A New Biography Challenges the Narrative on Leon Black
Leon Black, the founder of Apollo Global Management, saw his reputation unravel in October 2020 after The New York Times reported that he remained a primary financial patron to Jeffrey Epstein long after the financier was labeled a criminal. That reporting established a central narrative regarding Black’s judgment and his ties to the disgraced figure. But a new biography by longtime finance journalist Bill Cohan, titled Money to Burn: The Unvarnished Truth About Leon Black, Apollo, and the Rise of a New Wall Street, pushes back against that characterization. The book presents Black not as a willing accomplice in Epstein's dark operations, but as a finance pioneer whose career was derailed by a mix of personal flaws and isolation.
Cohan describes his work as a direct rebuttal to what he terms a “Leon jihad” conducted by news outlets, specifically pointing to the coverage from The New York Times, the Financial Times, and Airmail. In an interview, Cohan characterized Black as the “Saint Sebastian of Wall Street,” suggesting he has become a target for persistent media scrutiny. This new biography has reignited tensions between Cohan and Times reporters David Enrich and Matt Goldstein, who have long tracked the Epstein-Black relationship. According to accounts of a recent exchange, the Times journalists confronted Black’s representatives about their portrayal in Cohan’s book, claiming they were not given adequate opportunity to address the text before publication.
The Dispute Between Author and Reporters
At the center of this clash is a profound disagreement over what defines complicity. Cohan argues he listened to Black’s side of the story and found no evidence to refute the financier's claims of innocence regarding Epstein's criminal schemes. He notes that the Times reporters are frustrated by their inability to get Black on the record, yet he believes their aggressive past reporting makes it predictable that Black would stop talking to them. Still, the Times remains steadfast in its account of the facts.
Times spokesman Charlie Stadtlander stated that the organization’s reporting on Black has been fair and accurate, standing the test of subsequent revelations. For their part, the Times reporters remain skeptical of Cohan’s narrative, specifically highlighting a March 2026 report they produced. That piece revealed that Epstein played a functional role in helping Black navigate the payment of $20 million to over a dozen women with whom Black had sexual relationships. The Times investigation relied on internal notes and files shared with congressional investigators, details that Cohan claims arrived too late in his own writing process to be properly addressed in the book.
Broader Implications for Wall Street and Accountability
Beyond the personal animosity between the author and the newspaper staff, the case illustrates the intense scrutiny currently applied to the private equity industry. Black remains a foundational figure in the development of modern American finance, and his struggles represent a test case for how the public and regulators weigh historical conduct. Rep. James Comer, chair of the House Oversight Committee, is moving to compel testimony from Black regarding those payments, while Sen. Ron Wyden has questioned whether the financial maneuvers amount to money laundering. Black denies all such allegations.
This debate underscores the friction between legacy media investigative units and authors who gain exclusive access to their subjects. As Black attempts to frame a new version of his history through Cohan’s biography, federal scrutiny continues to mount. The upcoming interview between Cohan and the Times’s own Andrew Ross Sorkin on September 9 at the 92nd Street Y promises to be a flashpoint in this ongoing public reckoning. It remains to be seen whether a biographical account can alter the established public record shaped by years of investigative reporting.