This week could turn out to be pivotal for the Trump White House as both major parties get ready for midterm congressional elections in November. President Donald Trump's decision to reverse a policy of separating families coming across the U.S. southern border came in the wake of a political firestorm that fired up opposition Democrats and alarmed even some Republicans. At the very least, it likely set the stage for immigration to be a key issue in November. Trump was in combat mode Wednesday during a political rally in Duluth, Minnesota, where he vowed to make immigration a central focus in the upcoming congressional campaign. "If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders," Trump said to an enthusiastic crowd, some chanting, "Build the wall!" Just hours earlier, the president reversed his controversial policy of separating children from their parents by signing an executive order in the White House. "We are going to have strong, very strong, borders. But we are going to keep the families together," he said. Trump decided to back away from the controversial policy of separating families after an outcry from around the country that included protests in several states, including Arizona, Texas, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. Also driving the outrage was a recording of children crying out for their parents released by the investigative journalist group ProPublica. The separation policy drew condemnation from Republicans including former first lady Laura Bush and a host of Democrats. "We should be able to agree that we will not keep kids in child internment camps indefinitely and hidden away from public view," said Maryland Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings. "What country is that? This is the United States of America!" Advocates for a tough border policy sided with the president including Art Arthur of the Center for Immigration Studies. He cited a recent upsurge in attempted border crossings. Question: Why did Trump reverse his decision on separating families === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- Because there was outrage
- Because it was good policy
- Because he liked it
- not enough information
Because there was outrage

The rate of incarceration in the U.S. is the world's highest, leading to what many lawmakers and policy analysts say is a nationwide imprisonment epidemic. But the beginning of the end of that epidemic started Tuesday, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, a Democrat from New York, told VOA. A bipartisan prison reform bill that passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a 360-59 vote "strikes an opening blow against the overcriminalization of the nation," Jeffries, one of the bill's co-sponsors, said. U.S. President Donald Trump said "the strong bipartisan vote paces the way for action by the Senate." Last week, Trump endorsed the bill at a White House summit on prison reform, saying, "Our whole nation benefits if former inmates are able to reenter society as productive, law-abiding citizens." If the bill reaches the president's desk for a signature, it would provide $50 million in funding for five years to provide job training, education and substance abuse treatment for prisoners as well as a number of quality-of-life measures aimed at reducing chronically high rates of recidivism among former inmates. But the contentious issue of criminal justice reform has split Democrats and Republicans within their own parties, possibly jeopardizing the bill's chances of passage as it heads to the U.S. Senate. In a letter to colleagues last week, Democratic Senators Kamala Harris, Dick Durbin and Cory Booker joined two House Democratic colleagues, Representatives John Lewis and Sheila Jackson Lee, in saying the bill could not be implemented effectively and could possibly lead to prison privatization. Jeffries told VOA many of the arguments against the First Step Act "were anchored in falsehoods." He added the legislation passed today "is a first step towards eradicating the cancer of mass incarceration" a move also welcomed by many House Republicans. "Rather than allowing the cycle of crime to continue, this legislation takes a practical, intelligent approach to rehabilitation," House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, a Republican... Question: What does Donald Trump probably think about the $50 million that will be spent on prison reform. === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- He would hate it.
- not enough information
- He would support it.
- He would deny it.

Answer: He would support it.

If you turned on the TV towards the end of 2002 you could have been forgiven for thinking that Britain had gone absolutely horseshit mental. Every week, it seemed, another pretty young girl from a nice family, who was happy and popular and always did well at school, was being kidnapped or murdered by what the Sun newspaper cheerfully termed 'evil paedo scum'. Naming and shaming was as popular a feature in the Murdoch press as Page Three girls and discounted holidays to Butlin's. Of course you can't blame parents for wanting to keep their children safe; that's pretty much the job description of a parent. And, on the face of it, the tabloids were doing a public service in warning us about the paedophile menace lurking in our midst. The problem came when it turned out that a huge number of these concerned tabloid-reading parents were also absolute fucking morons. For every story of an actual sex offender being driven from their house by a baying mob there was one like that of Dr Yvette Cloete, a doctor at the Royal Gwent Hospital in Newport, South Wales, who returned home from work to find that a group of 'concerned parents' had daubed the word 'paedo' on her front door in bright red paint. Dr Cloete was a consultant paediatrician. Easy mistake. If you're an absolute fucking moron. And so it was that one hung-over morning, after reading yet another story about vigilantes who had threatened to stone Maxine Carr, the girlfriend of Soham killer Ian Huntley, to death during her high-profile trial for perverting the course of justice, I decided to set up a website parodying this collective national madness. The result of two or three hours of hung-over labour was thinkofthechildren.co.uk, a spoof campaign site which claimed to offer a handy online guide for crazy vigilantes of all stripes to co-ordinate their crazy vigilante efforts. Although there are a few parts of the site I'm still a bit proud of, the majority of it was, I freely admit, satire of the lowest order. Question: After the end of this story, the narrator seems to be a little: === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- self-deprecating
- arrogant
- not enough information
- prideful
self-deprecating