I was playing off the article’s use the expession.
And he is.
“I was playing off the article’s use the expession.”
I gathered from the quotes.
“And he is.”
Well, then, you weren’t “playing off” the article, you were agreeing with the article. You only alluded to the article’s use to get around making the claim yourself, as was my point. Which begs the question, now that you’ve said it outright (”and he is”), why you didn’t save me time and come out with dirty lib doublespeak from the get-go.