What information is corroborated by both sources? In other words, what information do both sources claim to be true?

NO LINKS!!! pls hurry

It seems that both sources are describing how President Polk demonstrated the manifest destiny of continued westward expansion, and by emphasizing capturing Mexican territory, he would fulfill the presidency policy of continental protection. I believe the question is making the point of how the dispute over the border would not be resolved according to the foundational logic of location. The border separating the two powers were incorrect across both perspectives--the landscape boudnary of one power did not constitue the other's prefered boundary, and evidently the Untied States were foreshadowed to attack regardless of the negotiation outcome in evidence of the brewing tensions. I hope this helps slightly as I do not know specifically to what the question refers.

Explanation:

before we work more on piecing ideas together to form summaries and paragraphs, we need to look at fundamental sentence construction. imagine you are reading a book for school. you need to find important details that you can use for an assignment. however, when you begin to read, you notice that the book has very little punctuation. the sentences fail to form complete paragraphs and instead form one block of text without clear organization. most likely, this book would frustrate and confuse you. without clear and concise sentences, it is difficult to find the information you need.

for both students and professionals, clear communication is important. whether you are typing an email or writing a report or essay, it is your responsibility as the writer to present your thoughts and ideas clearly and precisely. writing in complete sentences is one way to ensure that you communicate well. this section covers how to recognize and write basic sentence structures and how to avoid some common writing errors.