Answer:
Yes.
Explanation:
Any source in History can be biased. It can be based on personal opinion, pressure, etc.
Let's take an example. Let's say we want to learn more about Hitler, and we have a primary source that we are analysing. The primary source is a diary entry from a Nazi propagandist, and in the diary entry he talks about how Hitler is like a reincarnation of God, he will lead Germany and the world to greatness and is all in all a great guy.
Straight away, you can tell that that is biased.
So to summarise, anything can be biased. It isn't related to what type of source it is. If you want to analyse and interpret sources, you will need to have lots of different primary and secondary sources at hand, and compare them to find the best answer and analysis.
Hope this helps
The answer you are looking for is A: Make Treaties.
This is because Congress is actually responsible for making and maintaining treaties.
> The president must act as commander-in-chief
> The president does appoint judges to the Supreme Court — just think that our previous president elected a justice.
> And they run as the head of the political party, during the elections
<span>The U.S. Constitution take part from Magna Carta, and believe the right to protect the people from government abuse; the Constitution also take parts from the English Bill of Rights of 1689(relationship b/t right of the individual and groups with the right of the government)</span>
