Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. As the Jeffrey Epstein related fallout continues to
Speaker 1: rain down, people are starting to pay a price, and
Speaker 1: one of those people is Katherine Rumler, the former Obama
Speaker 1: White House counsel and currently the top lawyer at Goldman Sachs.
Speaker 1: And honestly, it's a long time coming. This isn't some revelation.
Speaker 1: If you follow the story, you know about Katherine Rumler,
Speaker 1: and you know that she was offering Jeffrey Epstein all
Speaker 1: kinds of advice and strategy to help fight the charges
Speaker 1: that he was facing, and even though he was a
Speaker 1: disgusting animal, she had no problem remaining his friend, especially
Speaker 1: considering that friendship also came with a lot of perks,
Speaker 1: such as a nine thousand, three hundred and fifty dollars handbag,
Speaker 1: which is wild to me considering how rich this lady is. Anyway,
Speaker 1: you mean to tell me, ms, big shot lawyer here
Speaker 1: can't come up with nine thousand, three hundred and fifty dollars.
Speaker 1: So it's not just the perk, right, not just the bag.
Speaker 1: She actually really enjoyed Jeffrey Epstein. She enjoyed his company,
Speaker 1: She enjoyed his friendship, and she certainly enjoyed his patronage.
Speaker 1: Today's article was published by Reuters and the headline Jeffrey
Speaker 1: Epstein gave her a nine three hundred and fifty dollars handbag.
Speaker 1: But did Goldman Sachs departing top lawyer violate any rules
Speaker 1: This article was authored by Jenna green Well. Maybe not
Speaker 1: any rules of the trade, but she certainly broke all
Speaker 1: the rules of morality, and considering the shit storm, Goldman
Speaker 1: Sachs is certainly in the right letting her go. Now.
Speaker 1: Of course she'll say she's stepping down, but you know,
Speaker 1: the pressure came from the top shareholders, people on the board.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants to deal with this shit, and that's because
Speaker 1: all of you have kept the pressure on. So every
Speaker 1: one of you who have been engaged, following along and
Speaker 1: demanding justice, shed give yourselves a pat on the back,
Speaker 1: because you're the real engine behind all of this. Not
Speaker 1: my big mouth, not anybody else talking about it. It's
Speaker 1: all of you folks who are demanding justice and who
Speaker 1: refuse to be told to move on, because I promise you,
Speaker 1: if you weren't making the kind distinct that you're making,
Speaker 1: they would have already moved on. We'd have no files, nothing.
Speaker 1: So the whole entire thing, as far as where we
Speaker 1: are is because of folks like you. Goldman Sachs top
Speaker 1: lawyer Catherine Rumler faced fierce criticism on social media and
Speaker 1: calls for her ouster following revelations that she accepted thousands
Speaker 1: of dollars worth of gifts from Jeffrey Epstein when she
Speaker 1: was previously a partner at a law firm. As a
Speaker 1: matter of attorney ethics, her conduct didn't appear to violate
Speaker 1: any professional rules, but I raised questions of judgment. Some
Speaker 1: legal ethics experts told me, well, it really comes down
Speaker 1: to the blowback. They might wrap it in some kind
Speaker 1: of dressing. Oh yeah, yeah, it was about ethics, It
Speaker 1: was about this that the other thing, But really it's
Speaker 1: about pushback. They don't want to deal with you folks
Speaker 1: going bananas, and they now know that this isn't going
Speaker 1: to just blow over. So they had to do something,
Speaker 1: and that something is removing Catherine Rumler. Late Thursday, Rumler
Speaker 1: announced her resignation as Goldman's Chief Legal Officer and General Council,
Speaker 1: effective June thirtieth. My responsibility is to put Goldman Sachs
Speaker 1: Interest first, Rumbler said in a statement. Goldman chief executive
Speaker 1: David Solomon, who had initially stood by Rumler, said in
Speaker 1: a statement that Rumler has been an extraordinary general Council
Speaker 1: and will be missed. I don't worry. I'm sure you
Speaker 1: can find another pedophile adjacent person to come and take
Speaker 1: the reins. A spokesperson for Rumler, who served as White
Speaker 1: House counsel during the Obama administration, said earlier this week
Speaker 1: that she was never Epstein's lawyer and that she had
Speaker 1: done nothing wrong. Okay, so that's pretty important, right. She's
Speaker 1: saying that she has never been Epstein's lawyer, so that
Speaker 1: means that there is no lawyer client privilege, so they
Speaker 1: can't hide behind that. Let's just keep that in mind
Speaker 1: moving forward as more information comes out about Catherine Rumler.
