It is easy to see that the board of directors of the construction company is full of corruption and should be replaced. There are many instances of bribery by various persons on the staff of board member Wagston that are a matter of public record. These bribes perniciously influenced the awarding of government contracts. The argument's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that ["the argument fails to show that corruption is not limited to Wagston's staff", "the argument presumes without giving justification that all of Wagston's staff have engaged in corruption", 'the argument attempts to deflect attention away from substantive issues by attacking the character of the board', 'the argument fails to specify the relation between bribery and corruption']