Ken Starr

The arc of Ken Starr's involvement with Jeffrey Epstein begins at Kirkland & Ellis, where Starr was a partner when the firm was retained to represent Epstein during the 2007–2008 federal investigation in the Southern District of Florida. Starr joined a defense team that included fellow K&E partner Jay Lefkowitz, Alan Dershowitz, Jack Goldberger, and Gerald Lefcourt. The team's objective was to prevent a federal indictment and secure the Non-Prosecution Agreement that would allow Epstein to plead to lesser state charges. Starr's specific contribution was lobbying the Department of Justice hierarchy: he wrote directly to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip ², and a broader K&E submission ³ cited a 2007 DOJ letter from Brian Benczkowski, then a DOJ official and later K&E partner, arguing that prostitution crimes belonged at the state level. Starr's registered lobbyist status at K&E (LDA ID 34088) is documented, but his congressional outreach on Epstein's behalf during this period does not appear in formal Lobbying Disclosure Act filings — a gap that suggests this advocacy may have been structured to fall beneath the registration threshold.

What distinguishes Starr from the other defense attorneys is the depth and duration of the personal relationship that persisted long after the NPA was secured. In July 2009, writing from Tel Aviv where he was teaching at Bar Ilan University, Starr told Epstein: "Miss you too, my admired friend. Stand firm. This too shall pass" ⁴. In April 2010, Starr coordinated a Harvard dinner with Henry Rosovsky and Epstein ⁵, writing: "Very good. I'll be there at that very civilized hour unless Jeffrey guides us differently." By January 2018, Starr was consulting Epstein about the marketing strategy for his Penguin Random House memoir Contempt: A Memoir of the Clinton Investigation ⁶, demonstrating a relationship that had transcended any attorney-client boundary into genuine personal dependence. Starr's affection was evidently genuine; Epstein's deployment of it was strategic.

The most extensively documented chapter of the Starr-Epstein relationship is the coordinated op-ed campaign of December 2018 through March 2019, which sought to reshape public narrative around Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement as the Miami Herald's "Perversion of Justice" series threatened to reopen the case. The seed was planted over a year earlier: on November 22, 2017, Starr lunched with Epstein at 358 El Brillo Way in Palm Beach, and Epstein immediately told Landon Thomas Jr. of the New York Times: "Ken Starr here today with me. he seems to have been ahead of his time." Thomas responded: "Indeed — he should write an op-ed!" ⁷. That casual suggestion became an elaborate strategic operation.

By December 6, 2018, the effort had escalated into a multi-front defense campaign. That single night, Starr emailed Epstein proposing former AG Ed Meese as an outside voice to argue against federalizing state matters ⁸. Simultaneously, Epstein emailed Kathryn Ruemmler and Starr together with detailed legal framing: "prostitution, state not federal. 2005, new york class a misdemeanor... no federal nexus" ⁹. Ruemmler endorsed the op-ed plan: "I think an op-ed from Ken and Alan would be good" ¹⁰. And on that same evening, Epstein separately asked Noam Chomsky: "should ken starr write an editorial? a scientist.. who has benefited.." ¹¹. Epstein was simultaneously activating his legal advisor, his former White House Counsel advisor, and his intellectual validation network — each unaware of the full scope of the others' involvement.

The drafting process reveals how carefully the public narrative was engineered. Starr produced a Washington Post draft that characterized Epstein as "a successful self-made businessman with no prior criminal history" whose offenses "amounted to solicitation of prostitution," described the federal intervention as "draconian measures" and "an extremely aggressive federal intrusion," and dismissed victim testimony with the claim of "exculpatory evidence, including sworn testimony from many that they lied about being eighteen" ¹². When David Schoen, later Trump's second impeachment lawyer, reviewed the draft, he flagged the Starr byline as a liability "because of the specific nature of his trouble — dismissed and being sued for allegedly overlooking sexual harassment" at Baylor. Epstein asked Schoen if he might rework it "into a pro prosecutor piece" under a different name, revealing the operation's willingness to detach the argument from its actual author entirely.

The question of co-authorship consumed weeks of negotiation. Starr asked: "Is Alan open to co-authoring a piece? Is that wise? If so, I will work to clear this with my firm" ¹³. Epstein cautioned: "please clear with the firm as we dont want judge marra to feel only onesided pressure" — a revealing acknowledgment that the target audience included the presiding judge. When Dershowitz suggested adding Martin Weinberg and Jack Goldberger because "you and alan are lightening rods," Starr retorted: "Lightening rods, sure. But the big advantage is, we will get read. Maybe that is actually a disadvantage." Epstein replied: "I have reputational cancer not pancreatic." Starr: "Ready to fight (after clearing with the firm). Hugs (or elbow bumps), Ken" ¹⁴. By December 19, Epstein settled on Starr and Weinberg as co-signers, specifically because "neither lily or alan are fully peaceful" ¹⁵ — an assessment of which defense team members could be trusted not to go off-script.