Speaker 1: Ethic rules for lawyers offer few guardrails on propriety of
Speaker 1: accepting gifts. Most day bars have adopted an American Bar
Speaker 1: Association rule that says a lawyer may not solicit a
Speaker 1: substantial gift from a client, but the rule doesn't prevent
Speaker 1: a lawyer from accepting an unsolicited client gift, no matter
Speaker 1: how valuable. Said Fordham School of Law Ethics professor Bruce Green.
Speaker 1: Nor are lawyers barred from soliciting or accepting substantial gifts
Speaker 1: from a former client or other non client. Look, let's
Speaker 1: not get caught in the weeds here. That's not what
Speaker 1: this is about. It's not about a three hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty dollars bag. It's about her judgment being skewed. It's
Speaker 1: about her judgment being terrible. It's about her associating, frolicking,
Speaker 1: and enjoying the company of a convicted sex offender. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you're Goldman Sachs, do you want this lady representing
Speaker 1: your company? I know, I wouldn't talk about a nightmare.
Speaker 1: If she can't even figure out that Epstein's a piece
Speaker 1: of shit, you really want her in charge of negotiating
Speaker 1: billion dollar deals and whatnot? Seems like a situation that
Speaker 1: you try to avoid at all costs. According to Rumler
Speaker 1: spokesperson Jennifer Connolly, Rumler knew Epstein through her prior work
Speaker 1: as a criminal defense attorney, receive referrals from him, and
Speaker 1: was friendly with them in a personal context. Epstein also
Speaker 1: occasionally sought her informal legal advice, and she responded based
Speaker 1: on what she knew, and often in ways designed to
Speaker 1: placate him without having to actually get involved. Connolly wrote
Speaker 1: in an email, still lying, Still lying about the relationship.
Speaker 1: Just admit it. Just admit that you enjoyed his company,
Speaker 1: you knew what he was, and you didn't give a
Speaker 1: fuck about the people he heard. I'm so tired of
Speaker 1: the lying, the bullshitting. The mental gymnastics Goldman has a
Speaker 1: thirty nine page quote of conduct that includes instructions on
Speaker 1: giving but not receiving gifts from clients. It also prohibits
Speaker 1: employees from engaging in outside activities that create conflicts, reputational risks,
Speaker 1: or any other negative impact to the firm or our clients.
Speaker 1: I mean, right there is cause for firing. You want
Speaker 1: to talk about reputational risk, You want to talk about
Speaker 1: a serious problem, folks, this is it. Imagine being a
Speaker 1: board member, somebody that holds a large number of stock
Speaker 1: over here. Imagine what you're thinking right now. And make
Speaker 1: no mistake, the only reason she resigned is because they
Speaker 1: were letting her say face. She was on her way out.
Speaker 1: No matter what. It's unclear to what extent the rule
Speaker 1: would have obligated Rumler to disclose her prior association with
Speaker 1: the notorious financier, whose death in twenty nineteen was front
Speaker 1: page news, or if such disclosure was made. Rumbler was
Speaker 1: hired by Goldman in April of twenty twenty. They already knew,
Speaker 1: they didn't care, Just like the rest of these people.
