I have figured out how to draw the $3x(-1+0.5t)$ part
Then you have figured out
which, purely from transformations point of view, is a horizontal shift right by 1, horizontal stretch by a factor of 2, and vertical stretch by a factor of 3. And you must know that the
$-\delta(-t + 3)$ part
except as $\delta(t)$, is
so $3x(-1 + 0.5t) - \delta(t)$ is
which should let you figure out $3x(-1 + 0.5t) - \delta(-t + 3)$.
For scalings other than unity, e.g. $2\delta(t)$, one can either draw it with height of 2, or height of 1 and the value labeled next to it. The sign should be preserved in the plot though, with $-\delta(t)$ pointing down.
Note that $\delta(t)$ isn't a usual function, but a distribution, and it's not quite right to interpret it as having a value "at" anywhere (it instead must be enclosed with an integral). Graphically there's no issue in that it'll correspond to the intended symbolic expression.
Let $x_2(t) = 3x(-1 + 0.5t) + \delta(t + 1)$. Then, the delta overlaps a non-zero value. I'm unsure whether there's a convention here; there's two proposals, left being mine and right @MattL's:
There's arguments both ways, that I'd summarize as, left behaving more function-like, while right emphasizing the non-functional nature of $\delta(t)$, and each being more visually convenient in different scenarios. Discussed here.