Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 03:21 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 03:21
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,773
Own Kudos:
810,735
 [4]
Given Kudos: 105,853
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,773
Kudos: 810,735
 [4]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
azizlake
Joined: 16 Apr 2025
Last visit: 10 Apr 2026
Posts: 2
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 2
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
studentforever
Joined: 12 Apr 2025
Last visit: 27 Sep 2025
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
2
 [1]
Given Kudos: 21
Posts: 9
Kudos: 2
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,773
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105,853
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,773
Kudos: 810,735
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
The lobbyist accused of offering a large cash bribe to the senator defended himself: "When I left the house that day, I was carrying no money with me, so I could not possibly have had anything to offer to the senator. Moreover, immediately before I met with the senator, I spent all my cash on lunch with a colleague at an upscale restaurant, which also explains why I was not in a position to offer the senator a bribe."

This argument is most vulnerable to what criticism?

(A) It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one piece of the pieces of information provided in its support.

(B) It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.

(C) It does not preserve the proper time relationship between cause and effect.

(D) It presents two pieces of evidence that do not support the same conclusion.

(E) It confuses basic financial information with legal claims.


Official Explanation



The lobbyist presents a self-contradictory argument. He says

I. he left the house with no money

II. he spent all his cash on lunch

If he truly left the house with no money, he would not have had cash to spend on lunch. Both of these statements can't be true simultaneously. Yet, both of them are presented as evidence to the claim "I didn't bribe the senator."

(B) is the credited answer. Two pieces of evidence contradict each other. That's precisely the problem with this argument.

(A) is not correct. The conclusion, "I could not have bribed the senator" is not paraphrase of anything said previously in the argument.

(C) is not correct; there is no problem with time relationship --- leaving house, then having lunch, then seeing the senator. The "effect" for which he is arguing happens last, and the reputed causes happen before it: that is the proper time sequence for a causal chain.

(D) is not correct; each piece of evidence, by itself, would support the conclusion; they just contradict each other.

(E) is a wonderful distractor. Here, bribery is both a financial matter and a legal matter, so there is no confusion: consideration from both the financial and the legal spheres are appropriate.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
501 posts
358 posts