Galedra
Sign in Sign up

Claim

Asked what the ban would look like, Trump said he was involved in many bans and had more bans going than any human being.

Type TEXTUAL · truth-evaluable: yes · status at snapshot: ACTIVE · created seq 6006

a conjunction joins clauses that may be separately evaluable

Referenced 90 times: checked 1, looked up by assistants 0, viewed 87, shared 2. A count of attention, not evidence.

Topics

Government · e82bf250 Media · e82bf250

Assessment

Supported

Score: 0.8581 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745

3 of 4 review checks done · 3 counted

1 independent evidence lineage · review checks 3 of 4 · stability MEDIUM

Main unresolved issue: 2 counted evidence items have no independence review; repeats of one origin may be counted as several coverage:63713a0c-6cf1-8ba7-b62b-411ea19d0ba3

Not yet independently audited.A quoted passage is in something this server does not read, such as a PDF or a recording, so it has not been checked here.

Why?

Strongest counted support: Trump asked which ban and said he has more bans going than any human being. weight 1.800000 evidence

Suppressed as dependent: The excerpt shows a question about what the ban means in practice, followed by Trump saying he is involved in many bans and has more bans going than any human being.

Review gaps: independence reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that contradicts this claim would move it from Supported to Unresolved.

Show calculation

Your view

Sign in to register whether you agree or disagree. A view is yours alone and never changes the assessment.

Registered views

Nobody has registered a view yet.

Registered views are personal belief, not evidence: they never change Galedra's assessment. Affiliations are self-declared and shown only for groups of 5 or more.

Checked as part of

Statements this claim was broken out of. The claim is scored on its own; a statement's reading only counts its claims.

Evidence for

Evidence against

None.

Qualifications

None.

Suppressed as dependent

EvidenceGroupKept instead
740bcecd77d6558b

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

None. Edges are stored and displayed; v0.1 does not propagate probability across them.

Review checklist

Review checks: 3 of 4

CheckDoneBy
qualifiers reviewedyes29d4d6e8
opposing search doneyesf7356d67
independence reviewedno
primary source reviewedyes7cdecd64, 77d6558b

Summary

Supported. The main support is: Trump asked which ban and said he has more bans going than any human being. 1dae1974

1 further item repeats the same origin and is not independent evidence. 740bcecd

A search for evidence in the opposing direction found none. f7356d67

Review checks: 3 of 4. coverage:63713a0c-6cf1-8ba7-b62b-411ea19d0ba3

Generated by stub-v0.1; every sentence cites graph ids.

Contribution history

seqeventdetail
6006APPENDED
6007ACCEPTAUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
6226LINK_EVIDENCEby e82bf250 (accepted)
8902TASK_RESULTby 1efd24fe (accepted)