Editorial Draft — iamsleepy01

Trump setting himself up for Impeachment.

Trump is getting the Chinese to help with investigating Biden to help with re-election, but there is one thing is forgetting: The Federal Law. The Law states that “it is illegal for “a person to solicit, accept, or receive” anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a United States election.”

On October 3 2019, Donald Trump seek help from foreign countries to help him win for his reelection and there were already talks about people trying to impeach him for seeking help from the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

He is using the foreign countries to investigate the Bidens and dig up some dirt. If they find anything serious and corrupted, Trump has a huge chance of winning. But, a president using a third party to find some secrets about another political rival seems to be “flagrantly violating the law” as stated by the author.

Gallery | This entry was posted in Editorial Draft, iamsleepy. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Editorial Draft — iamsleepy01

  1. davidbdale says:

    OK Sleepy, let’s go.

    First, I’m impressed that you’re using specific references to government individuals and federal laws. It would be easy to neglect your responsibility to be focused and specific. Now, let’s really bear down on those aspects of your approach.

    P1. Your first paragraph asserts two facts: 1) President Trump (that’s the better way to refer to him the first time) is getting Chinese help to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden (that’s the better way to refer to him for the first time). 2) Federal law (lower case) prohibits soliciting, accepting, or receiving” valuable assistance to affect a US election.

    What you’ve left out is whether the help has been received, accepted, or solicited. “Is getting” Chinese help would mean “is receiving,” but I think you have no evidence help has been received, which points up the bigger issue. In a few words you COULD identify the president’s on-air appeal that “it’s something the Chinese should look into” as a solicitation. That would serve BOTH the purpose of providing a clear illustration of a news event to which you’re referring AND a clear claim of specific law-breaking. NEXT, you need a compelling reason to make your claims; for example, 1) you’re the first person to notice this offense, or 2) you want to change the minds of a significant portion of readers who are resisting your conclusion. Permit me to demonstrate.

    Despite the refusal of Republican Senators to admit the president is committing impeachable acts, Mr. Trump’s on-air request that “China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine” is an impeachable abuse of presidential power on its face. His choice of China was no accident. Just moments earlier he had discussed upcoming trade talks with China and declared that “if they don’t do what we want, we have tremendous power.” Any reasonable Chinese observer would connect the dots and consider that a direct threat that if they don’t deliver dirt on presidential candidate Biden, they’ll face continued tariffs, or worse.

    We don’t disagree on the facts of your argument, Sleepy, but this replacement paragraph identifies your target audience AND provides the specifics of the scene you’re no doubt remembering when you make your point. Reminding readers of the specific request and providing the context that highlights its abuse of power makes a much more powerful argument.

    It also preserves for another paragraph your excellent observation that soliciting foreign assistance to influence a US election. That’s still yours to utilize.

    Does this help you, Sleepy? It’s the most important advice I can offer at this stage of your drafting. I’ll be happy to provide structural and rhetorical advice once you construct a clear and specific argument.

    (I don’t know what you mean by “as stated by the author” in your last line, but unless you cite a specific article, it’s out of place. This is an editorial, so you’re not obligated to respond to anyone else’s writing. If you do, though, you’ll need to do so much more clearly.)

    Like

  2. yankeefan25 says:

    You had plenty of facts and knew what you were talking about, but I’m not sure you ever took a stance or side of this argument. Have more opinion and use the facts to support your opinion. The information and facts are good but just have to make it more of an editorial.

    Like

  3. ahntkd99 says:

    I’ll be back to write a peer review on this one.

    Like

    • ahntkd99 says:

      You had lot of information and facts about Trump is setting himself up for Impeachment. However, there’s no point. It seems like you haven’t written your arguments or conclusive thoughts. I would like you to write a decisive alternative that supports your thoughts.

      Like

  4. I’ll be back to write a peer review.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s