In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.

Example Input: Comment: "Soylent Orange" is Trumpism. Sessions said "it's an honor to be able to SERVE you". Really? you swore an oath to serve our country, not a demagogue. Your loyalty is required to be to our constitutional principles, not to any person. 
That ridiculous 'fawning fan fest of flattery' was the most embarrassing and gratuitous display of brown-nosing I have ever witnessed. Does this weak leader have no humility? Does his fragile egomania require constant praise?
Example Output: Non-threat

Example Input: Comment: The old and washed up foreign money bag lady in the Salvation Army disco era pantsuit, who knows not the truth from a lie, with a bogus political sham marriage, to a hillbilly back-woods lawyer, will not and can not win this election in any way shape or form.
Example Output: Non-threat

Example Input: Comment: Rubin, take a break from writing fantasy.  None of what you describe is going to happen.  The Republicans will double down on their Trump bet because they have no other.  And it may work, because around half of the public--the Republican half--has lost whatever ability it once had to track information and analyze argument relevant to public affairs.  Trump makes perfect sense in his context of late imperial decadence.  You wouldn't have expected a Thomas Jefferson or an Abraham Lincoln to show up in a list of Roman emperors, would you?  Well, stop being surprised at Trump turning up as the inheritor of a corrupted democracy.
Example Output:
Non-threat