The President is Commander in Chief of the US military, under Article II of the Constitution, which gives him expansive forces to utilize the military with regards to the United States, and to further its interests globally. (A fascinating reality here is that when working as Commander in Chief, the President really is "exempt from the rules that everyone else follows" as in he can't be obliged by any conventional law go by Congress. That is a result of the Supremacy Clause, which says the Constitution itself is preeminent to any demonstration of Congress. Thus when the President is acting specifically from the Constitution, he is not responsible to Congress.)
President Obama utilized his forces as Commander as a part of Chief to guide the military to chase down and endeavor to catch Osama receptacle Laden, the previous head of al-Qaeda, who arranged and drove the execution of the 9/11/01 fear based oppressor assaults on the World Trade Center in New York City that slaughtered around 3,000 American natives. A group of Navy seals endeavored to catch container Laden at his mystery den in Pakistan, yet receptacle Laden was murdered in the endeavor. Few would differ that for this situation the President utilized his Article II forces to unequivocally deflect future demonstrations of psychological warfare.
Answer:
The excerpts which show that Queen Elizabeth's response to the Parliament's request was rhetoric are:
1. The realm shall not remain destitute of any heir that may be a fit governor, and peradventure more beneficial to the realm.
2. For though I be never so careful of your well-doing, and mind ever so to be, yet may my issue grow out of kind, and become perhaps ungracious.
Explanation:
Queen Elizabeth responded to the parliament quite persuasively. She appeals using logos to persuade the audience and make her point clear to them. She convinces them that she is capable enough to rule alone. She appeals them to give her strength.
She said that Parliament should not worry that she is not married or doesn't have any child. Having one doesn't guarantee that the heir would be competent enough to rule. She is herself quite capable to rule effectively and is a capable leader.
Answer:
they considered the case close
Explanation:
because they didnt have enough proof
