The mayor has been accused

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope Ad Hominem2% picked this

   Authorities are investigating the consultant for taking bribes from officials of

   This doesn't impact the mayor's argument. We don't know if something that happened in a different city is relevant at all to the mayor's situation. At best, this is attacking the consultant's character, but doesn't actually tell us anything about the situation involving the mayor.

   2%
2. B

   Correct85% picked this

   The mayor was aware that many of the bills were being presented to the consultant rather

   Why this is right

   Sure, the mayor paid every bill that was presented to him. But if he knew that some bills were never presented to him, and were being given to the consultant instead, that weakens his defense against the bribery accusation.

   Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   85%
3. C

   Out of Scope1% picked this

   The building contractor in charge of the improvements to the mayor's house had done business with the

   Without more information, there is no way of knowing how the previous work done by the contractor is related to the work this contractor did at the mayor's house and who paid for it.

   1%
4. D

   Out of Scope1% picked this

   The improvements to the mayor's house were done with expensive materials and involved thousands of

   All this really tells us is that the improvements to the mayor's house were expensive. It doesn't even mean that the expenses were unjustified. It has no clear relationship to the mayor's defense.

   1%
5. E

   Irrelevant Comparison10% picked this

   The amount of money that the city paid the consultant over the last year greatly exceeded the cost of the

   This doesn't actually tell us anything about the possibility that the consultant was bribing the mayor. It's entirely possible that the consultant did a large amount of work for the city, was paid appropriately for it, and this amount that the consultant legitimately earned was greater than the cost of improvements to the mayor's house. So what? This doesn't show any relationship between the consultant's fees and the cost of improvements to the house.

   10%