In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: sexual-explicit and non-sexual-explicit. A comment is considered sexual-explicit if it explicitly portrays sexual matters.

Q: Comment: And now for the latest in unvetted and fake news we turn to the G&M.

A: Non-sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: That's right. Where are all those people who screamed about Hillary's emails now? What? All I hear is silence, the silence of lambs led to their slaughter. Their hero turns out to be just what we knew all along, a pussy-grabbing casting couch celebrity with absolutely zero concern for the average American. You asked for it, you got it (in the backside), Toyota.

A: Sexual-explicit
****
Q: Comment: It is good of the article's author to support Forcillo's defense view by calling the teen "troubled," which suggests he actually might have been suicidal, rather than simply high on a mixture of recreational drugs.

As for the suggestion that the Jury finding was "unfathomable," ie that Forcillo was justified in the use of lethal force against a male advancing with a knife poised in a threatening manner, yet guilty of attempted murder when firing a volley of shots at somebody who was laying down on the ground already incapacitated by shots to the chest, I think Forcillo's money was misspent.

Legislation gives the police a rare power in our society, and that is to reduce drastically the chance that they, or others, might be killed or maimed by according them the power, authority, and obligation to act with deadly force against a real or apparent threat to life.
Yatim, laying on the floor of the streetcar, did not pose that threat. I think the best Forcillo could hope for was...

A:
Non-sexual-explicit
****