(Question)
WASHINGTON Legal experts cast doubt Tuesday on a list of questions the special counsel purportedly wants to ask President Donald Trump, saying they would expect the veteran prosecutor to ask more and more pointed questions. The New York Times published the list of 44 questions it said special counsel Robert Mueller plans to pose to Trump as part of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. The newspaper reported that the list was compiled by Trump's lawyers based on questions that were read to them by special counsel investigators. The largely open-ended questions range from queries about Trump's firing of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, to general inquiries into what Trump knew about alleged coordination between his 2016 presidential campaign and Russia. While the list reflects the general line of questioning the special counsel's investigation is believed to be focused on, legal experts said the questions published are not what Mueller or any prosecutor for that matter would ask an interview subject. "It doesn't sound like questions that a prosecutor would typically ask, unless it was just a very general information-gathering type of inquiry, and they'd not limit themselves to only those question and reserve the right to ask follow-up questions," said Eric Jaso, a partner at the Spiro Harrison law firm who served as an associate independent counsel during the Whitewater investigation of former President Bill Clinton. The questions, Jaso said, were likely written by Trump's own lawyers, based on a conversation with the special counsel about topics he wants to query. "If Mr. Mueller is going to interview the president, I suspect that he's going to ask rather pointed questions rather than having questions that would allow the president to basically give a narrative and potentially go far afield from the topics that they're trying to focus on," Jaso said. Paul Rosenzweig, an adjunct professor at the George Washington School of Law... According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: Who thinks the list of questions for trump are a joke? Options: A. mueller B. legal experts C. the democrats D. not enough information
(Answer)
B

(Question)
I will never own a Chanel suit. It is unlikely that I will ever own a (genuine) Chanel handbag. However, a Chanel nail polish was definitely attainable. Whilst they are ridiculously expensive compared with most other nail polishes ($AU39), they are still much more affordable than the $AU1,000,000,000 a handbag costs (or so I estimate as I have never actually priced one). After seeing swatches of Peridot online, I knew that baby would one day be mine. The other two polishes in the collection - Quartz and Graphite - did not excite me the way Peridot did. That was until I read this review of Graphite on the Polish Police. Suddenly, Graphite was on my radar. It was stuck in my head like an ear worm; another baby, soon to be adopted. I argued with myself for about a month on whether to get these polishes or not. Could I really spend nearly $80 on nail polish. It did seem rather excessive to me. Then, Myers sent me a $10 voucher for my birthday and I got a $30 voucher for doing a survey so the decision was made. For $38 of my own money (less than the cost of two OPI's!) I became the proud owner of Peridot and Graphite. Here is my review of Graphite. Graphite is the most stunningly intriguing nail polish I have ever owned. In the bottle it looks a little bit dull and boring - grey and bland. But on the nail it is completely different. In some lights it is silvery, others a more gun metal grey, and in others it has almost a goldish tone to it. It is super sparkly, yet is not a glitter polish - though in saying that it appears more glitter than shimmer. It is quite opaque. Two coats and you can't see the nail line. In the photos below I have actually applied three coats (plus an addition two top coats of clear) because I was going to a wedding and I wanted it to be perfect. But ordinarily two would be sufficient. According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: What occupation does the author have? Options: A. A doctor B. not enough information C. A teacher D. An engineer
(Answer)
B

(Question)
So, I worked with a friend of mine who was a playwright to put together a play to take to the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. It was a three person show, and one of the roles was written specifically for me. Many of the lines were written after we improvised the scenes in my living room as she wrote the piece. Took it to Scotland, where it was quite well received. A year or so later, it was being produced in New York in a much more prestigious setting. I auditioned, was called back a couple times, and got to the play the role again. Fantastic! THEN, it was produced by an even larger theatre. Different producer, different casting director, etc. I went to the open call for it, and the casting director treated me really poorly. It was odd. She looked at my resume and said, "It says you have already played this role." I said, "Yes, I was fortunate enough to workshop it and originate the role." She looked at me like I was lying. I mean, shuttled me out the door like I was a crazy woman. Needless to say, I was not called back. And that was okay(I mean, of course I wanted to do the show with this group of people, but hey, we can't always get what we want). Fast forward to opening night: my playwright friend invites me to see the show. The actress playing "my" role was fantastic, but they had to change lines in the script that indicated what she looked like, because she was of Hawaiian descent. Again, no big dealand she was great! What was strange was meeting the director that evening. My friend introduced me as the originator of the role, and the director asked me why I hadn't auditionedOverall, it wasn't a harsh rejection or a terrible story, it was just weird to have been treated like a liar when I was not lying According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: How long did it take to write the play? Options: A. Two months B. Several weeks C. not enough information D. Six months
(Answer)
B