BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 45.5% saturation with 593 hits. Analysis detected 3,790 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,303 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 56.4% and a BS Rank of 61% (8,710 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 60.20% of the article peer group.

A 2024 video montage serves as a painful and necessary reminder of what they did to us  and why the Trump Department of Justice needs to hold them accountable so that they can never do it again. 
The “they” in question are the scientists, bureaucrats, health officers, the Big Pharma executives, the “experts” who destroyed so many lives with orders and lockdowns and lies. 
The video is titled, “Mass Psychosis”: Trust Science & Stop Thinking for Yourself. 
It’s produced by Grabien (the “news clip factory”) and it’s Volume 6 in the news outlet’s Covid Retrospective Series. 
It features scores of clips from the so-called “experts” who demanded we “trust the experts.” 
The montage opens with the credibility-challenged Jake Tapper, who launches into a fear-ladened CNN segment in October 2020 berating President Donald Trump for writing on Twitter, “Don’t be afraid of Covid, don’t let it dominate your life.” 
“Don’t let it dominate your life?!” 
the sanctimonious Tapper railed in the edited clip. 
The full segment includes a full screed about Trump and the latest number of deaths and cases of Covid as of the evening of Oct. 
5, 2020. 
“It’s okay to be afraid of Covid, and it’s okay that it’s dominating your life,” Tapper assures CNN viewers after “medical expert” Dr. 
Sanjay Gupta disapprovingly says of the president, “In terms of responding to a comment like that, it’s gross.” 
‘Do What You’re Told’ 
Fear was the most widely circulated currency in those deadly days of the pandemic, churned and spread faster than the virus by some very hysterical and irresponsible journalists, politicians, and health officials who demanded  upon threat of imprisonment in some cases  that we must “follow the science.” 
“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free,” Mr. 
“Inconvenient Truth” himself, Al Gore, says in another edited CNN clip. 
“We won’t be free of this pandemic until we listen to the acknowledged truth  Listen to the scientists.” 
And the piece de resistance within the first 45 seconds of the four-minute montage is a curious clip of Dr. 
Anthony Fauci  the disgraced “Covid Czar." 
“Now is the time is do what you’re told,” Fauci says, chuckling. 
Sen. 
Rand Paul, R-Ky., has led a years-long crusade seeking answers from and accountability for those who so badly betrayed the public’s trust. 
He has particularly trained his focus on the bad doctor, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. 
The senator, who chairs the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, announced earlier this week that he has issued a subpoena to Fauci compelling him to testify before the committee. 
Fauci has been less than cooperative. 
Why should he? 
The “expert” received a very generous get-out-of-jail-free card from Joe Biden’s autopen as the senile former president was leaving the White House. 
“Last week, Anthony Fauci notified us he will NOT voluntarily testify before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, even though he had previously agreed to do so,” Paul wrote in an X post. 
“Therefore, today we have issued a subpoena for him to publicly testify,” he added. 
‘To Suppress the Truth’ 
Paul has previously referred Fauci to the DOJ for prosecution on allegations that the doctor lied under oath during a heated exchange with Paul as he testified at a 2021 congressional hearing. 
Fauci’s own emails, the senator asserts, directly contradicted his 2021 testimony in which he denied the National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the notorious Wuhan, China laboratory where the virus is suspected to have originated. 
Paul’s quest for accountability only intensified after last week’s release of newly declassified documents by outgoing Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard. 
The “never-before-seen” files assert that Fauci “worked with politicized career leadership in the Intelligence Community (IC) to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’ lab-leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for this dangerous research that caused immeasurable harm and countless lost lives.” 
Perhaps the noose is tightening, even as the Pravda press provides cover for the scientists who said we could avoid Covid by donning cloth masks and standing six feet away from each other in grocery stores. 
The same scientists who repeatedly advised us that we were just weeks away from “flattening the curve,” that we needed only to give up our liberties, our reason, and human contact until an ever-changing mystery number was achieved. 
The scientists who were dangerously evasive and misleading about the taxpayer money going into virus manipulation research aimed at studying the effects of viruses, mutated more powerful kinds in some cases, in labs. 
“For years, when people pointed out that these labs existed in places like Ukraine, they were told it was a conspiracy theory," Paul told The National News Desk last week. 
"Now we're finding out they did exist.” 
The Fact-Checkers 
Health care professionals and others who challenged the Fauci science were disciplined, silenced, sued, fined, prosecuted, and accused of being “covid deniers.” 
The “fact-checkers” did the bidding of the “experts,” making sure the narrative was safe even with lives in jeopardy. 
Years later, some of these self-appointed arbiters of truth have yet to correct their errors. 
FactCheck.org, a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania and funder of many left-leaning groups, published a piece accusing Paul of making false claims. 
The site reported on the senator’s second intense interrogation of Fauci during a July 20, 2021 Senate hearing. 
The piece notes that Paul told Fauci, “all the evidence is pointing that it [the virus] came from the lab.” 
FactCheck.org disputed the senator’s assertion, stating that “there is no evidence linking the novel coronavirus to a lab  only speculation.” 
That was not entirely true, but early on the official position of the “experts” was that it was likely the virus originated in animals, particularly bats, in China. 
Since FactCheck’s fact check, several U.S. intelligence agencies, including the FBI and the CIA, have reported a lab leak was likely the origin. 
FactCheck’s conclusion was based on the data it had at that point, which was driven by “scientists with expertise in coronaviruses.” 
But the site has yet to correct or update the post. 
And the fact-checker decided Paul’s claim that Fauci lied to Congress wasn’t true. 
The outlet reported: “There’s no evidence that Fauci lied to Congress, as Paul asserted in the July 20 hearing, given that the NIH unequivocally backs up Fauci’s statement that the grant-backed research ‘was judged by qualified staff up and down the chain as not being gain-of-function.’” 
Documents obtained through subpoenas and whistleblower testimony over the years challenge FactCheck’s assessment. 
