While prestigious, I have to think the type of lawyer who wants Trump for a client is hardly goingbto want to do heavy government work for a civil servant’s salary. Surely there’s way more cash in skip-and-falls and “get six divorce punches on your loyalty club card and the 7th is free”.
The cash is in the favors you can do for people, now that the Supreme Court has ruled that bribes gratuities are perfectly legal. It’s no accident that Trump now wants to remove taxes on “tips”. As of right now, if you “tip” your Deputy AG to fix a case for you, it needs to be reported to the IRS. If there are no taxes on “tips”, they are not reportable to anyone, and no pesky reporter can report your “tip” income.
There was, when the ruling first came down. Responsible journalists tend to operate on events, with facts that can be verified. When the ruling happened, there were a lot of “Here’s what this means” articles, talking in the abstract about things that haven’t happened yet. They only got published because they were timely because of the ruling.
Now, we have no actual information that this guy is gonna grift “gratuitues” out of his position, other than he’s a Trump insider and that’s what they do. But responsible outlets won’t report on it unless there is clear evidence.
Now if we find out there are facts backing up the idea, these responsible journalists have already done a lot of the legwork, so they just add the new facts and can publish something timely again.
While prestigious, I have to think the type of lawyer who wants Trump for a client is hardly goingbto want to do heavy government work for a civil servant’s salary. Surely there’s way more cash in skip-and-falls and “get six divorce punches on your loyalty club card and the 7th is free”.
The cash is in the favors you can do for people, now that the Supreme Court has ruled that
bribesgratuities are perfectly legal. It’s no accident that Trump now wants to remove taxes on “tips”. As of right now, if you “tip” your Deputy AG to fix a case for you, it needs to be reported to the IRS. If there are no taxes on “tips”, they are not reportable to anyone, and no pesky reporter can report your “tip” income.Wow, this is entirely too plausible. Why isn’t their reporting on it?
There was, when the ruling first came down. Responsible journalists tend to operate on events, with facts that can be verified. When the ruling happened, there were a lot of “Here’s what this means” articles, talking in the abstract about things that haven’t happened yet. They only got published because they were timely because of the ruling.
Now, we have no actual information that this guy is gonna grift “gratuitues” out of his position, other than he’s a Trump insider and that’s what they do. But responsible outlets won’t report on it unless there is clear evidence.
Now if we find out there are facts backing up the idea, these responsible journalists have already done a lot of the legwork, so they just add the new facts and can publish something timely again.