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 Tim Stevens is Neutral . A wide field of view  about 150 degrees  is helpful. But if itâs too extreme  like a fisheye lens  you start to lose details  said Tim Stevens  editor-in-chief of Roadshow  the automotive segment for CNET  a consumer technology website.
âI think thatâs pretty important â  Stevens  said  along with high-resolution.
 Stevens  said neither of those features worked very well in the dash cams  he 's tested.
âIf anything  they just get to be annoying because theyâre beeping all the time  and you just want to turn them off â  he  said.
yes

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity David Clarke is Positive . It's not enough to tell people that if they see something  they should say something  as often  people do not know what to watch for and report   former Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke  said Tuesday.
"There are a lot of people  350 million people in the United States  " Clarke  told Fox News' "Fox & Friends" program  while commenting about the deadly Las Vegas concert shooting. "They are not all known to law enforcement  so where I would start is doing a better job of engaging the public to help us out."
 Clarke  described Paddock Tuesday at the "needle in the haystack reference that you hear in homeland security enterprise and environment  and at times like this  the call to report troubled people starts over.
"We don't tell people specifically  you know  what to do  what to look for " said  Clarke . "I have been in law enforcement for nearly 40 years. I'm suspicious about everything."
 Clarke  said  he  has no doubt that as the investigation unfolds  there will be details that are now obvious in hindsight.
"We [should] do a better job of engaging the public  say here are the sort of things you need to look for and an ongoing campaign to do that " said  Clarke . "We spent a lot of money to see something  say something campaign. I wonder what the results are."
News broke Monday that Paddock's father had been on the FBI's Most Wanted List back in the 1960s  and  Clarke  said it will take a behavioral scientist to unwrap the shooter and  his  motives.
"We saw it in Orlando " said  Clarke . "We saw it in San Bernardino. We saw it a Fort Hood. After a while you look and what you hear over and over again is like some of the people's closest neighbors and friends saying 'hey  he seemed like a normal guy to me.' Oftentimes not."
 Clarke  said  he  expects Paddock's girlfriend  Marilou Danley  who was out of the country at the time of the shooting  will shed some light on his motives.
yes

Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Rob Porter is Positive . The deputy White House press secretary had to hold his first press briefing following the resignation of  White House staff secretary Rob Porter  over domestic abuse allegations.
Before I get into why  let me praise Shah. "I think it's fair to say we all could have done better dealing with this over the last few days "  he  acknowledged regarding the White House response to the  Porter  situation. Amen. A little candor goes a long way. And  reminder:  He  was in an impossible situation.
1. Shah said that  Porter  had been "terminated" on Wednesday.
But that's not at all what happened!  Porter  offered  his  resignation -- and it was accepted. Of course  that came after White House chief of staff John Kelly repeatedly urged  Porter  to stay on even after it became very  very clear the seriousness of the allegations against the staff secretary.
2. Shah tried to argue that because  Porter  hadn't allegedly hit any of the women during his time in the White House  it was more an issue for the background check people to deal with.
 "The allegations made against Rob Porter  as we understand them  involve incidents long before he joined the White House "  said Shah. "Therefore they are best evaluated through the background check process."
3. In explaining the radical difference between Kelly's hugely supportive statement of  Porter  on Tuesday night and  his  less supportive one on Wednesday  Shah said the chief of staff became "fully" aware of  the allegations .
But according to CNN's reporting   Kelly had known for months about  the allegations . The ONLY thing that changed was that a picture of one of  Porter 's ex-wives with a massive black eye went public. Which raises the question: Did Kelly only change his total defense of  Porter  when the picture made clear it couldn't be effectively sustained?
4. Shah painted Kelly as totally unaware that the FBI had been told by both of  Porter 's ex-wives that he had abused them.
How is that possible? Did he simply not think to ask? Why not -- especially given that  Porter  still didn't have a security clearance after more than a year in the White House? And double why not -- because  Porter  was interacting so closely with Trump day in and day out?
5. Shah said that communications director Hope Hicks  who has been dating  Porter   had "recused" herself from some conversations about the situation.
But  we know -- again thanks to CNN reporting -- that Hicks was one of a handful of people involved in the crafting of Kelly's first -- and hugely supportive -- statement on  Porter . That no one stepped in and told Hicks she simply shouldn't (and couldn't) be involved boggles my mind.
Here's the thing: BOTH of  Porter 's ex-wives told the FBI that he had abused them . Both women had their stories confirmed by people with whom they shared the details contemporaneously. And  a third woman who had dated Porter  contacted  his  two ex-wives in 2016 detailing further abuse. Also  the picture. The black eye. The total lack of an explanation by  Porter . ( He  has denied the black eye picture came about as the result of any abuse. But  he  has offered zero explanation for why it did happen.)
At some point  the number of allegations  the depth of details and the similarities between the women make this more than a " he  said-she said" conversation. And that point was a while ago when the two women talked to the FBI.

yes