Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to dive into
Speaker 1: that Kathy Rumler transcript from her meeting with Congress, and
Speaker 1: like usual, we're just going to skip all the nonsense
Speaker 1: at the beginning where they're talking about who's there and
Speaker 1: who is going to be taking part in the transcribed
Speaker 1: interview with miss Rumler, and instead we're going to pick
Speaker 1: up with her opening statement. Kathy Rumler, thank you very much,
Speaker 1: Thank you all for the opportunity to appear before the committee.
Speaker 1: I have been a practicing lawyer for thirty years, as
Speaker 1: a federal prosecutor, as a defense attorney, and as general counsel.
Speaker 1: I first met Jeffrey Epstein in July of twenty fourteen,
Speaker 1: when I was restarting my legal practice after having served
Speaker 1: several years in government. Although Epstein was never my client,
Speaker 1: I got to know him when he referred a financial
Speaker 1: institution client to me for which he was the primary advisor.
Speaker 1: There are two important points that I want to make
Speaker 1: up front. I didn't see any evidence of an ongoing
Speaker 1: criminal conduct or misconduct of any kind by mister Epstein
Speaker 1: during the time I dealt with him. Second, if I
Speaker 1: had seen or heard any evidence suggesting that he was
Speaker 1: abusing women or girls, I would have immediately reported him
Speaker 1: to law enforcement. I knew then. What If I knew
Speaker 1: then what I know now about Epstein and what he
Speaker 1: really was, I never would have accepted an initial meeting
Speaker 1: with him. It was a mistake to deal with them,
Speaker 1: and I regret it. But many people assume that, given
Speaker 1: everything we know about Epstein, everyone who dealt with him
Speaker 1: before his twenty nineteen indictment must have known everything then.
Speaker 1: In my case, that assumption is completely wrong. When Epstein
Speaker 1: Cole called me at my law firm in July of
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen, I had never heard of him and I
Speaker 1: knew nothing about him. He told me that he was
Speaker 1: working with Bill Gates to set up a large donor
Speaker 1: advise fund, and that he and mister Gates were looking
Speaker 1: for someone to quarterback the myriad legal issues involved and
Speaker 1: establishing and administering his fund. Though the donor advised fund
Speaker 1: ultimately did not materialize. Within weeks, Epstein referred another important client,
Speaker 1: which did retain me and which I represented until I
Speaker 1: left my law firm in twenty twenty. Epstein was already
Speaker 1: a primary adviser to that client, a role he maintained
Speaker 1: throughout my time in private practice, and I had substantial
Speaker 1: dealings with them as a result. He also referred other
Speaker 1: clients to me, and even though I wasn't his lawyer,
Speaker 1: he saw my advice from time to time, as many
Speaker 1: people do. I was friendly with him in that context,
Speaker 1: and I dealt with them in my ordinary course, casually, informally,
Speaker 1: and sometimes irreverently. Shortly after meeting Epstein, I came to
Speaker 1: understand that he had pleaded guilty six years earlier to
Speaker 1: two prostitution related offenses, including solicitation of a minor for prostitution,
Speaker 1: and had received a non prosecution agreement from the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice. I learned from him that he had received
Speaker 1: an eighteen month sentence, of which he served thirteen months,
Speaker 1: much of that time on work release. Epstein told me
Speaker 1: that while a small number of women he had solicited
Speaker 1: for prostitution turned out to be under the age of consent,
Speaker 1: he had not known that any of them were under age.
Speaker 1: Epstein appeared to be quite open about the conduct leading
Speaker 1: to his conviction, or so he led me to believe.
Speaker 1: He expressed remorse, embarrassment, and regret for his conduct, which
Speaker 1: he described as paying money for sex to women he
Speaker 1: believed to be over the age of eighteen. Notwithstanding his conviction,
Speaker 1: by the time I met him, he had active relationships
Speaker 1: with extensive groups of respective professionals in business, academia, politics,
Speaker 1: and the arts. And given the nature of my law practice,
Speaker 1: I routinely dealt with compromise or controversial people, including those
Speaker 1: facing criminal or other allegations of wrongdoing. To be clear,
Speaker 1: at no time that I endorse or excuse the conduct
Speaker 1: for which Epstein had pleaded guilty in two thousand and eight.
