Statement:\n“People who speak too much against corruption are those who have taken it themselves.”\n\nConclusions:\nI. It is easier for those who have taken bribes to speak against corruption.\nII. People have double standards.\n\nWhich conclusion(s) logically follow(s)?

Introduction / Context:
The statement alleges that those who vehemently denounce corruption are themselves corrupt. This is essentially a claim of hypocrisy or double standards, not an analysis of ease or difficulty of speaking.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Allegation: Strong anti-corruption speech often comes from corrupt individuals.
• No information about why or how easy it is to speak.

Concept / Approach:
We must pick conclusions that are compelled by the statement alone. “Double standards” is a natural restatement (denouncing behavior one practices). Ease of speaking is not discussed and cannot be inferred.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
If X practices corruption while loudly attacking it, X exhibits double standards; this requires no extra assumptions.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Reading motivations (e.g., guilt, ease) into a statement that only asserts hypocrisy.

Final Answer:
If only Conclusion II follows.