How does the evidence support the claim that "political
speech and writing are largely the defense of the
indefensible"?
It presents statistics that prove that language is
often used to defend the indefensible.
It gives an example of how language helps people
reveal the truth.
O It provides a hypothetical example of how someone
can use language to hide terrible acts.
O It uses a quotation from an expert to show how
language can be used to defend immoral acts.

George Orwell uses examples - 'millions of peasants are robbed of their farms', 'people are imprisoned for years without ot trial or shot in the back of the neck.

These are all examples he uses to support his claim of 'political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensibe' but using examples of the indefensible.

HOPE THAT HELPS

Explanation:

George Orwell uses examples - 'millions of peasants are robbed of their farms', 'people are imprisoned for years without ot trial or shot in the back of the neck.

These are all examples he uses to support his claim of 'political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensibe' but using examples of the indefensible.

Explanation:

based on the biblical principle philippians 4: 13 "i can do everything through christ who strengthens me." i agree that it is through him that we are given the strength to cope with every situation.

and based on the biblical principle proverbs 16: 32 "better to get angry slowly than to be a hero. better to be even-tempered than to capture a city."   i agree with the author of the passage to the extent that the nobility of heart demonstrates the strength of a person. those who are contemptuous, get angry easily and show their anger toward others are really weak, but those who are noble and make sure to not hurt other people and their feelings are strong people.