The New York Times is facing internal and external criticism for a recent opinion piece that offered a sympathetic portrayal of Kathryn Ruemmler, a former Obama White House Counsel and ally of Jeffrey Epstein. The article, written by freelance contributor Ankush Khardori, has been described by some Times reporters as "embarrassing" and a "joke," particularly in light of the newspaper's extensive reporting on Epstein and its role in the #MeToo movement.
Scrutiny Over Ruemmler's Ties
Ruemmler, who resigned as Goldman Sachs' general counsel amid controversy over her emails with Epstein, was at one point named an executor of his will, though she later withdrew. She has stated she did not have full awareness of his criminal activities. The opinion piece depicted her as "oddly naive" and struggling in a challenging legal environment, with the author suggesting her "remorse felt genuine."
However, this framing contradicts the Times' own newsroom reporting, which has detailed Ruemmler's close relationship with Epstein, including gifts and communications where she referred to him affectionately and signed off emails with "xoxo." These details emerged from over 10,000 documents released by the Department of Justice.
Sources within the Times newsroom expressed dismay, with one reporter who covered Epstein stating, "Everyone thought the story was a joke… it was embarrassing. They [Khardori] didn’t even appear to have read our own reporting."
Undermining #MeToo Reporting
Attorneys representing Epstein victims have also voiced concerns. Nathan Werksman, who pushed for the reopening of Epstein's estate to lawsuits, argued that downplaying accountability for figures like Ruemmler undermines the paper's journalistic mission. He noted that in a profit-driven industry like Big Law, associations with controversial figures can have significant financial and reputational consequences.
The opinion piece suggested Ruemmler felt pressured to bring in business and claimed she would not have worked with Epstein had she known the full extent of his crimes. Ruemmler herself was quoted saying, "What I did not appreciate at the time and now deeply regret … is that Epstein used me, along with many others, to legitimize his standing." However, critics suggested her regret was more about damage to her career.
Khardori defended the piece to The Post, stating Ruemmler is a victim of sexual assault and that her relationship with Epstein was based on a shared client engagement. He added that Ruemmler never texted Epstein, declined dinners, refused introductions, and turned down a significant gift.
The Times, when asked for comment, stated that its news and opinion sections "do not coordinate with each other" and that "the newsroom and opinion provide insights and understanding to our audiences in different ways, and both offer enormous value."
A Pattern of Contradiction?
This sympathetic portrayal is seen by some as a stark contrast to the Times' own prominent #MeToo reporting, including its groundbreaking work on Harvey Weinstein, which amplified the movement. Some sources familiar with the situation found the interview tone-deaf, questioning the timing and the depiction of Ruemmler as both naive and powerful.
Previous reports from The Wall Street Journal indicated Ruemmler had numerous meetings with Epstein after her White House tenure and before joining Goldman Sachs, and that Epstein had planned for her to join trips to Paris and his private island. Werksman quipped that Ruemmler's publicist, who secured the interview, deserved commendation.