1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Alex787 [66]
3 years ago
5

How does the structure of Mike kubic's article support the central idea of his claim in the Salem witch trials and other witch h

unts
English
2 answers:
serg [7]3 years ago
7 0

Kubic's article has three parts. In the first part, he gives the full account of the witch trials which took place in 1692. The author shows how convicted people were actually not guilty of the accusations. In the second part, he writes that how exactly 100 years later the mass execution of the enemies of the revolution in France, so called "Reign of Terror" followed the similar patterns. The paragraph about the mass execution of Jews is also mentioned in the article. In the last part named "Public Scares in the USA", Kubic somehow summarizes the culmination of these historic demagoguery giving the examples of resettlement of Japanese Americans, First and the Second Red Scares in 20th century America ans concludes that prevalence of prejudice was still on the agenda even after two and half century later.  


stepladder [879]3 years ago
6 0

<span>The trials were rapid. Any person who suspected that some unfortunate event or development was the work of a witch, could bring the charge to a native judge. The judge would have the suspected evil-doer halted and brought in for public cross-examination, where the suspect was advised to admit. Whatever his or her response, if the charge of witchery was believed to be reliable, the suspect was turned over to a higher court and brought before a grand body of people </span>sworn to give a verdict in a legal case based on evidence submitted to them in court.

More of the evidence used in the court case was the testament of the accuser.<span> If more proof was needed, the jury might consider the witch cake, a strange mixture that was made from wheatlike cereal meal and urine of the sorceress’ victim and fed to a dog.</span><span> Eating the cake was supposed to wound the sorceress, whose cry of agony would deceive her secret individuality.</span>

You might be interested in
If the President of the United States were accused of accepting bribes while in office what power does Congress have to bring ch
Y_Kistochka [10]

The United States Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" ( Article I, section 2 ) and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments…[but] no person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present" ( Article I, section 3 ). The president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States are subject to impeachment.

The concept of impeachment originated in England and was adopted by many of the American colonial governments and state constitutions. As adopted by the framers, this congressional power is a fundamental component of the constitutional system of “checks and balances.” Through the impeachment process, Congress charges and then tries an official of the federal government for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” The definition of “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” was not specified in the Constitution and has long been subject to debate.

In impeachment proceedings, the House of Representatives charges an official of the federal government by approving, by majority vote, articles of impeachment. A committee of representatives, called “managers,” acts as prosecutors before the Senate. The Senate sits as a High Court of Impeachment in which senators consider evidence, hear witnesses, and vote to acquit or convict the impeached official. In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal. Since 1789, about half of Senate impeachment trials have resulted in conviction and removal from office.

Historical Development

In The Federalist , No. 65, Alexander Hamilton wrote that impeachment is "a method of national inquest into the conduct of public men" accused of violating the “public trust.” Hamilton and his colleagues at the Constitutional Convention knew that the history of impeachment as a constitutional process dated from 14th-century England, when the fledgling Parliament sought to make the king's advisers accountable. By the mid-15th century, impeachment had fallen into disuse in England, but in the early 17th century, the excesses of the English kings prompted Parliament to revive its impeachment power. Even as the Constitution's framers toiled in Philadelphia in 1787, the impeachment trial of British official Warren Hastings was in progress in London and avidly followed in America. Hastings, who was eventually acquitted, was charged with oppression, bribery, and fraud as colonial administrator and first governor-general in India

The American colonial governments and early state constitutions followed the British pattern of trial before the upper legislative body on charges brought by the lower house. Despite these precedents, a major controversy arose at the Constitutional Convention about whether the Senate should act as the court of impeachment. Opposing that role for the Senate, James Madison and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney asserted that it would make the president too dependent on the legislative branch. They suggested, as alternative trial bodies, the Supreme Court or the chief justices of the state supreme courts. Hamilton and others argued, however, that such bodies would be too small and susceptible to corruption. In the end, after much wrangling, the framers selected the Senate as the trial forum. To Hamilton fell the task of explaining the convention's decision. In The Federalist , No. 65, he argued:

The Convention thought the Senate the most fit depository of this important trust. Where else than in the Senate could have been found a tribunal sufficiently dignified, or sufficiently independent? What other body would be likely to feel confidence enough in its own situation, to preserve unawed and uninfluenced the necessary impartiality between an individual accused, and the representatives of the people, his accusers?

There was also considerable debate at the convention in Philadelphia over the definition of impeachable crimes. In the early proposals, the president and other officials could be removed on impeachment and conviction for "corrupt conduct," or for "malpractice or neglect of duty." Later, the wording was changed to "treason, bribery, or corruption," and then to "treason or bribery" alone. Contending that "treason or bribery" was too narrow a definition, George Mason proposed adding "mal-administration" but switched to "other high crimes and misdemeanors against the state" when Madison commented that "mal-administration" was too broad. A final revision defined impeachable offenses as "treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Is the example a complete sentence, sentence fragment, or run-on sentence? As they drove through the crowded intersection.
trasher [3.6K]
C
the answer is sentence fragment because the sentence is lacking a subject
6 0
3 years ago
Can somebody do this. I just want to be sure I have answered correctly
lisov135 [29]
1. Be badly-paid. (I think this might be right, I am honestly not 100% confident on this one.)
2. Do physical work.
3. Earn an average salary.
4. Get a pay raise.
5. Make a living.
6. Work overtime.

(Keep in mind, this is your class, so it might not be 100% correct, but these sound right to me, and theses are also not all the answer options, but I hope I helped.)

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which sentence uses a verb that agrees with its compound subject? A. Either Darlene or her nephews has washed our windows. B. Er
BabaBlast [244]

Answer: Neither the stars nor the moon provides us enough light to see this map

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
10 big events in the story Trojan war (End of Iliad)
dimaraw [331]

Answer:

Achilles killed Hector, and afterwards he dragged Hector's body from his chariot and refused to return the body to the Trojans for burial. ... The armies made a temporary truce to allow the burial of the dead. The Iliad ends with the funeral of Hector.

Like if i was correct :D

Comment if I was wrong pls :)

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • The _____ is the essential noun, pronoun, or group of words acting as a noun that cannot be left out of a sentence. simple subje
    6·2 answers
  • What word best describes the purpose of an analytical essay
    14·2 answers
  • Why is it important to stick to our own beliefs, morals, and values? ​
    15·2 answers
  • Select the correct text in the passage.
    8·1 answer
  • WILL GIVE BRAINIEST AND 80 POINTS The memoir I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings reveals to the readers how the author's childhood p
    5·2 answers
  • Select the correct answer. Which statement best defines theme?
    8·1 answer
  • Which of the following is an Informal definition of hot dog?
    7·1 answer
  • For you, do we have to at all times agree with all the decisions that are made or heard? why?
    10·1 answer
  • Body Composition is not influenced by which of the following characteristics?
    5·2 answers
  • The people in charge of Manzanar knew little about Japanese culture. How did their lack of knowledge affect conditions in the ca
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!