Question: My partner’s parents decided to help with all the planning and set up for his sister’s wedding. I am sure part of the reason was because they had offered to foot part of the expenses. There came a point in the planning, when his mom seemed to sort of run-amok with her ideas. His sister ended up accepting some plans for her wedding that I don’t think she was really that fond of, but she went along with them anyways. One of the things that stands out the most to me, was this idea that they would make a large wooden box with a hole in it, and people would smash their dinner plates into the box. Then the fragments of the broken plates would be put into metal keepsake tins for the guests to take home. (The tins were cute, the trash inside seemed very weird to me.) So imagine it’s the evening of your wedding reception, and people are in a corner of the room smashing their plates into a box. And then part of your wedding party is supposed to go in the back and fix up the tins of broken ceramic ware. It was like an exercise in how to needlessly generate extra stress hormones in a large room full of people. My partner’s sister looked like she cringed every time someone threw a plate in the box. It is weird (and wasteful) to propose to break brand new plates for a tradition that isn’t even part of your ancestry. It’s weird to railroad the people getting married into accepting to do things they don’t really want. Soon after that, my partner’s mother offered that she would be happy to help us plan and throw our wedding too, just like they did for his sister. I think the experience made us both content to elope. Who attended the person's partner's sister's wedding? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - The dog - not enough information - The partner and not the person dating the partner - The partner, person , and the parents
Answer: The partner, person , and the parents

Question: Creating a self portrait is not your typical selfie! When I taught in the traditional classroom, creating self portraits was something I had students do whether they were four or nine. In fact, I’d have them draw one on the first day of school and one toward the end of the year and to see the change over time was always so interesting. At least once during the year, likely toward the beginning, I would center a lesson around self portraits. In younger classes, there would be more than one. Creating a self portrait teaches students to be aware of themselves. Where is her head in relation to her body? Where are her feet in relation to her legs? It also teaches children spatial awareness. Where should he begin…with his feet or with his head? Where on the paper should his head be placed? How far down should his arms go? How can his whole body fit on a single piece of paper? A Lesson on Creating Self Portraits Whether you are in a classroom, or teaching a child at home, here is a simple lesson on creating self portraits geared toward young children, anywhere from age 2 through age 6. Keep in mind that their final product will show various levels of writing development, depending on what stage of writing they are in. (Basically, a two-year-old’s drawing should look very different than that of a five-year-old.) The teacher will need to model how to draw a self portrait. Gather the children around an easel or board and clip a paper to it. Narrate the process as you walk through the steps. “I am going to draw a picture of myself. I am going to start with my head.” Use your hands to show your actual head on yourself so students are aware of what you talking about. The visuals also help English Language Learners (if you’re teaching in an English speaking classroom.) and build vocabulary for all students. Who taught about self portraits? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - The teacher. - The author. - English Language Learners. - not enough information
Answer: The author.

Question: WHITE HOUSE — President Donald Trump on Monday declared he has an "absolute right" to pardon himself and then also tweeted his assertion that the federal government investigation into ties between his 2016 election campaign and Russia is "totally unconstitutional." While Trump has frequently ignored established norms and challenged the understood limits of presidential powers, his latest comments are viewed by some legal scholars as unprecedented and testing constitutional boundaries. "I was shocked" by Trump’s tweets, said Susan Low Bloch, a law professor at Georgetown University. "No president has ever tried it," she told VOA News. "It’s unlikely the president can pardon himself. I think the court would say no" and if he did give himself a pardon, "most congresses would impeach him." Bloch also notes when most people accept a pardon "it’s an admission of guilt," thus it would be a bad idea for Trump to pursue such a course of action. The professor, who has testified before the Senate on whether a president can be indicted and tried while in office, says the special counsel is "absolutely constitutional." Another constitutional scholar, Keith Whittington at Princeton University, said, "I think it is important to note that the president’s comments reference serious arguments that are being debated by legal scholars, but these are difficult and unusual constitutional questions that would ultimately be answered in the courts." According to Northwestern University Law Professor Andrew Koppelman, "Trump's position on pardons is consistent with the Constitution's text, but inconsistent with the overall structure. It means that the President could commit capital treason, or any other federal crime, and then immediately pardon himself. "It means that he could commit murder in the White House," Koppelman said. "It makes no sense within the Constitution as a whole." Asked by reporters Monday about Trump’s comment on his ability to pardon himself, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders repeatedly replied: "The... Why does Boch say it's a bad idea for Trump to pursue a pardon? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - Because when most people accept a pardon, it's an admission of guilt - because special counsel is 'absolutely constitutional' - because the court would say no. - not enough information
Answer:
Because when most people accept a pardon, it's an admission of guilt