Watchdog group: Corruption worsens under populist leaders

Frederick Foresight

Frederick Foresight

BERLIN -- People who turn to populist politicians promising to upset the status quo and end corruption may only be feeding the problem, an anti-corruption watchdog group warned Wednesday.

Transparency International said in its annual Corruption Perceptions Index for 2016 that in countries with populist or autocratic leaders, "instead of tackling crony capitalism, those leaders usually install even worse forms of corrupt systems."

...Transparency International research director Finn Heinrich told The Associated Press that the organization was taking a wait-and-see approach to Donald Trump's presidency, but that already it had "serious concerns."

"Donald Trump came on board as the people in Hungary and Turkey, on an anti-corruption ticket. He said, 'We're going to drain this swamp,"' Heinrich said. "But if you look at his action so far, there is nepotism.... The people in his Cabinet have many conflicts of interest. They are not people who stand for transparency."

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/watchdog-group-corruption-worsens-under-populist-leaders-1.3255890
 
Very difficult to blame Trump for a lack of transparency at this point, especially while at the same time ignoring the last 8 years of unprecedented lack of the same from the self-appointed "most transparent administration in history".

If Trump ends up following suit, I'll have no issue whatsoever calling him on it.
 
Regarding transparency, and given the diversified nature of his numerous business holdings, I think he should start by disclosing his tax returns. He initially said he would disclose in due course. Now my understanding is that he has no intention of ever doing so. I'm surprised that this doesn't even cause a ripple among his more ardent fanboys. It's like they feel the less they know, the better. (It's almost like a faith in God, I suppose. You don't want to consider it too carefully for fear of what you might discover.)
 
Last edited:
self-appointed ? . ?
Obama won both elections with the electoral college and the popular vote.

as far as having no issue of calling him out . . .
calling him out on ET's P&R is hardly any kind of ''calling him out''.
 
Frederick Foresight said:
Regarding transparency, and given the diversified nature of his numerous business holdings, I think he should start by disclosing his tax returns. He initially said he would disclose in due course. Now my understanding is that he has no intention of ever doing so. I'm surprised that this doesn't even cause a ripple among his more ardent fanboys. It's like they feel the less they know, the better. (It's almost like a faith in God, I suppose. You don't want to consider it too carefully for fear of what you might discover.)
More...
The media is simply not mature enough to handle his tax returns. It's all there in his financial statement which is public.
The purpose of a tax return is to show the IRS through any legal means possible that you are not as rich as they say you are.
 
java said:
The media is simply not mature enough to handle his tax returns. It's all there in his financial statement which is public.
The purpose of a tax return is to show the IRS through any legal means possible that you are not as rich as they say you are.
More...
That's it. Squint and don't look too carefully, and everything will be all right.
 
Frederick Foresight said:
That's it. Squint and don't look too carefully, and everything will be all right.
More...
I know what my returns look like, and they have very little to do with reality. What is it in his full financial disclosure that you found so troubling?
 
who cares about his tax returns? There is no requirement he release is old tax returns.
Check out his executive orders. Don't you big govt loving, liberty hating lefties realize the good he is doing right now? He is even helping chicago. Obama never fixed their murder problem and he lived there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top