 does it apply to both or does it just apply to gratuities? And the statute was unclear because it had some confusing language in it. On the one hand, it said it requires corrupt intent, which suggests that's the language of bribery. But then it also had the word reward in there, which is what the entire dissent hinges on, basically that single word, and say reward suggests a gratuity, and I agree with that. So there's ambiguity, conflicting language, confusion in there. When that happens, generally –