Kathy Ruemmler. How could she???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

She had an affair with Epstein’s lawyer, so that person likely made the into.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When will she be fired???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

She had an affair with Epstein’s lawyer, so that person likely made the into.

The timeline doesn't match up. She started the affair after she was already chummy with Epstein.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:- Smart, ambitious and successful with a long list of accomplishments all along the way;
- Old and getting older (she’s now 54)
- Never married – she was a ‘winner,’ and must’ve wondered why couldn’t she find a suitable guy to marry, or one couldn’t find her.
- No children.

This combination can make a woman mean. It's good she's been found out. Nasty piece of work.

But will add she's no worse than the men involved.

Certainly no worse than the men. I think that those of us here (in DC, on DCUM) are likely to be around her age, and perhaps would have loved to be White House Counsel under Obama. So, we can identify with her more than the pasty pants-less men in the files. We wonder, why, if she had it made (from our points of view) would she give all of that up for a few shiny objects and a little bit of flattery.

I know some folks from law school who ended up as WH counsel. They were smart and hardworking and I dont think they would have gotten mixed up with someone like Epstein. This is gross and bad and a flawed character.

[Anonymous]

Not to just pick on her: how could ruemmler not know what he did? She was WH counsel after Epstein had his conviction. So she knew. Like the Clintons knew - and yet had Maxwell attend Chelsea’s highly publicized wedding after Epsteins 2009 conviction.

I don’t see how Paul Weiss, Goldman Sachs, or any other firms can retain people who associated with him and showed up in these files. We can see so far that there is no business really in these files no magical special genius tax advice flowing from Epstein to a lucky few. This was all about fun and favors knowing he was a convicted sex offender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not to just pick on her: how could ruemmler not know what he did? She was WH counsel after Epstein had his conviction. So she knew. Like the Clintons knew - and yet had Maxwell attend Chelsea’s highly publicized wedding after Epsteins 2009 conviction.

I don’t see how Paul Weiss, Goldman Sachs, or any other firms can retain people who associated with him and showed up in these files. We can see so far that there is no business really in these files no magical special genius tax advice flowing from Epstein to a lucky few. This was all about fun and favors knowing he was a convicted sex offender.

You think Goldman Sachs has non vile people? They are evil incorporated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

She had an affair with Epstein’s lawyer, so that person likely made the into.

The timeline doesn't match up. She started the affair after she was already chummy with Epstein.

It matches up… her affair partner and Epstein’s lawyer connected her to Epstein in 2014 and they knew one another before 2014. They were both in prominent DC legal circles and connected to one another before 2014.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When will she be fired???

She's sort of suprising to be in the position she has as Chief Counsel. Univ Washington undergrad. Georgetown Law. These are not the best legal credentials. So they just wanted her there for her connections and personality?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

She had an affair with Epstein’s lawyer, so that person likely made the into.

The timeline doesn't match up. She started the affair after she was already chummy with Epstein.

Why would you think that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to just pick on her: how could ruemmler not know what he did? She was WH counsel after Epstein had his conviction. So she knew. Like the Clintons knew - and yet had Maxwell attend Chelsea’s highly publicized wedding after Epsteins 2009 conviction.

I don’t see how Paul Weiss, Goldman Sachs, or any other firms can retain people who associated with him and showed up in these files. We can see so far that there is no business really in these files no magical special genius tax advice flowing from Epstein to a lucky few. This was all about fun and favors knowing he was a convicted sex offender.

You think Goldman Sachs has non vile people? They are evil incorporated.

Don’t pick at me. There’s a difference between “mega finance place” and “our GC was close with Epstein and was contemptuous of regular people.” There’s a difference between “hot shot litigators” and “get my kid in a Woody project after your sex offense thing.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

She had an affair with Epstein’s lawyer, so that person likely made the into.

The timeline doesn't match up. She started the affair after she was already chummy with Epstein.

Why would you think that?

Because she told Epstein about the affair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to just pick on her: how could ruemmler not know what he did? She was WH counsel after Epstein had his conviction. So she knew. Like the Clintons knew - and yet had Maxwell attend Chelsea’s highly publicized wedding after Epsteins 2009 conviction.

I don’t see how Paul Weiss, Goldman Sachs, or any other firms can retain people who associated with him and showed up in these files. We can see so far that there is no business really in these files no magical special genius tax advice flowing from Epstein to a lucky few. This was all about fun and favors knowing he was a convicted sex offender.

You think Goldman Sachs has non vile people? They are evil incorporated.

Don’t pick at me. There’s a difference between “mega finance place” and “our GC was close with Epstein and was contemptuous of regular people.” There’s a difference between “hot shot litigators” and “get my kid in a Woody project after your sex offense thing.”

Well apparently there isn’t any such difference which we can obviously all see with our own eyes. Wake up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not to just pick on her: how could ruemmler not know what he did? She was WH counsel after Epstein had his conviction. So she knew. Like the Clintons knew - and yet had Maxwell attend Chelsea’s highly publicized wedding after Epsteins 2009 conviction.

I don’t see how Paul Weiss, Goldman Sachs, or any other firms can retain people who associated with him and showed up in these files. We can see so far that there is no business really in these files no magical special genius tax advice flowing from Epstein to a lucky few. This was all about fun and favors knowing he was a convicted sex offender.

You think Goldman Sachs has non vile people? They are evil incorporated.

Don’t pick at me. There’s a difference between “mega finance place” and “our GC was close with Epstein and was contemptuous of regular people.” There’s a difference between “hot shot litigators” and “get my kid in a Woody project after your sex offense thing.”

Well apparently there isn’t any such difference which we can obviously all see with our own eyes. Wake up!

Please just STFU

[Anonymous]

Simple. Many people did not actually consider what Epstein did to be a crime, because they think the girls (even as young as 14) consented to it for money and enjoyed it. Hard to swallow but there it is. This was seen as naughtiness on Epstein’s part but not actually a sex crime. Underlying that view is obviously contempt towards young women and a “boys will be boys” excuse towards men. Rich men have appetites they sate with money and Epstein’s appetite for young girls was seen as morally no different from an appetite for any other luxury item.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When will she be fired???

She's sort of suprising to be in the position she has as Chief Counsel. Univ Washington undergrad. Georgetown Law. These are not the best legal credentials. So they just wanted her there for her connections and personality?

Because the insider “world” these creeps operate in has nothing to do with merit. It’s a cartel.