<span>D. Securities and Exchange Commission
</span>
Answer:
The Mosaic Code is the basis of Jewish law. Other codes of law existed before the Mosaic Code. Hammurabi, a Babylonian king, had his code of laws written around 2100 B.C. The importance of the Mosaic Code in Western political thought is seen in three areas: man's relationship with his leaders, man's relationship to the nation or state, and man's relationship with his fellow man.
Moses stated that the law he had given to the Hebrews was God's law. As such, the law would no longer be based upon the word of whatever Pharaoh or king ruled. Leaders were bound to obey the laws, just as were the ordinary citizens. The law would, therefore, be unchanging and unchangeable; it could not be twisted to suit the purposes of the leaders.
Explanation:
I just took the quiz and got 100% trust me
Put a thanks
Thank you
The most likely reason is to prevent the president from abusing its power.
If he can unlimitedly dismissed the congress, the president will basically capable to do whatever he wants to the government,
including making reckless policies<span />
The answer to this question is
<span>Which of these Renaissance ideas does this passage support? And you are to understand that a Prince, and most of all a new Prince, cannot observe all those rules of conduct in respect whereof men are accounted good, being often forced, in order to preserve his Princedom, to act in opposition to good faith, charity, humanity, and religion. He must therefore keep his mind ready to shift as the winds and tides of Fortune turn, and, as I have already said, he ought not to quit good courses if he can help it, but should know how to follow evil courses if he must. —Niccolò Machiavelli
</span>D-"Secularism"
Hoped This Helped, <span>Isaiahborg2
Your Welcome :)</span>
Incomplete question. However, I inferred from a historical perspective.
<u>Explanation</u>:
Thomas Gage (General Thomas Gage) was is a famous British general that controlled a large portion of British soldiers in North America during the British colonial era.
His statement likely came at a time when there was large opposition coming from Boston over perceived injustices from the government. Hence, his statement meant they (those in power) were losing or not in control over Boston.
