Answer:
D. the president's role in foreign policy had not yet been specifically defined.
Explanation:
The Constitution does not explicitly state that the President has sole authority over foreign policy, and so at this point in history it was still unclear exactly how much power the President actually had in regards to international affairs. Washington didn't want to take a position on such a contentious issue without knowing for sure that he could back up his stance with actual authority.
Black absorbs light, which makes it the "hottest" colour. White reflects light making it cooler, so your answer would be white
Hope this helped :)
Answer:
Well it depends on the situation lets say that the President needs to persuade someone to join forces or to accept peace. But they can also persude some one to do the wrong thing. Presidents very seldom act entirely on their own; unless they can persuade others to support them and follow through, presidents who act unilaterally can be frustrated and even humiliated. As this is written, most of the executive orders President Obama issued in his second term are about to be nullified by the courts, President Trump, or Congress. These orders were effective for a while because President Obama was able to get his own cabinet officers to implement them; but they were toast as soon as others acted against them. In reality the President does have the power to persuade to make treatys, Veto bills, and take a variety of other measures, such as convening or dismissing Congress and receiving foreign ambassadors. So, In my perspective I belive that it is truly important that a President persuades but only when necessary.
Explanation: