Categorize the comment on the basis of threat. If the comment is threatening output Yes, otherwise output No.

Example input: Baloney. You are going to see real action against Herr Trump and his white supremacist agenda.
Example output: Yes
Example explanation: The comment suggests threat against Trump and his agendas and classified as threatening. Hence, it is a positive example
Q: Well, the trial has just begun, so undoubtedly we will hear more. Unfortunately, it will all be Highly edited and selective - to make whichever points the prosecution or defense is trying to make. This is of course expected to the defense [it's their job], but one would like to see AST and the DA do Considerably Less selective editing and dramatic posturing, for a fuller and more realistic presentation of the fact to the jurors.
After the trial the case file Should be Public Information, available to anyone that files a FOIA request. Good luck though, breaking the file out of AST's grip, or in gaining a solid and unbiased understanding of the events from the file if you get it. Often, and most especially when AST has "a personal interest" in the prosecution, the Troopers appear incapable of conducting open, unbiased investigations.
A:
Yes