Q: "Congratulations, jackass, you just got us sued." My editor, Sharon, was standing in front of my desk. She was apparently not happy. I shrugged, slouching further down in my chair, trying to hide from her gigantic crazy eyes behind my computer. It was a white laptop with a sticker that said "This Machine Kills Yuppies" slapped over the corporate logo on back. She reached out with one of her freakish man-hands and slammed the screen shut. "Let me try this again. You just got us sued six times over." Sharon Sinclair was a six-foot-tall beast of a woman with a huge mane of wiry black and gray hair pulled back in a pony tail. I had every confidence that she could tear me in two and use my bloody carcass in some kinky hedonistic lesbian cult ritual or something. So I usually tried to choose my words with the appropriate care around her. "Jesus-fucking-Christ, I haven't even had my morning coffee yet, and my head's still reeling from the Louisville Slugger that pummeled it last night. So I really don't feel like dealing with whatever annoying hormonal episode you have going on here." She glared at me silently, watching me squirm a little before asking, "Are you done?" "Probably." "Good," she said with a suppressed grin as she took a seat next to me. "Because I just let you publicly accuse the mayor and the valley's most powerful corporations of conspiring to defraud the taxpayers. So what's your plan for keeping my ass off the firing line?" I tilted back in my chair and met Sharon's gaze. "Look, we knew we'd get a strong reaction. Let them sue. We have e-mails to back us up." "These legal briefings say your e-mails were forged," she responded, waving a thick stack of papers in my face. "Of course they're gonna say that. That's why I made sure to get corroboration. Abrasax confirmed that the e-mails between Dylan Maxwell and City Hall are legit. But you know all this, so I don't know why we're wasting time going over it again." Question: Who is Sharon? Options: - the narrator's intern   - the narrator's direct supervisor   - not enough information   - the narrator's assistant === The correct answer is
A: not enough information


Q: The U.S. Supreme Court plunged into the politically messy issue of redrawing congressional and legislative districts Tuesday, in a case that could have profound implications for both major political parties for years to come. The high court heard oral arguments in a case brought by Democratic voters in Wisconsin. They argued that a Republican redistricting plan for the state assembly was so overtly partisan that it violated constitutional protections of freedom of speech and equal protection under the law for Wisconsin voters. A lower federal court sided with the challengers last year and against Republican state officials in Wisconsin. Officials argued Tuesday that they had not violated any constitutional rights when they drew up new boundaries for state assembly districts. "Our legislature followed traditional redistricting criteria, which is what they have been required to do and we think they followed that and that the justices will agree," Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel told reporters in front of the court following the oral arguments. The process of state legislatures redrawing congressional and legislative district boundaries has been enmeshed in politics for two centuries. Early on, the process was referred to as “gerrymandering,” where one party or the other tries to gain an electoral advantage by redrawing district boundaries to maximize their voting clout. Republicans have had success in several states in redrawing congressional and legislative voting districts and that has helped them maintain their majority in the House of Representatives. Democrats have come under fire as well for partisan maps in states where they control the legislature, like Maryland and Massachusetts. During Tuesday’s oral arguments, the more liberal high court justices seemed open to the case brought by Democratic voters. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said a ruling in favor of the Republican districting plan in Wisconsin would encourage others to stack the deck against their political opponents. “What becomes of the... Question: How long did the supreme court consider the case? Options: - six months   - one week   - not enough information   - two weeks === The correct answer is
A: two weeks


Q: U.S. President Donald Trump says he is considering tariffs, quotas, and retaliatory taxes on imports of steel and aluminum from countries such as China, Japan, and South Korea. The comments came during a wide-ranging trade discussion Tuesday between Trump and a bipartisan group of lawmakers at the White House.  The president said U.S. steel and aluminum industries are being "decimated" by the "dumping" of cheap imports of those materials into U.S. markets. Trump has long threatened what he calls "reciprocal" trade action to deal with steel, aluminum, and other imports.  But he has so far avoided taking any major steps, ostensibly out of fear of hurting the country's strong economic performance since he took office.  Several lawmakers on Tuesday urged Trump to be cautious when considering retaliatory trade steps, saying such measures could spark a trade war that leads to higher prices for U.S. producers and consumers.  "It's very, very much a double-edged sword," Trump conceded.  "I want to keep prices down, but I also want to make sure that we have a steel industry and an aluminum industry," he added.  The Trump administration is currently renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), as well as the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement with South Korea.  Trump called the U.S.-South Korea deal "very, very bad" and "horrible." He also said Canada has "treated us very, very unfairly."  Last month, the U.S. Commerce Department sent a so-called "232 report" to the White House, examining the national security impacts of steel and aluminum imports, and giving Trump 90 days to impose quotas or tariffs.  Under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the president can initiate a probe to determine if imports threaten national security.  "It's about our economy," Vice President Mike Pence during the meeting. "It's about our national security."  Trade was a major topic for Trump during the presidential campaign he vowed to impose a 45 percent tax on Chinese imports and a 35 percent tax on Mexican imports. Question: Where did the US Commerce Department send a report? Options: - China   - The White House   - Canada   - not enough information === The correct answer is
