Democrat Senator Wants ICE Agents To Choose Between Getting Run Over And Going To Jail 77%

By Breccan F. Thies50%

7/15/2026, 7:55:33 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Right Leaning Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 44% saturation with 355 hits. Analysis detected 2,468 faulty-reasoning hits from 806 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 68.6% and a BS Rank of 77% (4,879 of 20,518 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 76.20% of the article peer group.

Sen. 
Alex Padilla, D-Calif., on Wednesday called for the firing and prosecution of federal immigration enforcement officers who defend themselves against people who weaponize their cars and end up dead because of it. 
During the confirmation hearing of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who has been nominated for the permanent position, Padilla opened by asking about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in Texas and Maine shooting two illegal aliens. 
The illegal aliens allegedly refused to comply with the officers, instead dangerously fleeing the scene in one case, and attempting to ram into officers in the other, according to the Department of Homeland Security. 
Padilla initially asked whether Blanche thought state and local law enforcement should be involved in independent investigations regarding federal officer-involved shootings, and then suggested that the Department of Justice should have a role in investigating such cases at DHS. 
But he quickly pivoted to suggesting that officers whose lives are put at risk by agitators or illegals should automatically be fired for acting in self-defense. 
“Here’s the bottom line: Why I’m asking these two questions, because in prior incidents  you referenced Minnesota earlier in your testimony  Alex Pretti and Renee Good were also fatally shot, and as far as we can tell, it’s been months and months,” Padilla said. 
“There’s been no justice in these cases. 
As far as I can tell, those officers were not fired, they have not faced any charges. 
So it does undermine any confidence anybody should have in the Department of Homeland Security's ability, through the Inspector General or otherwise, to investigate its own.” 
Blanche responded, stating, “I very much disagree with the statement you just made. 
The mere passage of time between January and today doesn’t mean there’s no justice.” 
In all four cases, available evidence points to each person refusing to comply with lawful orders of federal agents, and in every case making extremely dangerous decisions that appear to span from the direct targeting of police officers with their vehicles, to putting them and others at risk by fleeing, or in Pretti's case, obstructing law enforcement officers and then resisting. 
As DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin stated Wednesday, “As our officers carry out operations to enforce our nations laws, they are facing a more than 1,300% increase in vehicle attacks.” 
Pretti's case is the only one that did not involve alleged weaponization or reckless use of a vehicle, and it included a confusing and chaotic timeline of events involving his carrying of a gun and an officer apparently believing he was reaching for it while another officer was removing it from his person. 
Even so, that does not automatically condemn the officer who shot him, as Padilla would apparently have it, or even suggest that the officer will be found to have improperly discharged his weapon, given the circumstances of Pretti's confrontation. 
When Padilla claims that “what we have seen is people continuing to die, not just in detention facilities, but on the streets of America,” he is leaving out the fact that Democrats encourage these people to put themselves in dangerous situations where their agitation dramatically increases the chances of a deadly confrontation. 
As my colleague Eddie Scarry points out, “Deportations are only deadly because of Democrat resistance.” 
Left-wing agitators are willing to give their lives to protect rapists and murderers from justice. 
The anti-immigration law agitation is coordinated, too. 
As The Federalist reported, many illegal aliens are coached on how to resist police, and the American agitators shielding them are part of a unified network. 
Mullin pointed to more examples of this: 
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hosted a webinar providing tips for illegal aliens to evade arrests at homes, workplaces, or in public. 
Dan Goldman posted a video online calling on illegal aliens to make a plan for ICE encounters. 
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass issued multilingual flyers and online resources advising illegal aliens how to evade arrest. 
California Governor Gavin Newsom released guides and sanctuary laws advising illegal aliens how to recognize ICE, block entry, and defy arrest. 
Despite a moment Tuesday where Mullin appeared to cave to the mob, legitimizing leftist agitator tactics by blocking all ICE officers from using traffic stops  their most important enforcement tool  President Donald Trump put the department back on track, and appears to now have zero appetite for allowing the left to control mass deportation. 
“Our #1 goal is to keep our officers safe and get criminals OFF our streets. 
Illegal aliens will be arrested and deported wherever they are. 
If you are here illegally, LEAVE NOW,” Mullin said. 
“We remind illegal aliens attempting to evade arrest is dangerous. 
