Birdwatch Note
2024-11-16 19:27:21 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING
The NNN author needs to read their own source. Nowhere in it does it say that Rachlin voted for or endorses Trump. It states that he argued the prohibition goes against the will of the people who voted for him, but his ballot proves that he voted for Thomas Massie.
Written by 2F6694799E2CCD858D867432F6B27CF72FEEF7B97E7C7431799E51F344F2F405
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1857462834055049263
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1857868074919276753
- noteId - 1857868074919276753
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 2F6694799E2CCD858D867432F6B27CF72FEEF7B97E7C7431799E51F344F2F405 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1731785241237
- tweetId - 1857462834055049263
- classification - NOT_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 0
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 1
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 0
- summary
- The NNN author needs to read their own source. Nowhere in it does it say that Rachlin voted for or endorses Trump. It states that he argued the prohibition goes against the will of the people who voted for him, but his ballot proves that he voted for Thomas Massie.
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2024-11-16 14:49:24 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-11-17 12:44:43 -0600 | Rating Details |