As his days in office wane, U.S. President Barack Obama is pushing to commute sentences of non-violent drug offenders convicted under what the White House called "outdated and unduly harsh" sentencing laws. It has become the centerpiece of his effort to reform the country's criminal-justice system, which has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Last Friday, the President granted commutations to 42 convicted nonviolent offenders, bringing the total so far in his presidency to 348 commutations more than any president has in nearly half a century. His predecessor, George W. Bush granted clemency in just 11 cases. It's not just Obama pushing for reform. Top Republicans and Democrats in Congress also support relaxing the sentencing laws that have tripled the federal and state prison populations in the last 30 years, reaching more than 1.56 million inmates at the end of 2014. However in Congress, the main legislative effort for sentencing changes, the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015, has failed to pass either chamber of Congress. The bill would reduce long mandatory minimum sentences for many nonviolent drug crimes, give judges more control over the terms of punishment and provide inmates with more opportunities to get out early by participating in rehabilitation programs. Failing congressional help, Obama has in recent months relied on his presidential powers to commute the sentences of non-violent offenders. Under the Constitution, the president has the power to grant "pardons for offenses against the United States" or to commute federal sentences. A pardon is an act of presidential forgiveness and wipes away any remaining legal liabilities from a conviction. A commutation reduces a sentence but does not eliminate a conviction or restore civil rights lost as a result of the conviction. The American Bar Association has joined Obama's push and put its support behind the Clemency Project 2014, a national effort by multiple justice groups to help inmates who meet U.S. Department of Justice... Question: What does trump think about this reform Options: - is with it - he hates it because obama started it - not enough information - doesn't know about it === The correct answer is
not enough information

I don't know how this rates as "shocking", I guess it might depend on the culture in which you live, but, it is at the least "repulsive" or disgusting. There was a huge corporation in which I had a contract with. I was called in, to help them uncover what they considered "a very serious series of incidents". Their own "in house" attempts were fruitless. It turned out, they had an over-sized engineering department, and that it had been announced that this would be scaled back due to completion of contracts. Someone though, within the engineering department, was sabotaging the continued work, slowing the completion. I was to go undercover, posing as a visiting engineer from a distant plant, and find out who the perpetrator/s were, as they wished to file legal action. So, this is at the corporate headquarters, in the late 1980's. These people were making 6 figure incomes easily. That being said, you kind of expect a bit more of a dignified behavior here than you would with a construction laborer or dishwasher. I completed my job in four days, giving them the evidence and name of the lone individual respsonsible for the sabotage. What exactly was he doing? He carried rubber gloves in his back pocket, and he would periodically use the restroom, and remove his feces from the toilet and smear it all over the walls, covering as much surface as he could. He would also visit restrooms in different departments and do the same. This would cause the unionized individuals, who only had that restroom to use in their area, to walk off their work stations. Seriously, a butt-hurt guy fearing a layoff, so he decided to smear his shit all over the place before it even happened. He readily confessed when confronted by HR, further destroying his work record/career. Question: What is probably true about the engineer who was confronted by HR? Options: - he was given a raise - not enough information - he was promoted - he was fired === The correct answer is
he was fired

*Question*
The young man (boy, really) played with his fingers in the garish light cast from the lone bulb in the concrete bunker. He scratched at an imaginary itch on his right hand (just below his thumb) to take his mind off the man in the lab coat who sat across from him at the beaten, scarred, wood table. It didn't work. And whoever this man in the lab coat was, he was insistent about paperwork. He had three inches clipped onto a weathered clipboard which he flipped through with precision. "Can I offer you a glass of water?" asked the boy's captor in a calm, sensitive tenor. The boy, Kurt, continued to scratch the imaginary itch, which had leapt magically from his right hand to the left. Eventually the falseness of the itch would be deduced, and the lab coated man would disappear out of the cell and return with... God knows what. He had seen torture hundreds-if not thousands-of times on TV, and he was glumly certain that there would be no commercial breaks for him. "Can I offer you a glass of water?" The question was repeated without urgency, like a forgetful waiter. The itch now leaped with the dexterity of a trained flea onto the boy's leg, and the dutiful fingers followed. He watched as the man in the lab coat, without name tag or company insignia, studied his stack of papers attached to the clipboard. Several yellow forms near the top half inch were labeled 27B. The man frowned and wrote a note on the top page. "Note: Find out who isn't duplicating 27B in Pink." "I'm sorry," he said, "I wasn't listening. Was that a yes or no to the water?" Kurt remained in his chair, almost motionless, except for the itching-and-scratching routine. It had leapt again, this time onto his scalp, and the twitching fingers followed. He wondered how long he could keep this up without drawing blood. Question: Who is the captor? Options: - A scientist - not enough information - A teacher - Boy's father === The correct answer is
**Answer**
not enough information