Speaker 1: It's always the same story. Right after the fact, they'll
Speaker 1: tell you, oh, we care so much about Epstein's survivors,
Speaker 1: we care so much about what Epstein was doing. But
Speaker 1: the reality is, when they had a chance to not
Speaker 1: hire them, to not associate with them, they sure had
Speaker 1: no problem doing it. Goldman spokesperson Tony Fratto told Reuters
Speaker 1: last week that Epstein often offered unsolicited favors and gifts
Speaker 1: to many business contacts. Rumler accepted the gifts between twenty
Speaker 1: fourteen and twenty nineteen, when she was a partner at
Speaker 1: Latham and Watkins, according to emails recently released by the
Speaker 1: US Department of Justice. The law firm says Epstein was
Speaker 1: not a client and declient further comment, Oh, I bet
Speaker 1: they did. I bet you. They're running for cover. If
Speaker 1: they have a bunker, they're hiding in it. Law firm
Speaker 1: consultant Lisa Smith with Fairfax Associates said that while some
Speaker 1: firms place limits on gifts from vendors, she hasn't seen
Speaker 1: partnership agreements that address non clients. It would be difficult
Speaker 1: to define that, but it's possible that exists, she said
Speaker 1: via email. Latham's partnership agreement is not publicly available, and
Speaker 1: the firm does not publish a code of ethics for
Speaker 1: its lawyers on its website. Epstein pleaded guilty in Florida
Speaker 1: State Court in two thousand and eight to felony solicitation
Speaker 1: a prostitution and procuring a person under the age of
Speaker 1: eighteen for prostitution. Just to be clear, if you're under eighteen,
Speaker 1: you can't be a prostitute. Okay, you're a child who's
Speaker 1: being manipulated, groomed, abused. I hope that was clear for
Speaker 1: everybody in the back. In July of two thousand nineteen,
Speaker 1: he was arrested on a sex trafficking charge and died
Speaker 1: a month later in a Manhattan jail cell in what
Speaker 1: New York City's Chief Medical Examiner called a suicide. Based
Speaker 1: on my review of a sample of more than nine
Speaker 1: thousand emails from twenty fourteen to twenty nineteen that mentioned
Speaker 1: Rumler's name. The exchanges offer a few indications of why
Speaker 1: the gifts were given or what, if anything, Epstein expected
Speaker 1: in return. A person from Bloomingdale's in twenty seventeen was
Speaker 1: said to be a birthday present, and on Valentine's Day
Speaker 1: in twenty eighteen, Epstein treated Rumler to a Glam Squad
Speaker 1: hair and makeup appointment. At least twice he sent chicken
Speaker 1: soup when she was sick. The email show, So how
Speaker 1: many of you out there have sent chicken noodle soup
Speaker 1: to somebody who's sick that you didn't really know. I'm
Speaker 1: sure everybody's out there running to the store right now
Speaker 1: to get some of that chicken noodle soup to send
Speaker 1: to a stranger. These people really think you're stupid, That's
Speaker 1: what they really think. And they're hoping beyond hope that
Speaker 1: the water carriers that are out here in the media
Speaker 1: do the job for them. Oh well, you see, this
Speaker 1: wasn't that big of a deal. Everybody does it, yoho,
Speaker 1: full stop. No, everybody doesn't do it. Only you, sick degenerates.
Speaker 1: I adore him. It's like having another older brother, Rumner
Speaker 1: wrote in a twenty fifteen email to Epstein's assistant. Also
Speaker 1: buried in the DOJ's document release a twenty sixteen email
Speaker 1: from Epstein forwarding a flattering column I wrote for a
Speaker 1: legal publication about Rumner's work on behalf of a Dubai bank.
Speaker 1: The email appears to have been sent to executives a
Speaker 1: Swiss bank Edmund the Rothschild. Well, we know he was
Speaker 1: working for the Rothschilds, and I know that sounds like
Speaker 1: some crazy ass Alex Jones level shit, but it's true.
Speaker 1: According to Connolly, the bank was a client of Epstein
Speaker 1: and Rumbler, and from the emails that appears that Epstein
Speaker 1: had facilitated her introduction to the client, emailing Rumler in
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen that Edmund D. Rothschild had a DOJ problem.
Speaker 1: Without elaborating, he asked if she was prohibited from involvement. No,
Speaker 1: no prohibition, she responded. A spokesperson for the bank did
Speaker 1: not immediately respond to a request for comment. Well, well,
Speaker 1: well what was she doing? What levers were being pulled?