The clearest evidence of Starr's dual function emerges from his simultaneous role as a television legal commentator and private defense strategist. On December 7, 2018, the morning after his late-night AG strategy emails to Epstein, Starr reported: "lust did a segment on CNN New Day re Mueller/Bill Barr. They closed (no prior notice) with a question re Ben Sasse's quote. I did ok in response" ⁸. From CNN's perspective, Starr was a former Independent Counsel offering independent analysis of the Mueller investigation and the AG confirmation process. In reality, he was advising a criminal defendant whose interests were directly affected by who became Attorney General and how aggressively federal prosecutors pursued past cases.

The media orchestration extended beyond CNN. In June 2018, Starr forwarded Epstein an email confirming he had given Michael Wolff — Epstein's own PR strategist, responsible for 303 emails in the DOJ corpus — a quote for a piece on Trump and obstruction of justice. "I gave Michael the all clear. We are going to continue to chat," Starr wrote ¹⁶. Wolff had described Starr as "the former independent prosecutor who might know more about the legal pursuit of the president than anyone else on earth." The circuit was closed: Epstein directed Wolff to Starr; Starr provided quotes framed as independent expertise; the published pieces served Epstein's broader interest in a weakened federal prosecution apparatus. Starr also screened press inquiries on Epstein's behalf, forwarding a Politico request from the Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking and asking Epstein what to do. "yes ignore," Epstein replied ¹⁷.

When Epstein asked Starr on December 7 about finding a female co-author for the NPA defense op-ed — a transparent effort to soften the optics of a man defending a sex offender — Starr agreed it would be "much better, of course" but admitted: "No one has come to mind. Thinking" ¹⁸. The episode captures the nature of the relationship: Epstein made the strategic decisions about messaging, audience, and optics; Starr executed them using his credibility and contacts, offering tactical suggestions but deferring to Epstein's judgment on the larger questions. It was a relationship of intellectual peers but unequal power — Epstein set the direction, and Starr provided the institutional legitimacy to carry it out.

Starr's advocacy for Epstein was not limited to media management. The DOJ emails reveal a sustained effort to influence both Congress and the incoming Attorney General. In late November 2016, Starr forwarded Epstein material about JASTA (the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act) through his daughter Cynthia Starr Roemer. Epstein replied: "got it, thanks. leave it in my hands. always a treat" ¹⁹. On December 1, 2016, Starr followed up: "Good OpEd in today's WSJ on our favorite subject" ¹⁹. The casual reference to JASTA as "our favorite subject" suggests an ongoing legislative collaboration that predated the more intensive 2018 op-ed campaign by two full years. The nature of this JASTA collaboration remains partially opaque — whether Epstein's interest was personal liability, client service, or geopolitical positioning related to Saudi Arabia and the 9/11 lawsuits the act enabled is not specified in the available correspondence.

On December 6, 2018, Starr proposed former Attorney General Ed Meese as an "outsider" who could argue against the federalization of state-level offenses. "We obviously need to think through the politics," Starr wrote ⁸, openly acknowledging the political dimension of a purportedly legal argument. The next morning, after appearing on CNN to comment on William Barr's AG nomination, Starr reported back to Epstein on how the Ben Sasse question had gone. This was significant because Sasse, during Barr's confirmation hearings, had publicly questioned the incoming AG about the Epstein case. Starr was watching congressional pressure points on the Epstein matter while simultaneously appearing as an independent commentator on the very same proceedings.

By February 2019, Starr escalated to direct congressional outreach, proposing a delegation of "Kathy, Alan, Ken" — Ruemmler, Dershowitz, and himself — to meet with Senator Sasse about the NPA ²⁰. Epstein hesitated, recognizing the strategic risk of exposing Starr prematurely: "I think we might save ken for later... I fear backlash for you... after mueller report, and what i understand the southern district is up to, I would think that your opinions would be highly valued with regard trump" ²⁰. This exchange reveals Epstein treating Starr as a depletable resource whose public credibility had a limited number of uses. Spending that credibility on Epstein's NPA defense would reduce its value for the Trump-related commentary that both men recognized was more strategically important. After the Miami Herald published critical opinion pieces on February 16, 2019, Starr still pushed: "Letter to Sasse?" ²¹. The congressional lobbying track persisted into March 2019 alongside the op-ed track, with Darren Indyke drafting documents circulated to both Starr and Ruemmler that Epstein rejected as "too long for an op ed. better signed by defense team, laying out position" ²².

