The given question has a statement followed by two conclusions I and II.…

Concept: Testing Conclusions Against a Statement

In statement-conclusion questions, a conclusion follows only when it can be derived from the statement alone, without adding outside knowledge or drawing a broader inference. A conclusion that generalises beyond the group the statement names, or that introduces an idea the statement never raises, does not follow.

Applying It to This Statement

The statement is limited to one named group: people who speak too much against bribery. It says this specific group had taken bribes themselves.

• Conclusion I claims something about all people in general, a class far broader than the group of vocal anti-bribery critics the statement actually describes. The statement gives no information about anyone outside that named group.

• Conclusion II is a general remark about the gap between saying and doing. The statement is about a group of people taking an action (bribery) that contradicts their own speech, not about how hard or easy that action is to carry out. That saying-versus-doing contrast is not part of what the statement asserts.

Cross-check

The statement makes no claim about anyone outside the named group of vocal anti-bribery critics -- their corruption status could vary freely without affecting what the statement asserts. This confirms the statement supports no claim about people in general, and that it never sets up an easier-said-than-done comparison.

Result

Since both conclusions step outside what the statement actually asserts, neither conclusion I nor II follows from it.