Q: WHITE HOUSE President Donald Trump, after a tactical retreat this week on immigration policy, demonstrated Friday that there is no strategic shift to his overall tough approach to those attempting to illegally enter the country, and vowing to "end the immigration crisis, once and for all." U.S. immigration laws, Trump declared, are "the weakest in the history of the world." Trump made the remarks in an auditorium in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, adjacent to the White House, where he presided over an event with so-called "Angel Families," those who have had relatives killed by people who entered the country illegally. "Your loss will not have been in vain," the president told the families, who held large photos of their slain relatives. "We will secure our borders the word will get out. Got to have a safe country. We're going to have a safe country." Trump called family members to the presidential lectern to recount how their loved ones had been killed by those who were in the United States illegally. Several of those speaking condemned the media for ignoring the stories of the victims and praised Trump and Vice President Mike Pence for their attention to border security. Crime assertion Trump, in his remarks, also suggested those illegally in the United States commit more crimes on a statistical basis than citizens or resident aliens. However, studies have shown that undocumented immigrants are less likely to commit a crime in the U.S. than native-born citizens, including one published by the libertarian CATO Institute this year. Following intense domestic and international condemnation, Trump on Wednesday signed an order ending his administration's practice of separation of children from their families while parents were being prosecuted for crossing the border illegally. The administration's recently implemented "zero tolerence" policy led to the criminal prosecutions of undocumented border crossers, which in turn led to federal officials separating adults and their children. According to the above context, answer the following question. After the speech, what did recent critics of Trump's zero tolerance policy likely feel?

OPTIONS:
- That the CATO Institute study was flawed
- That the Administration was doing the wrong thing on immigration
- not enough information
- That President Trump gave a great speech

A: That the Administration was doing the wrong thing on immigration

Q: WASHINGTON Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton called Republican rival Donald Trump dangerous and unqualified for the presidency in a blistering foreign policy speech Thursday in San Diego, California. "He is temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability and immense responsibility," Clinton said. "This is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes." Trump "doesn't understand America, or the world," she said. "It's not hard to imagine Donald Trump leading us into a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin." In anticipation of the address, Trump attacked his Democratic opponent on Twitter. "Crooked Hillary Clinton, who I would love to call Lyin' Hillary, is getting ready to totally misrepresent my foreign policy positions," he tweeted. Clinton emphasized her own experience as first lady, senator and secretary of state, saying she would provide the steady diplomacy the country needs. "National security is the foundation of how we make sure our interests are pursued in the world," said Louis Goodman, Emeritus Dean of International Relations at American University in an interview with VOA. With polls show terrorism is a major concern among Americans, Clinton targeted Trump's positions on the issue. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has promised to temporarily block Muslims from crossing U.S. borders. "The struggle against radical Islam also takes place in our homeland. There are scores of recent migrants inside our borders charged with terrorism. For every case known to the public, there are dozens more. We must stop importing extremism through senseless immigration policies," Trump said in a foreign policy speech in April. Trump's other anti-terrorism proposals include a pledge to torture and murder the families of suspected terrorists and target Islamic State. "I have a simple message for them," Trump said. "Their days are numbered. I won't tell them where and I won't tell them how. But they will be gone. And soon." But... According to the above context, answer the following question. Why did Trump attack Hillary

OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- for blocking Muslims
- for misrepresenting policy positions
- for pursuing interests

A: for misrepresenting policy positions

Q: I don't see a point. That's the biggest problem with my life currently. I honestly, don't see a point. Am I working towards temporary monetary gain? Is my goal supposed to be buying my dream car(s)? Is my goal spiritual? I'm currently Catholic, but I've seen how spiritually those around me have changed. I've even wondered what's the point of heaven, if everything I want is there. I like life because of the ups and the downs. I enjoy learning and discovering new things. The idea of perfection seems like an impossible concept to me. Maybe even an unenjoyable one. Maybe my goal is to have a family. Being catholic naturally we gravitate towards larger families. But as a libertarian I don't see a lot of potential in the United States at it pertains to economic freedoms. I see the government encroaching more and more into our lives. Is this the type of country I want to raise a family in? I certainly don't want to be outside the United States (no offense towards anyone outside of the U.S). Maybe my goal is political. I've always wanted to run for office. Maybe governor one day. Would I be able to avoid the waves of bipartisanship, and actually do what I believe is the best for the people of my state. Or would I collapse under the political pressures and sign up for agreements I know in my heart and mind won't help the people. Only time will tell. I just don't see a point. I actually have many goals, but I struggle to see the overall point of accomplishing any of it. Especially seeing as anything I do will be lost in the ink-blots of history. According to the above context, answer the following question. Who does the author want to marry?

OPTIONS:
- someone who only wants one child
- not enough information
- someone who doesn't want children
- someone with similar viewpoints about large families

A:
not enough information