This reckless illegal alien activity comes after sanctuary politicians held webinars and shared resources for how to openly defy [ICE].” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 16.4%Breccan F. Thies: 6.6%The Federalist: 8.5%Confirmation Bias16.4%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 1.2%The Federalist: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.2%Breccan F. Thies: 3.1%The Federalist: 3.4%Availability Heuristic10.2%This article: 9.8%Breccan F. Thies: 1.0%The Federalist: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic9.8%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%Breccan F. Thies: 1.6%The Federalist: 2.4%Overconfidence Bias2.1%This article: 4.0%Breccan F. Thies: 12.7%The Federalist: 10.2%Framing Effect4.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.6%The Federalist: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 1.7%Breccan F. Thies: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.6%Status Quo Bias1.7%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.2%Breccan F. Thies: 0.7%The Federalist: 1.0%Optimism Bias1.2%This article: 2.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.7%The Federalist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias2.0%This article: 44.0%Breccan F. Thies: 7.8%The Federalist: 12.2%Negativity Bias44.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.7%The Federalist: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Breccan F. Thies: 1.7%The Federalist: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error6.5%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Breccan F. Thies: 3.6%The Federalist: 4.0%In-Group Bias6.5%This article: 12.0%Breccan F. Thies: 1.6%The Federalist: 2.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias12.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 2.3%The Federalist: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.7%Breccan F. Thies: 0.7%The Federalist: 1.2%Recency Bias5.7%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 2.6%The Federalist: 5.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 8.1%Breccan F. Thies: 2.4%The Federalist: 2.8%Straw Man8.1%This article: 15.0%Breccan F. Thies: 9.0%The Federalist: 5.2%Appeal to Authority15.0%This article: 3.1%Breccan F. Thies: 1.9%The Federalist: 2.8%False Dilemma3.1%This article: 6.9%Breccan F. Thies: 0.9%The Federalist: 2.2%Slippery Slope6.9%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.4%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 22.0%Breccan F. Thies: 7.6%The Federalist: 11.4%Hasty Generalization22.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 7.1%Breccan F. Thies: 6.4%The Federalist: 8.2%Appeal to Emotion7.1%This article: 2.1%Breccan F. Thies: 2.0%The Federalist: 3.2%Begging the Question2.1%This article: 21.3%Breccan F. Thies: 2.4%The Federalist: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)21.3%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.5%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 1.1%The Federalist: 1.1%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 20.1%Breccan F. Thies: 2.1%The Federalist: 2.7%Anecdotal20.1%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.7%Breccan F. Thies: 1.6%The Federalist: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.7%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 6.5%Breccan F. Thies: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.8%Genetic Fallacy6.5%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 3.6%The Federalist: 3.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 10.8%Breccan F. Thies: 3.0%The Federalist: 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection10.8%This article: 18.4%Breccan F. Thies: 10.5%The Federalist: 19.9%Biased Writer Voice18.4%This article: 3.1%Breccan F. Thies: 3.6%The Federalist: 5.4%Indoctrination3.1%This article: 4.0%Breccan F. Thies: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias4.0%This article: 27.0%Breccan F. Thies: 12.2%The Federalist: 15.9%Politically Right Leaning Bias27.0%This article: 0.0%Breccan F. Thies: 1.0%The Federalist: 1.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

806 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers47%attributed speech428writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageDepartment of Homeland Security • 34 words • 0.0% coverageAlex Padilla • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageAlex Padilla • 46 words • 100.0% coverageAlex Padilla • 7 words • 0.0% coverageAlex Padilla • 17 words • 0.0% coverageAlex Padilla • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Blanche • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDepartment of Homeland Security • 61 words • 0.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 53 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 52 words • 100.0% coverageEddie Scarry • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageThe Federalist • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 56 words • 100.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 10 words • 100.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 9 words • 0.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 20 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

The Federalist

100%flagged-word coverage
26 attributed words6.9% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%The Federalist: 100.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning -46.3 ptsWriter: 46.3%The Federalist: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-27.8 ptsWriter: 27.8%The Federalist: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-7.5 ptsWriter: 7.5%The Federalist: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-3.5 ptsWriter: 3.5%The Federalist: 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.