residence. He'd come into New York

231
00:13:24.519 --> 00:13:26.639
<v Speaker 1>and he would set up a bunch of meetings with people,

232
00:13:27.240 --> 00:13:29.440
<v Speaker 1>which he would hold in his dining room at a table.

233
00:13:29.679 --> 00:13:31.960
<v Speaker 1>Believe it or not, that's even bigger than this one.

234
00:13:32.559 --> 00:13:35.240
<v Speaker 1>And so, for example, we're coming to a meeting at

235
00:13:35.240 --> 00:13:37.679
<v Speaker 1>two o'clock, that was my scheduled time to meet with them.

236
00:13:37.799 --> 00:13:40.360
<v Speaker 1>I would, you know, sit in the secretarial office space

237
00:13:41.000 --> 00:13:43.399
<v Speaker 1>until such a time as mister Epstein you know, was

238
00:13:43.440 --> 00:13:45.960
<v Speaker 1>ready for the meeting with me, and he would, you know,

239
00:13:46.039 --> 00:13:48.799
<v Speaker 1>typically have the person who was coming into the meeting

240
00:13:49.240 --> 00:13:52.000
<v Speaker 1>in this example me at the same time that the

241
00:13:52.039 --> 00:13:55.000
<v Speaker 1>person he was meeting before was exiting. And so in

242
00:13:55.039 --> 00:13:59.879
<v Speaker 1>that context, that's where I met mister Black. Question, Okay,

243
00:14:00.120 --> 00:14:02.200
<v Speaker 1>did mister Epstein ever talk to you about the nature

244
00:14:02.240 --> 00:14:06.519
<v Speaker 1>of his dealings with mister Black? Answer? I understood they

245
00:14:06.559 --> 00:14:09.039
<v Speaker 1>had a business relationship, but I didn't know any more

246
00:14:09.039 --> 00:14:13.679
<v Speaker 1>details than that. Question. Yeah, what in particular business? Answer No,

247
00:14:14.399 --> 00:14:18.759
<v Speaker 1>I didn't understand the details of their business relationship. Question

248
00:14:18.840 --> 00:14:22.240
<v Speaker 1>were you ever aware of any abuse allegations against mister Black?

249
00:14:23.240 --> 00:14:25.799
<v Speaker 1>Answer not that I can. I know there has been

250
00:14:25.799 --> 00:14:29.639
<v Speaker 1>some litigation subsequently, meaning you know, after Epstein, you know, died.

251
00:14:30.360 --> 00:14:32.840
<v Speaker 1>In more recent years, there have been mister Black has

252
00:14:32.840 --> 00:14:35.799
<v Speaker 1>been involved in some civil litigation. I'm aware of that.

253
00:14:36.759 --> 00:14:39.679
<v Speaker 1>Question What about affairs? Were you ever aware of mister

254
00:14:39.759 --> 00:14:44.240
<v Speaker 1>Black being involved in any affairs? Answer? I don't remember

255
00:14:44.679 --> 00:14:47.480
<v Speaker 1>at the time. I know there have been allegations again

256
00:14:47.600 --> 00:14:51.080
<v Speaker 1>in the media covering civil lawsuits or civil lawsuits that

257
00:14:51.120 --> 00:14:54.480
<v Speaker 1>a leg an affair. Question I see. And were you

258
00:14:54.519 --> 00:14:57.480
<v Speaker 1>ever aware of mister Black requiring women to sign non

259
00:14:57.519 --> 00:15:02.399
<v Speaker 1>disclosure agreements in connection with any of that litigation? Ms Rumler,

260
00:15:02.559 --> 00:15:05.559
<v Speaker 1>I don't have any knowledge of that, mister Lynch. Okay,

261
00:15:05.799 --> 00:15:08.480
<v Speaker 1>that's all I have. All right, folks, We're gonna wrap

262
00:15:08.559 --> 00:15:10.600
<v Speaker 1>up right here and in the next episode, dealing with

263
00:15:10.639 --> 00:15:13.000
<v Speaker 1>the topic. We're gonna pick up where we left off.

264
00:15:13.480 --> 00:15:16.039
<v Speaker 1>All the information that goes with this episode can be

265
00:15:16.080 --> 00:15:18.080
<v Speaker 1>found in the description box.