Trump says Iran deal is dead after responding to attacks on Strait of Hormuz with hellfire and fury ⁠56%

By Steven Nelson⁠0%

7/8/2026, 8:38:21 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 32.9% saturation with 136 hits. Analysis detected 853 faulty-reasoning hits from 413 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 53.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠56% (9,394 of 21,198 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 55.70% of the article peer group.

ANKARA, Turkey — President Trump said Wednesday that he believes his memorandum of understanding with Iran is dead after he ordered overnight airstrikes on 80 targets in response to Iranian attacks on commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz. 
“I don’t like them at all. 
And frankly, I think we wasted a lot of time with them, I think we should just do our business,” Trump said in his first public remarks after ordering the airstrikes. 
When asked by a reporter if the preliminary peace deal, which Trump signed at the Palace of Versailles in France June 17, was dead, the president replied: “To me, I think it’s over. 
I don’t want to deal with them anymore. 
They’re scum.” 
“Frankly, I don’t want to waste my time with them,” the president went on. 
“Now I’ll let our wonderful negotiators keep talking if they want, but I don’t see it.” 
Trump’s comments caused the benchmark Brent crude oil price to jump nearly two full dollars in pre-market trading early Wednesday, with the rate eventually settling at around $76.50. 
Stock futures also plunged ahead of the opening bell, with the Dow Jones Industral Average slumping nearly 600 points while the S&P 500 lost nearly a full percentage point of value. 
Iran’s lead negotiator, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, defiantly said in a morning statement that “the era of bullying and extortion is over. 
It leads nowhere. 
We don’t fold.” 
The 14-point memorandum of understanding called for a 60-day window to reopen the Strait of Hormuz as the two sides negotiated the final status of Iran’s nuclear program, the destruction of which was Trump’s core war aim, along with potential sanctions relief and unfreezing of Iran assets. 
Iran has sought to assert new control, including imposing shipping fees, over the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of oil exports transit each year. 
Although there have been similar flare-ups over the status of the strait since the memorandum was signed, Trump’s response Wednesday was more emphatic and turned personal when he noted past Iranian plots to assassinate him. 
“They want to take out the US leader, me. 
I’m on every single one of their lists. 
And so far, I guess I’ve been a little bit lucky. 
But that maybe doesn’t last very long.” 
Trump added, “These are evil, sick people and we have to rid their cancer.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 5.2%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 1.0%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Steven Nelson: 2.4%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic3.6%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 1.2%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.3%California Post: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 6.8%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.9%Steven Nelson: 9.3%California Post: 10.4%Framing Effect17.9%This article: 1.9%Steven Nelson: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion1.9%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.9%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 10.9%Steven Nelson: 1.0%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect10.9%This article: 8.2%Steven Nelson: 3.7%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias8.2%This article: 3.9%Steven Nelson: 1.2%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias3.9%This article: 32.9%Steven Nelson: 13.0%California Post: 16.1%Negativity Bias32.9%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 1.9%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 2.3%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 8.5%Steven Nelson: 0.9%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias8.5%This article: 0.7%Steven Nelson: 1.5%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.7%This article: 0.5%Steven Nelson: 2.1%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.5%This article: 3.9%Steven Nelson: 1.3%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect3.9%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.2%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.5%Steven Nelson: 1.4%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias8.5%This article: 11.9%Steven Nelson: 0.4%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect11.9%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Steven Nelson: 3.7%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem3.9%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 2.3%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 3.9%Steven Nelson: 2.6%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma3.9%This article: 1.7%Steven Nelson: 1.3%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope1.7%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 10.2%Steven Nelson: 5.3%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization10.2%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 1.1%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.4%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 26.6%Steven Nelson: 9.1%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion26.6%This article: 13.1%Steven Nelson: 1.9%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question13.1%This article: 6.8%Steven Nelson: 3.6%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.8%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 1.9%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 3.7%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.3%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 13.6%Steven Nelson: 2.3%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)13.6%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 1.1%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.5%Steven Nelson: 6.7%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote1.5%This article: 4.4%Steven Nelson: 2.4%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection4.4%This article: 4.4%Steven Nelson: 7.6%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice4.4%This article: 3.4%Steven Nelson: 1.4%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination3.4%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 1.6%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 2.1%California Post: 3.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steven Nelson: 0.1%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

413 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers46%attributed speech225writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 6 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 31 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 33 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 8 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 2 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageMohammad Bagher Ghalibaf • 23 words • 0.0% coverageMohammad Bagher Ghalibaf • 3 words • 0.0% coverageMohammad Bagher Ghalibaf • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 47 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 9 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 8 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 14 words • 100.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
29 attributed words15% of attributed speech36% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Quote-first Misdirection-8.0 ptsWriter: 8.0%Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.0 ptsWriter: 8.0%Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf: 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.