Speaker 1: As a I'm a prosecutor, I relied on a resolution
Speaker 1: reach by a federal and state prosecutors and validated by
Speaker 1: a judge as being a proportionate and final resolution to
Speaker 1: its criminal conduct. In light of everything that we know now,
Speaker 1: that resolution was deeply flawed, but at the time, given
Speaker 1: my experience, the resolution seemed consistent with his description that
Speaker 1: he was a customer or a john and had never
Speaker 1: intentionally targeted miners. Epstein also provided me with a letter
Speaker 1: that one of his attorneys in the matter, Stephanie Thacker,
Speaker 1: had written to the Deputy Attorney General's Office at DOJ
Speaker 1: in twenty eighteen, appealing the U. S. Attorney's requirement that
Speaker 1: Epstein entered a non prosecution agreement. Although I did not
Speaker 1: know Miss Thacker personally, I know of a reputation as
Speaker 1: a judge on the US Court of Appeals and as
Speaker 1: a respected an experienced former's supervisory prosecutor in DOJ's Child
Speaker 1: Exploitation and Obscenity Section. Miss Thacker's lengthy and substantive letter
Speaker 1: stated that the evidence gathered by the state and federal
Speaker 1: investigator showed that Epstein saw commercial sex only from people
Speaker 1: who were of age. As we know now, his conduct
Speaker 1: was much worse and more sinister. But at the time
Speaker 1: I reviewed Miss Stacker's letter, I strongly supported and corroborated
Speaker 1: Epstein's explanations to me, and based on my experience as
Speaker 1: a former senior DOJ official, I also knew that the U. S.
Speaker 1: Attorney's office in Miami had a reputation for aggressive, hard
Speaker 1: NOS prosecution. I believed that though prosecutors would have charged
Speaker 1: them with targeting miners for commercial sex if they had
Speaker 1: sufficient evidence to support the charges. My communication with Epstein
Speaker 1: ended in July of twenty nineteen, after he was indicted
Speaker 1: for sex trafficking miners. I was shocked by the indictment,
Speaker 1: which led alleged that Epstein had intentionally enticed and recruited
Speaker 1: minor girls to engage in sex acts with him in
Speaker 1: exchange for cash. Those horrific allegations, which covered conduct that
Speaker 1: had occurred almost ten years before I I met Epstein,
Speaker 1: contradicted what I understood about the nature and scope of
Speaker 1: the prior conduct. There has been so much media attention
Speaker 1: around my email communication with Epstein and the gifts that
Speaker 1: he gave me. Many of my emails with Epstein have
Speaker 1: been taken out of context or do not mean what
Speaker 1: some have speculated or suggested. With that said, given what
Speaker 1: I know about him now, I wish that I would
Speaker 1: have dealt with them at all, much less emailed with him.
Speaker 1: With respect to gifts, I didn't ask for them, I
Speaker 1: didn't need them, and I didn't view them as a
Speaker 1: particularly personal or consequential. I accepted them graciously, as I
Speaker 1: saw no reason not to. But the gifts weren't important
Speaker 1: to me, and I declined to accept some of them.
Speaker 1: In any event, nothing he gave me caused me to
Speaker 1: deal with him any differently than I otherwise would have
Speaker 1: Epstein was a masterful liar, and he clearly lied to me.
Speaker 1: I can see now that he used me and the
Speaker 1: other respectable people to legitimize his standing, and I know
Speaker 1: now that he often exaggerated relationship with me to others.
Speaker 1: I understand how frustrating and hurtful it must have been
Speaker 1: for anyone victimized by Epstein, so to see him going
Speaker 1: about his life without facing the type of accountability and
Speaker 1: consequences he deserved. I'm angry that he hurts so many people,
Speaker 1: and I regret ever having anything to do with him.
Speaker 1: I look forward to answering the committee's questions. Mister Grant,
Speaker 1: Thank you, Miss Rumler. The time reads ten twenty three,
Speaker 1: and the Majority's time will begin now, mister Grant. Question,
Speaker 1: thank you for that opening statement. Of course, just to
Speaker 1: make sure that we have a thorough transcript of today's interview,
Speaker 1: some of these questions will, of course elicit what you
Speaker 1: just brought up in your opening statement, so I want
Speaker 1: to apologize in advance for that answer. Understood. Question, I
Speaker 1: want to briefly begin with discussing your background. So where
Speaker 1: did you attend undergraduate school? Answer? The University of Washington
Speaker 1: in Seattle. Question and what degree did you graduate with?
Speaker 1: Answer A Bachelor of Arts degree in English. Question and
Speaker 1: where did you attend law school? Answer Georgetown University Law Center.
Speaker 1: Question and when did you graduate from Georgetown? Answer nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety six. Question When were you admitted to practice law?
