President Vladimir V. Putin brought up a sale of Russian energy assets with President Trump’s envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, pushing a deal that raises new questions about conflicts of inter...

A few weeks ago, NYT reporter Eric Lipton was chastizing people about the proper use of "corruption" - adopting the John Roberts definition as if it was a universal one. Corruption requires explict quid pro quo. It is not corrupt to take an action that aligns with the interest of a person who gives you a gift, unless the official action was in direct response to that gift--a bribe. Terms matter. Accuracy and fairness matters. Regardless of what social media wants.— Eric Lipton NYT (@ericlipton.nytimes.com) May 12, 2025 at 2:02 PM Stupid people on social media! Maybe he should have a chat with the editorial board at his paper, which has a slightly broader view. The self-enrichment of the second Trump administration is different from old-fashioned corruption. There is no evidence that Mr. Trump has received direct bribes, nor is it clear that he has agreed to specific policy changes in exchange for cash. Nonetheless, he is presiding over a culture of corruption. He and his family have created several ways for people to enrich them — and government policy then changes in ways that benefit those who have helped the Trumps profit. Often Mr. Trump does not even try to hide the situation. As the historian Matthew Dallek recently put it, “Trump is the most brazenly corrupt national politician in modern times, and his openness about it is sui generis.” He is proud of his avarice, wearing it as a sign of success and savvy. Though even here, since when is "old-fashioned corruption" merely taking bribes? How are these provincial hicks from New York City ruling our discourse? Watch one mafia movie challenge.