Sheriff Clarke threatens and detains a man for shaking is head at him.

[adr3naline]

Originally Posted by Nuclear_Art

Those are articles about Clarke, but if you think they "show acclaim", then I don't think you know what acclaim means.

Although not possible to prove, something tells you had not taken the time to fully read said articles nor the public's commentary that followed before posting this reply.

[Nuclear_Art]

Originally Posted by adr3naline

Although not possible to prove, something tells you had not taken the time to fully read said articles nor the public's commentary that followed before posting this reply.

"Although not possible to prove"? What? Actual words in the articles say as much. Do you think reporters of those articles would accidentally write about his angry outbursts if they were trying to portray Clarke as a nice guy? Reading is a valuable tool to understanding but it is even more valuable to comprehend what you read.

A few choice quotes from The Atlantic article, which yeah, prove it:

Clarke said of Nolan: “The gentleman over here says, ‘Figures don’t lie.’ I disagree. I say, ‘Figures lie, and liars figure.’”

After the county took over the House of Correction, Clarke sued Abele over cuts to his budget and accused him of being a heroin addict and of having “penis envy.”

Public commentary on internet news articles is 99% idiocy, most of it is racist. But then again, you sound like you do your part to add to that idiocy.

Feel free to put me on ignore.

[adr3naline]

Originally Posted by Nuclear_Art

"Although not possible to prove"? What? Actual words in the articles say as much.

In your words, reading comprehension is valuable. This statement says I cannot prove you didn't read the articles, however your conjecture says you did not. I'm glad I could spell that out for you.

Originally Posted by Nuclear_Art

Do you think reporters of those articles would accidentally write about his angry outbursts if they were trying to portray Clarke as a nice guy? Reading is a valuable tool to understanding but it is even more valuable to comprehend what you read.

Do you understand the role of a reporter in 2017? This will help.

Originally Posted by Nuclear_Art

Public commentary on internet news articles is 99% idiocy, most of it is racist. But then again, you sound like you do your part to add to that idiocy.

C'mon there Einstein you started out strong but went straight high school at the end.



I'm still dumbfounded by the fact posters like this^ assume I know or like Clarke. Almost as if the first ~20 posts in this thread don't exist.