Speaker 1: Answer nineteen ninety eight. Question and what jurisdiction do you
Speaker 1: currently hold a bar license? Answer the District of Columbia,
Speaker 1: the State of Virginia, and State of New York. Answer
Speaker 1: are your licenses currently in good standing? Answer yes? Question
Speaker 1: and can you briefly just go through your professional background
Speaker 1: from when you graduated law school until current day? Answer sure.
Speaker 1: Right after law school, I clerked on the United States
Speaker 1: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Then I worked
Speaker 1: at a litigation boutique here in DC where I specialized
Speaker 1: in white collar criminal defense. From there, I went to
Speaker 1: the White House where I worked as an Associate Council
Speaker 1: to the President for President William Jefferson Clinton. From there,
Speaker 1: I worked briefly at a law firm in Washington, DC,
Speaker 1: the law firm of Latham and Watkins. And I left
Speaker 1: Latham and Watkins when I had the opportunity to go
Speaker 1: and work at the US Attorney's office in DC as
Speaker 1: an assistant US Attorney. I worked in that office for
Speaker 1: a few years, and then I had the opportunity to
Speaker 1: go on detail to Maine Justice, where I spent close
Speaker 1: to four years on the investigation and prosecution of executives
Speaker 1: at Enron after its collapse. I then returned to the
Speaker 1: private practice as a partner to the law firm of
Speaker 1: Latham Watkins, where I again specialized in white collar criminal defense.
Speaker 1: I was there for two years, and then I returned
Speaker 1: to the government in January of two thousand and nine
Speaker 1: in a senior management role at the Justice Department. I
Speaker 1: served as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General until twenty ten.
Speaker 1: In twenty ten, I moved to the White House, where
Speaker 1: I became Principal Deputy White House Council for President Barack Obama.
Speaker 1: In June of twenty eleven, I was promoted to White
Speaker 1: House Council for President Barack Obama. I served in that
Speaker 1: role until May of twenty fourteen, and I returned to
Speaker 1: private practice at Latham and Watkins in July of twenty fourteen,
Speaker 1: where I became the global chair of the white collar
Speaker 1: Defense and Investigations practice. At Latham, I worked in private
Speaker 1: practice in the capacity until April of twenty twenty when
Speaker 1: I moved to go to Goldman Sachs. My first position
Speaker 1: at Goldman Sachs was Global Head of Regulatory Affairs. I
Speaker 1: then I moved to become or was promoted to become
Speaker 1: the Chief Legal Officer and General Council of Goldman Sachs
Speaker 1: in March of twenty twenty one, and in February of
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six, I announced that I'd be stepping down
Speaker 1: from those roles at the end of June, and I
Speaker 1: currently am in an advisory role at Goldman Sachs. Question.
Speaker 1: Thank you a very illustrious career answer, Thank you. Question
Speaker 1: What were your primary responsibilities when you were at the
Speaker 1: White House and you were the White House Council. Answer?
Speaker 1: You know, the very first White House count Council was
Speaker 1: appointed by then President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and he was asked,
Speaker 1: this is I don't know if this is apocryphal, but
Speaker 1: this is the story. He was asked by a member
Speaker 1: of the media what his White House Council was going
Speaker 1: to do, and he said legal stuff. And I think
Speaker 1: that's still a pretty apt description of the job as
Speaker 1: White House counsel. There's a number of responsibilities that I
Speaker 1: think are very particularized to the role. You're responsible for
Speaker 1: judicial nominations, making recommendations to the President for judicial nominations,
Speaker 1: and shepherding those along with the Office of Legislative Affairs
Speaker 1: through the Senate confirmation process. You are. At least when
Speaker 1: I was working for President Obama, I had the responsibility
Speaker 1: for making clemency recommendations to the President, advising on legality
Speaker 1: of matters relating to domestic policy, national security, and congressional oversight.
Speaker 1: It's been quite a few years since I've been up
Speaker 1: there with the White House Committee. I've typically always been
Speaker 1: a lawyer, so this is my first go around as
Speaker 1: a witness and not being a lawyer here. But that
Speaker 1: was a significant part of my responsibility, responding to Congress
Speaker 1: and communicating with general counsels of the other agencies. So
Speaker 1: it's a very broad portfolio. All right, folks, we're going
Speaker 1: to wrap up episode one right there, and in the
Speaker 1: next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up
Speaker 1: where we left off. All the information that goes with
Speaker 1: this episode can be found in the description box.