3 ms·

There is no proof of corruption. What do you know? Bring it to the press.

• durnygbur 4y ago
  There are no proofs. Those with proofs have suicide waiting at their doorsteps.
• dreinhardt 4y ago
  That has already happened. Try looking for Schwesig and her Klimastiftung, and that’s just a tiny part of the picture.
• smsm42 4y ago
  I think the standard formula is "no evidence". Incidentally, check out https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/the-phrase-no-evidence-is-a-red-flag https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/the-phrase-no-evidence... But I think that the position of "until we have a court decision proving corruption, one could not reasonably talk of a possibility of corruption, and discuss appearance of conflict of interest" is naive at best, and completely boneheaded at the usual case. Corruption is notoriously hard to prove, especially "soft" corruption where there's no direct bribery but more like alignment of interests diverting the interests of corrupt functionaries from serving the people (who even knows that that means?) to serving their private wallet and/or ideology (well, that one is much clearer). And there's tons of the press talking about German politicians being too cozy with Russia, even pre-dating the war. So what? It's not like German voters cared.