Thad and pierre made an appointment to view a condo for lease advertised in the newspaper. thad phoned the landlord and set up a viewing for two hours later in the day. the couple thought the condo was perfect and informed the landlord they wanted to start the application process to lease the condo. the landlord then explained the condo had just been leased. the next sunday in the classifieds, the condo was again advertised for lease. a friend of the couple phoned the landlord, pretending to be interested in the property. when asked if it had been leased, the landlord replied, "no". what is going on in this situation? a. probably nothing at all. the condo was probably leased in the two hours between the couple’s phone call and their viewing. chances are the lease fell through for various reasons. b. it seems the landlord did not like the idea of leasing his condo to a same sex couple. this is not permissible. a landlord must live by federal and state fair housing laws. c. more than likely the landlord was not happy with the sexual orientation of thad and pierre. he owns the condo and may lease it out to whomever he sees fit. d. none of the above.

Which technological breakthrough of the 1950s revolutionized the way that americans kept up with news and world events? a) radio b) internet c) television d) motion pictures

Ato z on the bun timeline show where the events listed a through g board blow fit on the timeline

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.