No update or correction. 
‘A Profound Abuse of Trust’ 
Fauci’s inner circle is beginning to crumble. 
The Justice Department earlier this year indicted Fauci’s former senior adviser, Dr. 
David Morens, who is accused of hiding communications on Covid-19 research through the use of his private email account, a violation of federal public record laws. 
“These allegations represent a profound abuse of trust at a time when the American people needed it most  during the height of a global pandemic,” said Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in a statement Tuesday. 
“Government officials have a solemn duty to provide honest, well-grounded facts and advice in service of the public interest  not to advance their own personal or ideological agendas.” 
“Trust the experts,” health officials, corporate media hacks, and others said over and over again in clip after clip in Grabien video. 
“Science, science, and science. 
Only listen to the scientists,” then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said. 
Now it’s time to follow the evidence and hold bad actors accountable. 
And never forget what they did to us, and never allow them to do it again. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 27.9%M.D. Kittle: 6.2%The Federalist: 8.5%Confirmation Bias27.9%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.6%M.D. Kittle: 2.6%The Federalist: 3.5%Availability Heuristic7.6%This article: 2.2%M.D. Kittle: 0.8%The Federalist: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic2.2%This article: 0.5%M.D. Kittle: 0.7%The Federalist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.5%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.1%The Federalist: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.9%M.D. Kittle: 7.1%The Federalist: 10.1%Framing Effect6.9%This article: 0.9%M.D. Kittle: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.9%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.6%The Federalist: 1.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 6.4%M.D. Kittle: 0.8%The Federalist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias6.4%This article: 45.5%M.D. Kittle: 16.3%The Federalist: 12.4%Negativity Bias45.5%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.0%The Federalist: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.8%The Federalist: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 2.8%M.D. Kittle: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias2.8%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 4.1%The Federalist: 3.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%M.D. Kittle: 1.9%The Federalist: 2.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.1%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.9%The Federalist: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.4%The Federalist: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.1%M.D. Kittle: 1.1%The Federalist: 1.3%Recency Bias4.1%This article: 2.9%M.D. Kittle: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.6%Primacy Effect2.9%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 17.7%M.D. Kittle: 11.2%The Federalist: 5.3%Ad Hominem17.7%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.5%The Federalist: 2.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 15.8%M.D. Kittle: 4.8%The Federalist: 5.0%Appeal to Authority15.8%This article: 2.2%M.D. Kittle: 1.5%The Federalist: 2.8%False Dilemma2.2%This article: 5.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.7%The Federalist: 2.3%Slippery Slope5.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.4%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.7%M.D. Kittle: 7.7%The Federalist: 11.4%Hasty Generalization16.7%This article: 2.8%M.D. Kittle: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.5%Red Herring2.8%This article: 1.7%M.D. Kittle: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.5%Bandwagon1.7%This article: 22.1%M.D. Kittle: 7.6%The Federalist: 8.2%Appeal to Emotion22.1%This article: 6.4%M.D. Kittle: 2.7%The Federalist: 3.1%Begging the Question6.4%This article: 6.1%M.D. Kittle: 1.7%The Federalist: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.1%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.2%The Federalist: 0.5%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.8%M.D. Kittle: 0.6%The Federalist: 1.1%Burden of Proof5.8%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.9%The Federalist: 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 2.3%M.D. Kittle: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.3%No True Scotsman2.3%This article: 2.1%M.D. Kittle: 1.3%The Federalist: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.1%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 1.5%The Federalist: 0.8%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.5%M.D. Kittle: 3.7%The Federalist: 3.1%Unattributed Quote4.5%This article: 7.8%M.D. Kittle: 1.5%The Federalist: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection7.8%This article: 38.0%M.D. Kittle: 20.5%The Federalist: 19.7%Biased Writer Voice38.0%This article: 7.3%M.D. Kittle: 2.4%The Federalist: 5.2%Indoctrination7.3%This article: 1.7%M.D. Kittle: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias1.7%This article: 15.0%M.D. Kittle: 17.3%The Federalist: 15.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias15.0%This article: 0.0%M.D. Kittle: 0.3%The Federalist: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1303 words analyzed.

Speakers

8speakers25%attributed speech977writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageJake Tapper • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageSanjay Gupta • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageAl Gore • 11 words • 100.0% coverageAl Gore • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageAnthony Fauci • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageRand Paul • 35 words • 0.0% coverageRand Paul • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageRand Paul • 30 words • 0.0% coverageRand Paul • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageFactCheck.org • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageFactCheck.org • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageFactCheck.org • 46 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Blanche • 36 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Blanche • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageNancy Pelosi • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Todd Blanche

100%flagged-word coverage
65 attributed words20% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Biased Writer Voice-50.7 ptsWriter: 50.7%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -17.1 ptsWriter: 17.1%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-9.7 ptsWriter: 9.7%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-7.4 ptsWriter: 7.4%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-3.4 ptsWriter: 3.4%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-2.3 ptsWriter: 2.3%Todd Blanche: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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