Q: 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.
Comment: 1. Anyone, and especially those in government, caught in wrongdoing deserves to be, and should be, punished to the fullest extent possible.
2. Investigations should be initiated upon reasonable grounds; that is, there ought to be a reasonable suspicion that wrongdoing has occurred.
3. For any person who cares more about his country that his team, clearing out the venal underbrush takes priority over scoring political "gotcha" points. Thus, such an individual is likely more offended by (equivalent) wrongdoing on his side of the political fence.

Now, we obviously don't live in an ideal world. However, with which of these ideas do you disagree? This isn't remotely about "denial" (if anyone actually did wrong, hang 'em!), this is about honesty.

You dispute that the entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative that the Democrats and the media have been spinning has been manufactured? If so, what are the key facts that, in your mind, justified the investigation in the first place?
A:
Non-sexual-explicit