Trump Announces Iran Ceasefire ‘Over’ Weeks After Bragging About It ⁠81%

By S.V. Date⁠0%

7/8/2026, 12:53:04 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Recency Bias, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 27.1% saturation with 99 hits. Analysis detected 875 faulty-reasoning hits from 365 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 73.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠81% (3,885 of 20,407 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 81.00% of the article peer group.

Just weeks after admitting he agreed to a peace deal with Iran to avoid a global economic calamity, President Donald Trump on Tuesday said the deal was “over” and disparaged the same leaders he recently praised as moderate and reasonable as “scum” who could not be trusted. 
“I don’t want to deal with them, but they’re scum. 
You know what scum is? 
They’re scum, they’re sick people, they’re led by sick people, and they’re vicious, violent people,” Trump told reporters at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey. 
“As far as I’m concerned, it’s just a waste of time dealing with them. 
They’re liars. 
We make a deal, and if I make a deal with him, we have a deal. 
He goes out, he talks. 
We make a deal. 
Everyone’s agreed, no nuclear weapons. 
We make a deal. 
They go outside, talk to the press, they say we never even talked about it. 
Is something wrong with them? 
They’re cuckoo,” he said at a photo opportunity with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. 
His comments came after the U.S. military announced another round of attacks on Iranian targets around the Persian Gulf, which responded to Iranian attacks on oil and natural gas tankers trying to pass through the Strait of Hormuz using a channel not approved by Iran. 
Prior to Trump’s war, traffic flowed freely through the narrow opening, including a fifth of the world’s crude oil. 
Oil prices rose Tuesday on Trump’s statement. 
Just three weeks ago, Trump was bragging about the “memorandum of understanding” he signed that ended the war that he himself began on Feb. 28 without consulting Congress or any of America’s traditional allies except for Israel, which also participated in the attacks. 
At a news conference at the close of the G7 summit in France on June 17, Trump admitted that he decided to end the war because oil reserves were running on empty the world over and economic disaster was just weeks away. 
“The one thing I didn’t want to see is I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe,” he said then. 
“If you kept this going, that could have happened.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.1%S.V. Date: 3.8%AP: 3.2%Confirmation Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.4%AP: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 1.4%AP: 2.8%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.6%AP: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 5.2%S.V. Date: 1.1%AP: 0.5%Hindsight Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 2.6%AP: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 11.6%AP: 9.9%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 5.2%S.V. Date: 0.7%AP: 0.4%Loss Aversion5.2%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.9%AP: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.4%S.V. Date: 2.6%AP: 1.4%Optimism Bias1.4%This article: 11.5%S.V. Date: 4.9%AP: 2.4%Pessimism Bias11.5%This article: 27.1%S.V. Date: 21.4%AP: 13.5%Negativity Bias27.1%This article: 16.2%S.V. Date: 2.7%AP: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias16.2%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 3.5%AP: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.3%AP: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 1.2%AP: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%S.V. Date: 2.1%AP: 1.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 2.2%AP: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.5%AP: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 24.7%S.V. Date: 2.9%AP: 1.5%Recency Bias24.7%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.4%AP: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 26.8%S.V. Date: 5.1%AP: 2.9%Ad Hominem26.8%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 1.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 1.4%S.V. Date: 3.4%AP: 2.6%Appeal to Authority1.4%This article: 1.4%S.V. Date: 2.0%AP: 1.9%False Dilemma1.4%This article: 2.5%S.V. Date: 0.9%AP: 2.0%Slippery Slope2.5%This article: 4.4%S.V. Date: 0.6%AP: 0.2%Circular Reasoning4.4%This article: 7.4%S.V. Date: 6.7%AP: 6.5%Hasty Generalization7.4%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.2%AP: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 17.0%S.V. Date: 5.1%AP: 6.2%Appeal to Emotion17.0%This article: 1.9%S.V. Date: 0.5%AP: 1.3%Begging the Question1.9%This article: 16.7%S.V. Date: 3.3%AP: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)16.7%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.2%AP: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.5%AP: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 5.2%S.V. Date: 0.2%AP: 0.1%Composition/Division5.2%This article: 4.1%S.V. Date: 1.3%AP: 1.3%Anecdotal4.1%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.4%AP: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 2.4%AP: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.3%AP: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.5%S.V. Date: 2.7%AP: 2.7%Unattributed Quote5.5%This article: 12.1%S.V. Date: 4.2%AP: 2.0%Quote-first Misdirection12.1%This article: 24.7%S.V. Date: 23.8%AP: 12.7%Biased Writer Voice24.7%This article: 6.6%S.V. Date: 0.7%AP: 1.6%Indoctrination6.6%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 6.8%AP: 4.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%S.V. Date: 0.0%AP: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

365 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker42%attributed speech213writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 47 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 10 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 5 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 25 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 14 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 2 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 16 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 5 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 5 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 15 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 5 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 19 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 9 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Trump

95%flagged-word coverage
152 attributed words100% of attributed speech76% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Biased Writer Voice-42.3 ptsWriter: 42.3%Trump: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+28.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Trump: 28.9%28.9%Indoctrination+15.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Trump: 15.8%15.8%Unattributed Quote+13.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Trump: 13.2%13.2%

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.