Speaker 1: And did Rumler play any part in the Obama administration
Speaker 1: hiding this and covering this up? Because make no mistake,
Speaker 1: the Obama administration had all this information. They knew what
Speaker 1: was going on, they knew what Epstein was and they
Speaker 1: hit it too. So Thomas Massey the other day hit
Speaker 1: the nail on the head, but he didn't go back
Speaker 1: far enough because this shit started during Clinton's first term
Speaker 1: and it's been going on since. So all the people
Speaker 1: out here that want to pass blame blame everybody else.
Speaker 1: I got to tell you, it's everybody's fault. Neither side
Speaker 1: has cared about this, and that's why we find ourselves
Speaker 1: in the position that we're in. But when you have
Speaker 1: somebody like Katherine Rumler, who is this high up, who
Speaker 1: is somebody that's the White House counsel, and they're being
Speaker 1: asked to step in and you know, help out with
Speaker 1: the DOJ, that's a problem. And if Prince Andrew and
Speaker 1: MANDELSSN are going to get hemmed up, don't you think
Speaker 1: that people that were in a position like Rumbler's here
Speaker 1: in America should also face serious scrutiny? I most certainly do.
Speaker 1: Reuter's was unable to establish what issue Epstein was referring to,
Speaker 1: or whether Rumbler was ultimately retained to work on it.
Speaker 1: Rumbler's bounty from Epstein included a Hermes purse priced at
Speaker 1: nine thousand, three hundred and fifty dollars in twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: and defendeecote and bag costing six thousand, eight hundred in
Speaker 1: August of twenty eighteen. According to emails released by the DOJ.
Speaker 1: Other gifts include wine, flowers and a massage at the
Speaker 1: Four Seasons in Washington, DC. The email show boy, it
Speaker 1: must be nice, huh out here on the predator's dime
Speaker 1: getting your legs rubbed. Hope you enjoy yourself, because I
Speaker 1: can assure you that the girls that were involved with
Speaker 1: massaging Jeffrey Epstein and his gross ass friends, they didn't
Speaker 1: have very much fun. Should Rumler have known better than
Speaker 1: to accept? With a benefit of hindsight, it seems easy
Speaker 1: to say yes, and to see Epstein's campaign of largesse
Speaker 1: as a deliberate move to get a leading lawyer in
Speaker 1: his corner, even unofficially still run in cover for your
Speaker 1: friend here. Huh. Let's just face it, Catherine Rumler piece
Speaker 1: of shit, okay, point blank period, no cover. That's it.
Speaker 1: That's what she is. And this is why I'm calling
Speaker 1: for a special counsel, someone that goes back and looks
Speaker 1: at everything, Obama, Bush, Clinton, everybody. Everything has to be
Speaker 1: on the table. In twenty eighteen, the Miami Herald and
Speaker 1: other news outlets reported in detail on allegations of sexual
Speaker 1: abuse by teen girls against Epstein. Oh stop it. It
Speaker 1: was widely reported the first time around. Don't even sit
Speaker 1: here for a minute and act like you had no
Speaker 1: idea that shit is not going to work. Rumbler spokesperson
Speaker 1: said her views on Epstein were shaped by his denial
Speaker 1: of any wrongdoing other than what he had pled guilty
Speaker 1: two years prior, and that if she had known what
Speaker 1: she knows now, she never would have dealt with them
Speaker 1: at all. By the nature of their practice, criminal defense
Speaker 1: lawyers are going to have relationships with unsavory people. What
Speaker 1: lawyers need to keep in mind is whether such relationships
Speaker 1: could reflect poorly on their firm or company, said Downey
Speaker 1: Law Group founder Michael Downey, whose firm folks on legal
Speaker 1: ethics and lawyer discipline defense. Especially if gifts or favors
Speaker 1: are involved, the rules of professional conduct, though necessarily come
Speaker 1: into play, he said, Instead, it's ultimately a question of judgment. Well, folks,
Speaker 1: I don't think there's any question that she hues poor
Speaker 1: judgment and while she was having a great time getting
Speaker 1: her massage and having her Hermes bag, that Epstein bill
Speaker 1: is now due and Katherine Rumler is paying up with interest.
Speaker 1: All of the information that goes with this episode can
Speaker 1: be found in the description box