Trump: US elections are riddled with foreign and domestic fraud 85%

By Andrea Widburg87%

7/16/2026, 9:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 35 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Burden of Proof, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 36.8% saturation with 303 hits. Analysis detected 2,672 faulty-reasoning hits from 823 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 77.1% and a BS Rank of 85% (3,300 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 84.90% of the article peer group.

President Trump spoke to the nation last night about serious problems with American elections. 
You could watch the speech live on Fox News, Newsmax, C-SPAN, and PBS. 
ABC, NBC, and CNN refused to air the speech on their live broadcasts, while CBS and MSNBC managed to air just a little bit before abandoning it to spout their own opinions (including what they laughably call "fact checks"). 
That's the state of America today. 
It was a good speech but ended (I thought) weakly. 
Had the networks (some of which still have a free gig on the public airways) run the speech, the American people would have been exposed to shocking information about our elections, which are being controlled, not by We, the People, but by foreign governments (especially China) and inside operators, and are generally deeply corrupt and mismanaged. 
You can watch the speech here and read the transcript here , but these are the core points (which came after Trump did a mini State of the Union intro about how well the U.S. is doing in 2026). 
One. 
Beginning around 2020, China illegally acquired around 220 million American voter files, learning who voters were, their party affiliations, and their voting patterns. 
China's goal was to prevent Trump's reelection. 
Trump also alluded to, but did not dive into, the fact that China may have printed ballots for Biden. 
Hearing all that, my first thought was that I bet China is kicking itself for having interfered in the 2020 election. 
Had Trump been reelected, he would have been an utterly ineffectual lame duck. 
China's short-term 2020 election victory had an unexpected outcome: In 2024, Trump came back loaded for bear, wise to Washington's ways, and with a cabinet equally passionate about his goals-including pushing back against China on every non-military front. 
Two. 
Government intelligence operatives were fully aware of China's massive election actions, but suppressed or downplayed the information about foreign interference in an American election. 
The burn bags that didn't burn provide hard proof. 
Trump cited communications that had government operatives explicitly discuss withholding information from Trump about foreign election interference. 
Three. 
Those of us who worried about electronic voting machines were right to worry. 
In many states, those machines are wide open to manipulation. 
He specifically cited the then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro's government as one that could, if it wished, affect vote outcomes by altering the machines. 
Four. 
America's voting rolls are filled with dead people and non-citizens. 
So far as we know, 278,000 non-citizens have registered in federal elections. 
Five. 
Trump noted that mail-in voting is inherently corrupt and, as an example, cited California's extremely suspicious 38-day vote count following its June 2 primaries. 
(Can you imagine waiting 38 days in November and December 2026 and, especially, 2028, for California to count its votes?) 
Six. 
Election officials and agencies know about many of these problems, but routinely fail either to disclose or address them. 
One of the many failures is that states are sharing voting rolls to identify people who, because of relocations, are registered in two or more states. 
This was all important information that major networks, in the spirit of suppression, continued to suppress by refusing to air President Trump's speech. 
As for me, I was disappointed in how the speech ended. 
I believe that the Guaranty Clause of the U.S. 
Constitution requires emergency federal action when it's proven that our election system is corrupted to the point at which our votes have become meaningless. 
That clause, which is founded in Article IV, Section 4, and applies generally to the whole of government, states that: 
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government , and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. 
A "Republican Form of Government" is one that derives its authority from the people, reflecting their will through their votes. 
We now know that, thanks to massive foreign and domestic interference, our will is not being reflected through our votes. 
I wanted Trump to issue an emergency executive order addressing at least some of these concerns. 
He didn't. 
He did tell everyone that all the statements he made are supported by facts, and that all those facts can be found here . 
He also said that his government notified various state agencies about problems with their systems. 
Finally, Trump urged people to get in contact with their representatives (people he'd just proven may not, in fact, be the People's duly elected representatives) to urge them to pass the SAVE America Act. 
