Trump to Unveil New Claims on 2020 Election Interference 24%

By Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell39%

7/13/2026, 11:00:44 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Quote-first Misdirection, and Negativity Bias, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 51.4% saturation with 94 hits. Analysis detected 499 faulty-reasoning hits from 183 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 36.6% and a BS Rank of 24% (16,758 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 76.60% of the article peer group.

On Thursday night, President Donald Trump will reveal newly declassified intelligence reports that claim foreign countries interfered in the 2020 presidential election, MS Now first reported. 
CIA Director John Ratcliffe, acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin will join the president for the address, according to MS Now. 
Trump posted on Truth Social that he would be “making a speech to the nation on Thursday evening, at 9 p.m. 
Eastern.” 
The president has long said that he believes the 2020 election, which he lost to Joe Biden, was rigged. 
Some supporters say this belief is responsible for his commitment to passing the SAVE America Act, proposed federal legislation that would require voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in elections. 
“President Trump had an election stolen from him in 2020—FULL STOP,” former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon previously told the Daily Signal. 
“It’s seared into his soul that elections will continue to be stolen until we pass SAVE America.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 51.4%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 18.0%Daily Signal: 6.2%Confirmation Bias51.4%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 14.2%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 3.1%Availability Heuristic14.2%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 6.4%Daily Signal: 8.5%Framing Effect4.9%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 23.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 9.1%Negativity Bias23.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 19.1%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error19.1%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 3.1%Daily Signal: 3.4%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 3.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 3.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 2.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 31.7%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 10.6%Daily Signal: 4.6%Appeal to Authority31.7%This article: 9.3%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 2.8%False Dilemma9.3%This article: 9.3%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 6.2%Daily Signal: 1.6%Slippery Slope9.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 10.6%Daily Signal: 9.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 21.9%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 10.4%Daily Signal: 7.2%Appeal to Emotion21.9%This article: 12.6%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 7.7%Daily Signal: 2.2%Begging the Question12.6%This article: 19.1%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)19.1%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 2.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 12.6%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 2.7%Unattributed Quote12.6%This article: 24.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 8.4%Daily Signal: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection24.0%This article: 10.4%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 9.7%Biased Writer Voice10.4%This article: 9.3%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 3.1%Daily Signal: 3.9%Indoctrination9.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 3.1%Daily Signal: 10.7%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell: 0.0%Daily Signal: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

183 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker22%attributed speech143writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageSteve Bannon • 23 words • 100.0% coverageSteve Bannon • 17 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Steve Bannon

100%flagged-word coverage
40 attributed words100% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%30.0%60.0%Unattributed Quote+57.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Steve Bannon: 57.5%57.5%Quote-first Misdirection+42.8 ptsWriter: 14.7%Steve Bannon: 57.5%57.5%Indoctrination+42.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Steve Bannon: 42.5%42.5%Biased Writer Voice-13.3 ptsWriter: 13.3%Steve Bannon: 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.