Please help I’m really struggling

Here is their argument. given the obtuse angle x, we make a quadrilateral abcd with ∠dab = x, and ∠abc = 90◦, and ad = bc. say the perpendicular bisector to dc meets the perpendicular bisector to ab at p. then pa = pb and pc = pd. so the triangles pad and pbc have equal sides and are congruent. thus ∠pad = ∠pbc. but pab is isosceles, hence ∠pab = ∠pba. subtracting, gives x = ∠pad−∠pab = ∠pbc −∠pba = 90◦. this is a preposterous conclusion – just where is the mistake in the "proof" and why does the argument break down there?

The vertices of a rectangle are given in the columns of the matrix . if is found to perform a transformation, what are the coordinates of the transformed rectangle? (0, 0), (0, –3), (–3, –3), (–3, 0) (0, 0), (0, 3), (3, 3), (3, 0) (0, 0), (0, 3), (–3, –3), (–3, 0) (0, 0), (0, 3), (–3, 3), (–3, 0)

Acompany wants to reduce the dimensions of its logo by one fourth to use on business cards. if the area of the original logo is 4 square inches, what is the area of the logo that will be used on the business cards?