I think an informal writing style helps the reader to have a vivid, mental thinking about the writing, and it helps the reader to think about the question without stating it like you have to find the themes in an essays or writing.
Answer: She worked as "a big-city prosecutor, a corporate litigator, a trial judge and an appellate judge."
Explanation:
The detail that supports the idea that Sonia’s career gave her a chance to experience and understand several different elements of the American legal system is that "She worked as "a big-city prosecutor, a corporate litigator, a trial judge and an appellate judge".
Sonia was born in New York where she was an assistant district attorney. She also practiced privately and was nominated to the District Court by President Bush and later nominated to the Supreme Court by Obama.
She understood the American legal system as she was very experienced.
I believe the answer would be propaganda because the author is trying to get you to do something via media.
I hope this helps!
Answer: C) The author proves that he's biased when he uses terms like "silly" and "stupid."
Explanation: The words "silly" and "stupid" are the only instances of evidence among the options, since they were taken directly from the text that is being discussed. The closest example of bringing the text's content into the discussion is in option C (stating what the author has expressed), but that option doesn't present any conclusion. Option A is presented as a personal opinion with a vague origin ("I feel") and option B tries to back the presented conclusion with an assumption ("the author obviously hates [...] fast food") instead of evidence.
