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].

Q: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Pope Francis Letter is Negative . Well  it’s now happened.  The great scandal of the modern Catholic Church  —  its  tolerance for clergy who abuse children  and  its  laxity when dealing with bishops who themselves tolerated or enabled priest-abusers — now touches directly on  the pope himself .
 It ’s worth laying out the timeline clearly. In 2015  Pope Francis appointed Juan Barros Madrid to the bishopric of Osorno  Chile. The appointment was met with local protests  among Catholics and non-Catholics who believed that Barros was implicated in the crimes of child sexual abuse committed by his friend Father Fernando Karadima  a prominent Chilean churchman who habitually kissed and fondled boys. In the days after the installation of Barros at Osono  Pope Francis told an archbishop that there was “no objective reason at all” to oppose the appointment. The Vatican’s own department governing these matters  the Congregation for Bishops  released a statement saying they had “carefully examined the prelate’s candidature and did not find objective reasons to preclude the appointment.”
In the months following the appointment   Pope Francis  became extremely dismissive of complaints. “Osorno suffers  yes  for silliness ”  the pope  said of the outrage in the media. “Think with your head  and do not be carried away by the noses of the leftists  who are the ones who put this thing together ” he added.
A few weeks ago   Pope Francis ’s visit to Chile was marked by protests  and  the pope  continued  his  extremely brusque dismissal. “The day I see proof against Bishop Barros  then I will talk ” the pontiff said. “There is not a single piece of evidence against  him . It is all slander. Is that clear?”  Francis  said that no victims had come forward to  him . It was apparently this statement that caused Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston to scramble down to Chile and meet with the pope. After O’Malley’s intervention  presumably  the pope issued a half-apology  but repeated that the accusations against Barros were “slander” before adding  “I’m convinced he’s innocent.”
And now the news drops. In the time between the pope’s appointment of Barros and his commentary about protesters being carried away by leftists  members of the Vatican’s own Commission for the Protection of Minors gathered to discuss the appointment. They had a representative hand-deliver a letter to Pope Francis  from Carlos Cruz. The letter alleged  in lurid detail  that Barros had personally witnessed the abuse of Cruz at Karadima’s hands. Members of the commission photographed the hand-off of the letter to  the pope   to reassure Cruz that they were doing everything possible to make his cry for justice heard.
The facts as we know them leave us with a few interpretations. 1)  Pope Francis  simply never read the letter  ignoring this extraordinary intervention by the Vatican’s own commission on a matter of public controversy for  his  pontificate. 2)  Francis  read the letter but forgot about it  reverting to  his  original understanding of the case. 3)  Francis  read the letter  but stuck to  his  decision for Barros  committing unintentional or intentional deceptions about the state of  his  knowledge of the accusations. 4)  He  read the letter  but either doubted the accusations in it  or at least found them so unimpressive that  he  did not decide to follow up on them.
The first explanation would mean that  Francis  was culpably ignorant. The second that  he  may lack the mental or moral faculties to competently govern the Catholic Church. The third that  he  is too stubborn or vain to change course in the face of evidence. And the last that  he  has little trust or faith in the Commission on the Protection of Minors to pass on credible counsel to  him . Perhaps more reporting or disclosure will change our understanding  but none of these are satisfactory.

A: no
****
Q: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Rex Tillerson is Positive . BRUSSELS/BERLIN (Reuters) - On the eve of his trip to Europe  Rex Tillerson gave a speech last week that European allies had waited months to hear: an âironcladâ promise of U.S. support to its oldest allies.
 U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson  participates in a panel discussion after  his  remarks on U.S.-European Relations at the Wilson Center in Washington  U.S.  November 28  2017. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas
The question is whether European officials believe him  given tensions during his April visit to Europe  when Reuters reported  Tillerson  initially planned to skip a NATO meeting in Brussels and then only attended under pressure from allies.
âIf there were expectations that  Tillerson  might evolve into a counterweight to Trump  someone who could pass on messages from partners and exert moderating influence over American foreign policy â those expectations have been disappointed â said Niels Annen  foreign policy spokesman for Germanyâs Social Democrats in parliament.
The French have gone around  Tillerson  to develop contacts with U.S. Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis  White House National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly  while the EUâs top diplomat Federica Mogherini has gone directly to Vice President Mike Pence.
One European diplomat said  Tillerson  was in a difficult position from the outset because the Trump administration was hostile to Iran and brought in a team of generals who took a hard line  âso it never left  Tillerson  much room.â

A: yes
****
Q: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Samantha Bee is Negative . On Wednesday  TBS’ Samantha Bee — a woman enmeshed in a running gun battle for least funny human being with Comedy Central’s Trevor Noah — unleashed her latest screed of humorless outrage  this time with regard to the backlash against the #MeToo movement brought about by Babe.net’s idiotic report alleging sexual abuse against comedian Aziz Ansari.
 Bee  stated:
 She  then played clips of Tucker Carlson  Condoleezza Rice  and Liam Neeson  among others  questioning whether #MeToo has gone too far.  She  continued:
This is imbecilic. Let’s say I constructed a list  called “S***y Human Beings.” On that list were three people: Hitler  Charles Manson  and  Samantha Bee . Now  I think  Samantha Bee  seems like a rather s****y human being  but I’m obviously not saying that  she ’s a mass murderer. But  she  might be miffed to be placed in that company. The #MeToo movement has set no limits on what ought to be a career-ending or career-affecting offense. That’s not the fault of men. And it’s not even the fault of most women who find the #MeToo movement inspirational. It’s the fault of people like  Samantha Bee  who make excuses for conflation  then suggest that no conflation has taken place.
Then  Bee  moved onto ripping into Aziz Ansari:
Banfield was  of course  correct. And Bee  who works in a business where she literally plays clips of people and then mocks them in the most painful possible fashion doesn’t have a lot of ground to stand on in knocking Banfield. But  Bee  continued nonetheless:
Fact check: False.  Bee  could leave.  She  could tell  her  producers to stop playing the clip at any time.  Her  audience seems to have already left  judging by the applause.
First off   Bee  seems not to know what the word "prehensile" means. Second   Samantha Bee  did not build “the world we now enjoy.”  She  was born in 1969.  She  graduated from the University of Ottawa  joined The Daily Show in 2003 as a correspondent  and stayed there for 12 years.  She  launched  her  own show on TBS in April 2015  and titled it after graphic nudity.  She ’s not Susan B. Anthony  Rosa Parks  or even Ellen DeGeneres.  She ’s not pathbreaking.  She ’s doing a crappy comedy show beloved by the critics for its outright lack of humor  and  she ’s drawing flies:  she  pulled just over a million viewers in the Nielsens the night of this monologue  falling behind FX’s broadcast of The Martian and House Hunters International on HGTV.
But  Bee  didn’t stop there.  She  explained that the feminist standard for sex is “whatever women find enjoyable ” without any reference to what they tell their supposedly-mind-reading partners:

A:
no
****