Given a document, an entity and its sentiment towards the entity, verify if it is the correct sentiment towards the entity. Answer should be yes or no. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Steve Bannon is Neutral . The attempts to curtail testimony to congressional investigators became clear this week when  former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon  appeared before the House Intelligence Committee and infuriated both sides of the aisle by refusing to answer questions about  his  work during the presidential transition and in the White House.
At some points during  Bannon 's six hours of closed-door testimony   his  attorney took breaks to confer via telephone with the White House counsel's office to clarify what questions could be answered and came back with the same guidance:  Bannon  could not discuss any activities related to the transition or  his  tenure in the White House.
 Bannon 's team negotiated ground rules with the White House counsel's office the week prior to his appearance before the House Intelligence Committee  according to a source familiar with the situation.
The President's personal legal team was aware of discussions between the White House counsel's office and  Bannon 's lawyer about protecting a possible privilege claim. But it wasn't their decision  according to a person familiar with the discussions. The protection of the privilege is a matter for the White House  not the President's legal team  because it relates to the office.
Before the hearing   Bannon 's lawyer informed a staff member of Rep. Devin Nunes  the California Republican who chairs the House Intelligence Committee  that  Bannon  planned to claim executive privilege on topics beyond the presidential campaign  a source said.
But that information was apparently tightly held. "It caught me personally by surprise" that  Bannon  asserted executive privilege  said Rep. Mike Conaway  the Texas Republican leading the committee's Russia investigation.
South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy and Florida Rep. Tom Rooney  the other two Republicans leading the Russia probe along with Conaway  also said they weren't aware of any agreement between the White House and committee staff about the scope of  Bannon 's testimony.
"They wouldn't do that because I'd ask what I think is relevant to ask  and if you've got a legal privilege you can assert it " Gowdy said  adding that  Bannon  was in a "legally indefensible position."
As it became clear on Tuesday that  Bannon  was refusing to answer questions  the committee served  him  with a subpoena to compel  him  to divulge additional information.
But the scope of what  Bannon  was claiming was privileged shocked members from both parties.
" His  version of executive privilege is it covers the transition  the time  he  was at the White House and covers time forever " Gowdy told Fox News Wednesday. "That is no one's definition of executive privilege."
Lawmakers were also offended that  Bannon  had already divulged details about some of  his  post-campaign activities in Michael Wolff's explosive book "Fire and Fury " but then refused to discuss those events with the committee.  Bannon 's attorney also informed members that he would  in fact  answer those questions when he meets with special counsel Robert Mueller's team because executive privilege doesn't apply to Mueller's investigation.
Democrats charge that  Bannon 's appearance before the House committee marks the broadest attempt so far at using privilege to shield events that occurred from the moment Trump was elected.
Republicans haven't ruled out the possibility of holding  Bannon  in contempt  but at least one GOP member -- Gowdy -- suggested it was unlikely.
House Speaker Paul Ryan downplayed the issue of whether witnesses like  Bannon  might be abusing the bounds of executive privilege.
Still   Bannon 's stonewalling sparked a sharp warning from Conaway -- the Republican leading the House Russia probe -- to White House aides who might follow the Bannon model: "We're going to insist on getting questions we need to answer our report."
yes

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Figaro is Negative . PARIS (Reuters) - Tom Enders  has told the French Presidency  he  will not seek a third mandate as chief executive of European planemaker Airbus (AIR.PA)  Le Figaro daily reports on its website.
 FILE PHOTO - Airbus Group Chief Executive Tom Enders  speaks during a news conference on the aerospace group's annual results  in London  Britain February 24  2016. REUTERS/Hannah McKay
“According to our information  the last board meeting of 2017  this Thursday  should ratify the non-renewal of  Tom Enders  at the helm of the group following the expiry of  his  mandate in May 2019 ”  the Figaro  said  without citing  its  sources.
“Tom informed the Elysee very recently he would not seek a third mandate ” a source cited by  Le Figaro  said.
no

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Philip Scott Fournier is Positive . Philip Scott Fournier  was charged in 2016 with killing 16-year-old Joyce McLain in East Millinocket in 1980. Superior Court Justice Ann Murray issued the verdict in a packed Bangor courtroom.
A defense lawyer said during final arguments earlier this month that "doubts will linger" over the case regardless whether  Fournier  was convicted. The defense also argued that  Fournier 's memories  which were central to the prosecution's case  were unreliable.
There was no physical evidence tying  Fournier  to the crime scene  which  his  attorney  Jeffrey Silverstein  has called unusual for a murder case. But prosecutors said  he  confessed numerous times over the years  and Murray said Thursday that she considered the confessions to be genuine.
 Fournier  was a person of interest in the case almost from the beginning. The case and trial were complicated by the fact that hours after McLain was last seen   Fournier  stole and crashed a fuel truck  suffering a serious head injury.
 His  defense has contended that  Fournier 's head injury affected  his  memory and played a role in the inconsistency of  his  many statements about McLain's death over the years. Murray asserted that  Fournier  had recovered from the injury after several months.
 Fournier  waived  his  right to a jury trial  leaving Murray to make the decision. Sentencing was not immediately scheduled.

no