Starr's network within the Epstein matter operated at two levels: the core defense team and the strategic outer ring. At the core, Starr worked directly with Alan Dershowitz ²³, Martin Weinberg ¹⁵, Jack Goldberger, and Darren Indyke — the legal professionals who had represented Epstein since the NPA period and continued to manage his affairs. The dynamic among them was candid and often blunt. Epstein told Starr that Dershowitz suggested broadening the op-ed co-authorship because "you and alan are lightening rods," and Epstein himself assessed that "neither lily or alan are fully peaceful" as media representatives — a frank acknowledgment that some members of the defense team were liabilities in public-facing roles.

Kathryn Ruemmler's role alongside Starr deserves particular attention. From December 2018 through March 2019, Ruemmler and Starr operated as co-strategists on the Epstein defense, receiving the same emails, reviewing the same drafts, and offering parallel advice. Ruemmler endorsed the Starr-Dershowitz op-ed, noted media relationships ("This reporter is married to Maggie Haberman"), and traveled between New York and San Francisco while advising Epstein on legal positioning. Her most revealing statement came in the November 2018 exchange where Epstein floated Starr's involvement and Ruemmler acknowledged the fundamental problem: "The problem is always the same — girls were teenagers. Doesnt matter that they were prostitutes — its the age. And now several have gone on record and camera" ²⁴. Despite this clear-eyed assessment of the facts, Ruemmler continued to participate in the coordinated defense strategy.

The outer ring included figures Epstein connected to Starr for specific purposes. In June 2018, Epstein introduced Starr to Steve Bannon with a characteristically terse email: "Ken - steve. Steve -ken" ¹. This occurred during a period when both Starr and Bannon were providing Epstein with advice on the Mueller investigation and political strategy — Epstein was brokering a connection between his legal advisor and his political advisor. David Schoen, who would later serve as Trump's defense attorney in the second impeachment trial, was brought in to review and potentially assume authorship of Starr's op-ed draft. Landon Thomas Jr. of the New York Times functioned as a media intelligence source, his suggestion that Starr "should write an op-ed" providing the germ of an idea that Epstein's team spent over a year developing. The relationship with William Barr was structural rather than direct — Starr discussed Barr's AG nomination with Epstein and appeared on television commenting on the confirmation process, creating a circuit where his public analysis served private strategic purposes.

The unspoken backdrop to Starr's op-ed campaign was his own recent disgrace. In May 2016, an independent investigation by Pepper Hamilton LLP found that Baylor University, under Starr's leadership as president and chancellor, had systematically failed to investigate sexual assault complaints against football players, creating what the report described as an institutional culture that discouraged reporting and left survivors without support. The Board of Regents removed Starr as president, and he subsequently resigned as chancellor and from his tenured law professorship. At least 17 women reported sexual or domestic violence by Baylor football players between 2011 and 2016, during which period Starr had focused the university's resources on football program expansion and fundraising rather than Title IX compliance.

This history was not unknown to Epstein's circle. When David Schoen reviewed Starr's draft op-ed defending the Epstein NPA, he immediately flagged the vulnerability: "I do worry about starr honestly, again because of the specific nature of his trouble — dismissed and being sued for allegedly overlooking sexual harassment. Can you think of a comparable right winger who might do it?" ¹². Schoen's concern was tactical rather than moral — the problem was not that a man who had overseen institutional indifference to sexual assault was now defending a convicted sex offender, but that the optics would undermine the op-ed's persuasive force. Epstein's response was to explore whether Schoen himself might rework the piece under a different byline, detaching the argument from its compromised author while preserving the substance.

The Baylor parallel illuminates a pattern that extends beyond personal hypocrisy into institutional behavior. At Baylor, Starr prioritized the institution's revenue-generating interests (football) over its duty to protect vulnerable students. In the Epstein matter, Starr prioritized a client relationship — and his own continued relevance to a powerful network — over what even Ruemmler acknowledged was an indefensible factual record. In both cases, the mechanism was the same: the prestige of the institution (a university presidency, an Independent Counsel's reputation) was deployed to shield conduct that the institution's representative knew to be harmful. Starr died on September 13, 2022, at age 76, in Houston, Texas. He never publicly addressed the full scope of his post-NPA relationship with Epstein as documented in the DOJ Volume 11 release.