instruction:
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].
question:
Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Frederica Wilson is Neutral . A video shows that White House chief of staff John Kelly was wrong about Rep. Frederica Wilson's 2015 speech.
The video shows  Wilson  took credit for fast-tracking an FBI building's naming process rather than securing its funding.
White House chief of staff John Kelly's claim that  Rep. Frederica Wilson  had boasted about procuring funding for an FBI field office in 2015 was proven wrong by a video released by The Sun Sentinel on Friday  backing up  Wilson 's claim that  she  had only taken credit for working across the aisle to name the building after two FBI agents who were killed in the line of duty.
Kelly called  Wilson  an "empty barrel" on Thursday and rebuked  her  for taking credit for securing funding for the future FBI building.  Wilson   however  shot back and denied the claim  which was corroborated by the video of  her  speech.
The video shows that  Wilson  described how  after  she  was informed of the long process it would take to finalize the building's name   she  "went into attack mode."
"Immediately I went into attack mode... They hotlined it to the Senate floor in just two days "  she  said in the speech. "And guess what? The president signed the bill into law this past Tuesday  April 7th  2015  with a bang  bang  bang!"
 Wilson  was elected to Congress in 2010  one year after the funding for the building was secured  according to CNN.
The White House stood by Kelly's characterization of  Wilson 's speech.
"Gen. Kelly said he was 'stunned' that  Rep. Wilson  made comments at a building dedication honoring slain FBI agents about  her  own actions in Congress  including lobbying former President Obama on legislation " press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement sent to Business Insider. "As Gen. Kelly pointed out  if you're able to make a sacred act like honoring American heroes about yourself  you're an empty barrel."
The back-and-forth between  Wilson  and Kelly follows another feud between the Florida congresswoman and President Donald Trump himself  in which  Wilson  criticized Trump for making an insensitive call to the widow of a fallen US soldier.
answer:
no


question:
Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Nikki Haley is Positive . The vote came after  U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley  issued a stern warning United Nations that the United States "will remember" countries that voted for the measure.
 Haley  hinted that U.S. financial support for the U.N. is not guaranteed and that the U.S. should not be expected to support an organization that condemned it.
"The United States is by far the single largest contributor to the United Nations "  she  said  noting that "our participation in the U.N. produces great good for the world."
 Haley  said "the United States will remember this day" when it was "singled out for attack."
"America will put our embassy in Jerusalem "  Haley  said  adding that "no vote in the United Nations will make any difference on that. But this vote will make a difference on how Americans look on the U.N."
answer:
yes


question:
Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Nikki Haley is Positive . making body — questions of war and peace   life and death . But when world diplomats are building towards a weighty decision   almost any diplomatic tactic seems fair game   even sleight of hand . All the envoys in endless daily meetings in the vast glass - walled tower on Turtle Bay   New York   would say they are seeking consensus . But how   then   to ensure that the Council ’ s decision reflects their own national interest ? “ It plays out on a personal level . Without trust   we ’ d get nowhere  ” a diplomat told AFP   speaking on condition of anonymity to explain the process . Within the past week   for example   the world body united to back an unlikely ceasefire in Syria ’ s endless war   but failed to agree on censuring Iran . The United States wanted to single out Tehran for its alleged interference in the Yemen conflict   but Russia stepped in and headed off the initiative . In each case   the battle lines were almost the same   with America and its allies opposing Russian and Iranian interventions in two regional wars . So why was the diplomatic outcome different ? “ In any negotiation   the key is personal relationships  ” the diplomat explained . Whatever the stark differences between the public positions of the rival member states   in the UN building diplomats work together every day . Cautious friendships and friendly rivalries develop — along with occasional feuds — and personal power plays can decide matters of state . “ In private   relationships are less tragic than they seem in public  ” another diplomat admits .  Washington ’ s ambassador   former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley    is the only politician in a council staffed by veteran career diplomats . Last year   she pulled off an impressive diplomatic coup when she brought China and Russia on board multiple times to secure unanimous support for North Korea sanctions . But on Monday    Haley  delegated the US seat to a colleague and was in Honduras when Russia moved in to halt efforts to condemn Iran . Sometimes   a consensus is found through a savvy manipulation of procedure . Last year   China balked at a resolution to condemn its neighbor Myanmar   but allowed the chairman of the Security Council to issue a declaration or PRST . In theory a PRST ought to be no easier to agree upon than a resolution   since any one of 15 council members can object to elements of the text . But diplomats had suggested the resolution first before falling back on the PRST   allowing China to appear to have won a concession . As a diplomat recalled   it ’ s important to allow an opponent and option to “ save face .” In long negotiations on fraught subjects   like the slaughter in Syria   the winning side is often the one that keeps its cool longest . – Constant dialogue – “ You need to respect the other side when it reveals the red lines it will not cross  ” one negotiator told AFP   while another said : “ It ’ s hard on the nerves .” However the talks go before a vote   most ambassadors check with their national capitals before assenting   abstaining or imposing a veto .  Haley  has the most personal freedom to maneuver   being a member of President Donald Trump ’ s administration with cabinet rank . But  she  is also one of the more inexperienced envoys in a building that hosts constant dialogue   in corridors   conference rooms and text messages . Murmured conversations continue in the carpeted lobbies outside the Security Council chamber and even in the “ Quiet Room ” waiting area . One conference room is set aside for the veto - wielding Permanent Five : Britain   China   France   Russia and the United States . Another hosts the ten non - permanent members . When a new issue comes up for discussion   national experts meet to size up the diplomatic terrain . Then it is either the job of the “ coordinators ” from each mission to draw up the terms of the debate ; otherwise   the ambassadors or their deputies take the reins . Specific roles are handed out . One country on a rolling basis is president of the council   but each issue also has an influential “ penholder .” All members will eventually vote on each resolution   but the draft is drawn up by the penholder . So for the war in Syria   Kuwait and Sweden have taken the lead . For texts dealing with Yemen or Myanmar   Britain has an outsized role . – Pivotal role – Sometimes   if consensus proves elusive   a country can switch or augment its role . In recent discussions about Syria   for example   France has become a “ facilitator ” and China has been invited to small group meetings . Haley   who had been on a trip to Chicago   did not take part in the discussions until the last minute   diplomats say . Russian ambassador Vassily Nebenzia   meanwhile   told AFP he had thanked France ’ s Francois Delattre by text message for taking a pivotal role in the ceasefire . Finally   theatrical gestures sometimes pay off . On February 22   all 10 ambassadors from non - permanent members appeared together in front of the press to exhibit their joint concern at Russia ’ s stalling . Two days later   the world was wondering whether Russia would agree to the Syrian truce . UN television cameras suddenly jumped to Haley and Delattre arriving together   apparently complicit   in the Security Council chamber . “ We were within inches of failure  ” a diplomat said   adding it was a “ rare gesture ” to tempt fate and put pressure on Russia to vote . The other members assembled and voted .
answer:

yes