I was one of the best fingerprint examiners in the world. I could do things the FBI thought impossible. I could memorize fingerprints. The nearby agencies, including local offices of federal agencies that had their own labs, came to me for help. One day in a trial a new-hatched defence attorney tried to make me seem neglectful because I hadn't sent the prints from the crime scene to the FBI for verification. The FBI will not look at prints that have already been identified locally. I tried to get that across to him. Finally I said, "Sir, you don't understand. I don't ask the FBI for help. The FBI asks me for help." The courtroom went dead silent. The lawyer choked a bit and looked frantically at the judge, who knew me quite well. The judge slowly nodded. The lawyer choked a few more times, said, "No further questions," and returned to his seat. I was the only person in the five-state area in which the silver burglar was hitting who got him on fingerprint evidence. He never left fingerprint evidence . . . except when he did. Every other police agency quit looking, because his MO was unmistakable. We didn't. A detective got prints from a bamboo tree he had used to climb in a window, and I got several prints from items he had handled inside the house. After the trial he was being led back to the jail and I was walking down the hall. He stopped and said, "I want to talk to that lady." The bailiff told him he couldn't talk to the witness, but I said I wanted to hear what he had to say. He said, "Lady, you're the smartest cop I ever saw, and I hope to God I never see you again." I think that was the best compliment I ever got. I have other accomplishments. But I consider my police work the most important. Question: How long was the author a fingerprint examiner? Options: A. 10 years B. not enough information C. 11 years D. 12 years === The correct answer is
B

(Question)
The Trump administration's recent airstrikes in Syria just the latest action in a long-running conflict that has challenged U.S. presidents of both parties has prompted a new round of questions on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers are asking where last week's strikes fit in the larger U.S. strategy in response to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and for greater clarity to prevent an escalation of the conflict. "There needs to be a comprehensive strategy here laid out by the administration for Congress in terms of the options to pursue because of the urgency," House Foreign Affairs Chairman Ed Royce said during a House panel Wednesday. "Does the administration support imposing costs on the Russians and the Iranians for their role in the Assad regime's war crimes against its own people?" In his speech announcing the air strikes to the American people Friday, President Trump said the United States is "prepared to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents." But later Friday, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the latest action against Assad was a "one-time shot." Trump ordered Friday's strikes just weeks after saying the U.S. would "be coming out of Syria like very soon," reflecting changes in the administration's posture in response to Assad's reported use of prohibited chemical agents. "We're at a real risk here of conducting strikes without any clear strategy," Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, told VOA. "The Trump administration for the past several months has issued contradictory statements, with former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and some diplomats saying that the U.S. troops inside Syria, in eastern Syria, would be dedicated to also countering Iran inside Syria. The Pentagon was saying something completely different defeating ISIS and continuing that campaign," he said. Trump administration officials told a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs committee Wednesday the president's goals in Syria remain clear. Question: What hearing is being held this Wednesday? Options: A. not enough information B. Trumps Hearing for FBI investigation C. Hearing of OJ Simpson D. Hearing of the House Foreign Affairs committee === The correct answer is
(Answer)
D

SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Thursday pushed back against a North Korean state media report that U.S. President Donald Trump agreed during this week's Singapore summit with Kim Jong Un to gradually lift sanctions against Pyongyang, saying Trump had been very clear about the sequence of steps in the process. The official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said Trump offered to lift sanctions against it as relations improve, indicating a phased-in approach where concessions would be provided at various stages of the denuclearization process. Speaking at a news conference in Seoul alongside South Korean Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-hwa and Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono, the U.S. secretary of state said the Trump administration would not repeat the mistakes made by past presidents that rewarded Pyongyang for denuclearization promises. "When we refer to the mistakes of the past. They were providing economic and financial aid relief before the complete denuclearization had taken place. That is not going to happen. President Trump made that clear," Pompeo said. President Trump described his meeting with Kim as a resounding success and in a tweet said, "There is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea." But the U.S.-North Korea joint declaration was vague on details, providing no clear definition on what constitutes denuclearization, set no timeline for the dismantlement process, and said nothing about outside verification requirements. Pompeo, however, pointed out that in the Singapore statement both countries reaffirmed the inter-Korean Panmunjom declaration from April, in which both South and North Korea agreed to uphold all past agreements that did specify detailed nuclear prohibitions and verification requirements. The secretary of state and his counterparts in Seoul and Tokyo said they are united in support of the U.S.-North Korea agreement, and in agreement on the goal of complete, irreversible, verifiable dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear program. After the summit,... Question: How long have North Korea and US presidents continued to meet? Options: A. 10-20 years B. 10 years or less C. not enough information D. More than 20 years === The correct answer is
D