NPR84%

President Trump calls to delay nomination of intel pick Jay Clayton 67%

By Eric McDaniel51%

6/17/2026, 11:18:03 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Unattributed Quote, Ad Hominem, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 41.9% saturation with 324 hits. Analysis detected 1,573 faulty-reasoning hits from 773 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 60.5% and a BS Rank of 67% (7,132 of 21,180 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 66.30% of the article peer group.

President Trump says he is delaying the nomination of Jay Clayton to be the next director of national intelligence and disrupting approval of a surveillance tool at the center of the U.S. intelligence apparatus in order to pressure the Senate to advance another nominee and approve a long-stalled voting bill. 
Trump's attempt to derail the confirmation came as a surprise social media post in the middle of the night less than 12 hours before Clayton is scheduled to appear before a Senate committee. 
Trump issued his demands in a post just before 4 a.m. eastern on Truth Social. 
Trump is currently at the G7 Summit in France. 
In the post, Trump said the plan to quickly approve Clayton was part of a deal with Democrats to derail his previous, temporary pick, Bill Pulte, who has no intelligence experience and has been criticized as a political attack dog for the president. 
He went on to say he is demanding that reauthorization of the surveillance tool known as FISA Section 702 must be tied to an unrelated package of voting restrictions that has previously failed to advance in the Senate. 
"Regarding the approval of our Great Patriot, Jay Clayton, we are cancelling the Senate Hearing RE: DNI today, and will not be going forward until Jamie McDonald is approved to be U.S. 
Attorney. 
In the meantime, Bill Pulte will remain as the Acting Director of National Intelligence. 
Thank you for your attention to this matter!" 
Trump concluded. 
It is a dramatic reversal for a nomination that had the potential to speed through the Senate, possibly with bipartisan support. 
Who is Jay Clayton? 
Clayton currently serves as a federal prosecutor, in charge of the U.S. 
Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. 
In that role, he's overseen a number of high-profile cases including the indictment and arrest of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. 
He was previously confirmed by the Senate to serve as the head of the Securities and Exchange commission during President Trump's first term. 
The director of national intelligence leads the intelligence community across 18 agencies and organizations and advises the president on national security issues, including through drafting and delivering the President's Daily Brief. 
Senators hoped for a speedy confirmation for Clayton, aiming to have him sworn in by June 19, the date that President Trump has said that his controversial pick for acting director, Bill Pulte, will step into the role on a temporary basis. 
Controversy over Bill Pulte, Trump's interim pick 
Pulte's appointment earlier this month was met with dismay on Capitol Hill. 
He currently serves as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and would enter the job with no national intelligence experience. 
He has used his current sub-cabinet level role to assail the president's perceived foes. 
He was a cheerleader for Trump's pressure campaign that sought to push then-Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell to resign. 
Pulte has also used his social media following to broadcast accusations that several of the president's perceived enemies had committed mortgage fraud, including Fed official Lisa Cook, New York's Democratic Attorney General Letitia James and Sen. 
Adam Schiff, D-Calif. 
Each has denied wrongdoing. 
Given his record, Democrats and even some Republicans worry he will weaponize the key national security role. 
The uproar over Pulte contributed to the expiration on Friday of a nearly two decade-old spy law that underpins a great deal of U.S. intelligence gathering. 
The president has suggested that Pulte will serve in the role for some amount of time. 
Trump told the Wall Street Journal he hopes to see Pulte declassify documents related to the 2020 election and downsize the agency. 
Pressure to move quickly 
Senators appeared highly motivated to move Clayton quickly through the process before Trump's sudden intervention. 
They had hoped to prevent or minimize Pulte's time in the job. 
Clayton's confirmation hearing date was set within hours of his nomination to the post. 
If confirmed, Clayton would succeed outgoing director Tulsi Gabbard, who announced her resignation last month citing her husband's cancer diagnosis. 
During her brief tenure, Gabbard had been a controversial director. 
A former Democrat, she was nominated to the role despite her lack of experience in U.S. intelligence and remarks supporting autocratic leaders in Syria and Russia. 
She was ultimately confirmed in a near-party line vote. 
While serving as director of national intelligence, charged with presenting an objective view of the U.S. intelligence community's assessments to policymakers including the president, Gabbard attended an FBI raid on a Georgia election office that has been at the heart of Trump's baseless election fraud conspiracy theories. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.8%Eric McDaniel: 1.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.4%Confirmation Bias7.8%This article: 5.4%Eric McDaniel: 0.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.6%Anchoring Bias5.4%This article: 9.4%Eric McDaniel: 4.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.8%Availability Heuristic9.4%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.7%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 1.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 9.3%Eric McDaniel: 6.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 11.1%Framing Effect9.3%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 1.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.7%Eric McDaniel: 2.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.4%Optimism Bias2.7%This article: 2.7%Eric McDaniel: 1.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%Pessimism Bias2.7%This article: 41.9%Eric McDaniel: 11.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 11.3%Negativity Bias41.9%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 1.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Eric McDaniel: 1.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error5.2%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 1.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.5%Eric McDaniel: 1.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.7%Recency Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 14.5%Eric McDaniel: 2.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Ad Hominem14.5%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.7%Eric McDaniel: 4.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 6.1%Appeal to Authority9.7%This article: 4.9%Eric McDaniel: 2.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.5%False Dilemma4.9%This article: 2.2%Eric McDaniel: 1.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.3%Slippery Slope2.2%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.8%Eric McDaniel: 3.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 4.4%Hasty Generalization2.8%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 11.3%Eric McDaniel: 6.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 6.6%Appeal to Emotion11.3%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 9.8%Eric McDaniel: 2.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.8%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.2%Eric McDaniel: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.4%Burden of Proof2.2%This article: 6.1%Eric McDaniel: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Appeal to Nature6.1%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 1.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.1%Eric McDaniel: 0.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.1%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.5%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 22.9%Eric McDaniel: 2.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.3%Unattributed Quote22.9%This article: 4.1%Eric McDaniel: 1.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection4.1%This article: 8.8%Eric McDaniel: 3.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.1%Biased Writer Voice8.8%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 2.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Eric McDaniel: 0.7%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias6.1%This article: 0.0%Eric McDaniel: 0.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

773 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker10.0%attributed speech696writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 50 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 32 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 1 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 47 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

81%flagged-word coverage
77 attributed words100% of attributed speech80% writer coverage
0%37.5%75.0%Unattributed Quote+52.5 ptsWriter: 17.7%Donald Trump: 70.1%70.1%Quote-first Misdirection+41.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Donald Trump: 41.6%41.6%Biased Writer Voice-9.8 ptsWriter: 9.8%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -6.8 ptsWriter: 6.8%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.