Angela Merkel’s calm steadied a wounded nation — but it also put it to sleep. For sixteen years, Germany mistook caution for competence and comfort for courage. This essay dissects how the myth of …
Though this story begs to differ. Merkel wasn’t compromised. That’s her. And her decisions mostly reflected her own ideals, for like 16 years. Also pretty uncommon for CDU politicians not to be involved in several dirty money controversies. I’d say she has moral integrity. I mean there is a lot of valid criticism, like what’s outlined in the article. But being compromised doesn’t seem to be on the list?!
But a conspiracy theory about some select individuals isn’t on the same level with a politician who outright works for Gazprom. Or deliberately wasted billions, or took lobby money or regularly does some nice nepotism with consultants, or gave billions of taxpayer money to VW just so they can pay their investors some bonus… I mean all of that regularly happens with all the other ones. And Merkel seems pretty alright to me compared to that. I mean considering being compromised in specific… not necessarily the broader picture of what she did or didn’t do.
(Edit: And I saw the interview about the Syrian refugees and her a few weeks ago. And the way she talks seems quite upright. When confronted, she gives context, a solid reasoning grounded in facts, and cites her ethics. And she doesn’t (as of today) insist she did the objectively right thing. Scholz on the other hand tends to conveniently forget everything when confronted.)
I just assume every German politian is compromised like Schröder was.
Though this story begs to differ. Merkel wasn’t compromised. That’s her. And her decisions mostly reflected her own ideals, for like 16 years. Also pretty uncommon for CDU politicians not to be involved in several dirty money controversies. I’d say she has moral integrity. I mean there is a lot of valid criticism, like what’s outlined in the article. But being compromised doesn’t seem to be on the list?!
She likely had a Stasi file. Whoever knew the content, if compromising, didn’t have to pay.
But a conspiracy theory about some select individuals isn’t on the same level with a politician who outright works for Gazprom. Or deliberately wasted billions, or took lobby money or regularly does some nice nepotism with consultants, or gave billions of taxpayer money to VW just so they can pay their investors some bonus… I mean all of that regularly happens with all the other ones. And Merkel seems pretty alright to me compared to that. I mean considering being compromised in specific… not necessarily the broader picture of what she did or didn’t do.
(Edit: And I saw the interview about the Syrian refugees and her a few weeks ago. And the way she talks seems quite upright. When confronted, she gives context, a solid reasoning grounded in facts, and cites her ethics. And she doesn’t (as of today) insist she did the objectively right thing. Scholz on the other hand tends to conveniently forget everything when confronted.)
Merkel must have known about CumEx. It’s just not associated with her.
If everybody but the king is corrupt then questions should be asked.
Still, I would prefer Merkel over most politicians to become the next chancellor again.
Right. Wikipedia says the Bundesfinanzministerium was aware of CumEx trade since 2002…
Looking at some of the articles and Wikipedia pages, they were even aware as early as 1992 based on whistle blower reporting?
And if I read this right, all that came from this is a 3.5y slap on the wrist for one individual?!