That's weak sauce considering that he just identified a massive, unconstitutional emergency situation in America, with foreign election interference and officials in both states and the federal government covering up foreign interference and conniving to corrupt the process from within. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 34.4%Andrea Widburg: 14.2%American Thinker: 10.6%Confirmation Bias34.4%This article: 2.4%Andrea Widburg: 0.9%American Thinker: 0.7%Anchoring Bias2.4%This article: 8.0%Andrea Widburg: 3.3%American Thinker: 3.7%Availability Heuristic8.0%This article: 0.9%Andrea Widburg: 2.1%American Thinker: 1.6%Representativeness Heuristic0.9%This article: 8.4%Andrea Widburg: 1.4%American Thinker: 1.3%Hindsight Bias8.4%This article: 7.9%Andrea Widburg: 2.1%American Thinker: 2.7%Overconfidence Bias7.9%This article: 3.2%Andrea Widburg: 6.7%American Thinker: 7.1%Framing Effect3.2%This article: 4.1%Andrea Widburg: 0.4%American Thinker: 0.6%Loss Aversion4.1%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.7%American Thinker: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.3%American Thinker: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.6%Andrea Widburg: 0.8%American Thinker: 1.6%Optimism Bias4.6%This article: 4.9%Andrea Widburg: 2.8%American Thinker: 2.6%Pessimism Bias4.9%This article: 36.8%Andrea Widburg: 17.2%American Thinker: 13.0%Negativity Bias36.8%This article: 4.7%Andrea Widburg: 1.7%American Thinker: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias4.7%This article: 2.3%Andrea Widburg: 4.4%American Thinker: 2.9%Fundamental Attribution Error2.3%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.6%American Thinker: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Andrea Widburg: 3.7%American Thinker: 3.9%In-Group Bias5.7%This article: 4.7%Andrea Widburg: 5.8%American Thinker: 5.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias4.7%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 3.3%American Thinker: 2.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 1.4%American Thinker: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 2.1%American Thinker: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.9%American Thinker: 0.7%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 9.6%Andrea Widburg: 9.5%American Thinker: 5.6%Ad Hominem9.6%This article: 4.7%Andrea Widburg: 3.7%American Thinker: 4.0%Straw Man4.7%This article: 14.5%Andrea Widburg: 6.4%American Thinker: 4.7%Appeal to Authority14.5%This article: 10.9%Andrea Widburg: 5.0%American Thinker: 4.7%False Dilemma10.9%This article: 1.6%Andrea Widburg: 3.1%American Thinker: 3.3%Slippery Slope1.6%This article: 1.6%Andrea Widburg: 0.3%American Thinker: 0.3%Circular Reasoning1.6%This article: 9.7%Andrea Widburg: 18.2%American Thinker: 16.8%Hasty Generalization9.7%This article: 2.8%Andrea Widburg: 1.3%American Thinker: 0.6%Red Herring2.8%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.4%American Thinker: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.6%Andrea Widburg: 9.1%American Thinker: 8.5%Appeal to Emotion12.6%This article: 6.4%Andrea Widburg: 3.6%American Thinker: 2.7%Begging the Question6.4%This article: 15.1%Andrea Widburg: 4.0%American Thinker: 3.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)15.1%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 1.8%American Thinker: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 31.0%Andrea Widburg: 5.0%American Thinker: 1.7%Burden of Proof31.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.8%American Thinker: 0.5%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 1.4%American Thinker: 0.8%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.0%Andrea Widburg: 3.0%American Thinker: 3.6%Anecdotal4.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.7%American Thinker: 0.4%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.5%Andrea Widburg: 3.3%American Thinker: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.5%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.2%American Thinker: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.9%American Thinker: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 1.8%American Thinker: 0.7%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.4%Andrea Widburg: 2.8%American Thinker: 3.1%Unattributed Quote3.4%This article: 1.2%Andrea Widburg: 2.8%American Thinker: 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection1.2%This article: 27.3%Andrea Widburg: 31.0%American Thinker: 22.9%Biased Writer Voice27.3%This article: 10.2%Andrea Widburg: 5.3%American Thinker: 5.9%Indoctrination10.2%This article: 0.0%Andrea Widburg: 0.4%American Thinker: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.4%Andrea Widburg: 14.4%American Thinker: 14.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias12.4%This article: 7.0%Andrea Widburg: 1.0%American Thinker: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.0%

823 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker14%attributed speech709writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 56 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 24 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 15 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
114 attributed words100% of attributed speech85% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +50.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Trump: 50.9%50.9%Biased Writer Voice-31.7 ptsWriter: 31.7%Trump: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+22.8 ptsWriter: 7.1%Trump: 29.8%29.8%Politically Right Leaning +10.1 ptsWriter: 11.0%Trump: 21.1%21.1%Unattributed Quote-3.9 ptsWriter: 3.9%Trump: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.4 ptsWriter: 1.4%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.