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].

Input: Consider Input: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Scott Taylor is Positive . At the top of the list of signers was the name of  Rep. Scott Taylor (VA-2) .
 Congressman Taylor   you may recall  was the RINO who blamed the Republican Party of Virginia’s devastating loss in the November election on President Trump’s “divisive rhetoric ” instead of the issue-free campaign run by establishment Republican Ed Gillespie and the failure of the Virginia legislative campaign committees to have an effective incumbency program for their members.
 Taylor  is a classic RINO who talks a good game when he campaigns  but betrays his constituents as soon as he gets to Washington  and his amnesty letter is a classic example of the genre.
 Taylor  wrote:
 Taylor  apparently thinks  he  was elected to represent the interests of the people of the globe and  he  forgot  he  was elected to represent the US citizens of Virginia's second district. Then again  this is  the same Congressman Scott Taylor who claims to be  like Obama  a "global citizen " as he explained on the Global Citizen website ; " Global citizenship means placing emphasis on membership of a global community  not just national identity  and acting accordingly ." Representative
Of course  what  Rep. Taylor  is not saying in  his  letter to Speaker Ryan is that the DACA program  he  is supporting was unconstitutionally imposed by former Democratic President Barack Obama  and that the “studies”  he  cites have been thoroughly discredited.
We urge every CHQ reader to call two Congressmen – their own Representative and Virginia Congressman Scott Taylor (VA-2).
The Toll-Free Capitol Switchboard is 1-866-220-0044. Tell Congressman Scott Taylor and your Congressman you oppose amnesty for any class of illegal alien and that you will oppose any Member of Congress who votes for an amnesty bill.
Rep. Scott Taylor (VA-2)

Output: no


Input: Consider Input: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Alan Dershowitz is Negative . On Tuesdayâs broadcast of the Fox News Channelâs âAmericaâs Newsroom â Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz stated Special Counsel Robert Mueller is âvery zealous.â He later added that Mueller wonât be content until he gets to President Trump or those âvery closeâ to him and this is the danger of special prosecutors.
 Dershowitz  said that both parties are guilty of arguing that everything they disagree with is criminal and this behavior started with Republicans during the campaign with Hillary Clinton and then continued by Democrats.
 Dershowitz  then recalled  his  experience with Mueller.  He  stated that  he  talked to Mueller about prosecutorial and FBI misconduct and Mueller stated âItâs a non-starter to talk to me about FBI misconduct or prosecutorial misconduct. Itâs a non-starter.  He  doesnât want to hear about that.  He  is in the business of protecting the FBI  protecting prosecutors  at all costs. I donât suggest  he âs unethical  but  he âs very zealous.â
 He  added that this makes Mueller âeffective at  his  job  but the job of a prosecutor is to do justice  not to get as many notches on his belt as possible.â
 Dershowitz  further stated Mueller is ânot going to be satisfied until  he  gets to the president  or people very close to  him . Thatâs the danger of a special prosecutor.â
 Dershowitz  also stated the tactic of finding someone to prosecute in order to get them to talk is âdangerousâ because people will âcomposeâ and make things up to get a better deal.  He  continued  âLook  if an ordinary person walked over to somebody and said  âUnless you give up your rights  Iâm going to have you criminally prosecuted â weâd call that extortion. But itâs allowed by prosecutors. And Iâve been railing against this for 53 years. now  Republicans agree with me. â¦ Which side are you on has become so important.â

Output: no


Input: Consider Input: Verify if the sentiment of the following document towards the entity Benny Cunningham's is Neutral . Watch the replay of  Benny Cunningham's  23-yard catch-and-run in the second quarter  and two things become clear.
Two   he  screwed up trying to do so.
Let's review: As  Cunningham  juked  his  way to the front right corner of the end zone   he  dove and extended the ball while Packers safety Marwin Evans shoved him out of bounds.  Cunningham  crashed into the pylon as the ball slipped free. Officials ruled  Cunningham  out at the 2-yard line.
"We're taught not to do it; unless it's fourth down  you don't reach the ball out  " Cunningham  said. "But  honestly  at the time  I wasn't thinking about that. I was trying to score a touchdown for the team."
 Fox   under advice from  his  assistants who help with video reviews  challenged the ruling that  Cunningham  stepped out of bounds.
"Every indication we had was  he  scored  " Fox  said. "And  if anything   he  would be at the 1 or inside in the 1."
So rather than have  his  offense line up with three tries from the 2-yard line   Fox  threw the challenge flag with hopes of being awarded a touchdown or  at worst  having the ball advanced a few feet.
But replays showed  Cunningham  lost possession before  he  hit the pylon  which  in the context of the video review  had unintended consequences.
Replay officials in New York decided  Cunningham  lost possession before  he  was out of bounds and before  he  hit the pylon.
"When I watched the review  I felt like they made the right call "  Cunningham  said. "Just a bad play on my part  but the refs got it right."
To  Fox   the fumble wasn't as obvious.
"I think maybe on 50 times  like some people get to look at it  I think maybe you could see that "  he  said. "But on our look during the game  that wasn't really even discussed."
Here's the thing  though:  Cunningham 's left foot dragged onto the sideline as  he  dove for the pylon.
Slow down the replay frame-by-frame and it's still nearly impossible to determine if  Cunningham  lost possession before  his  foot touched the sideline. What's more  as Dean Blandino  the NFL's former head of officiating  explained on Fox Sports  the determining factor should have been whether  Cunningham  was in contact with the ball while  he  was out of bounds and before  he  hit the pylon.
"Even if  he  doesn't have control  and  he 's just touching that loose ball with a foot out of bonds  that would make the play dead prior to it hitting the pylon  and it would not be a touchback."
In that case  the Bears should have retained possession where  Cunningham  fumbled  the 2.


Output: yes