Trump’s State Fair Arch Is Cracking And Oozing Yellow Goo ⁠51%

By Curtis M. Wong⁠0%

7/2/2026, 7:49:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Unattributed Quote, and Recency Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 22.8% saturation with 105 hits. Analysis detected 945 faulty-reasoning hits from 461 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 50.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠51% (10,782 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 50.70% of the article peer group.

As debate over attendance figures at President Donald Trump’s Great American State Fair continues along party lines, new discourse surrounding one of the event’s most high-profile attractions has emerged. 
A miniature version of Trump’s proposed Triumphal Arch ― widely nicknamed the “Arc de Trump” ― displayed on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., appears to have undergone a refurbishment following its debut last week. 
A similar video, shared to X by former CNN journalist Jim Acosta, highlighted the large gaps between the bottom of the podiums and the ground below. 
On Wednesday, Moore shared a second video of the arch filmed after its apparent renovation. 
Whether the results represent any sort of improvement, however, is questionable. 
As the clip shows, Corinthian-style columns were added to the arch’s facade. 
Close-ups, however, reveal a yellow, viscous material ― believed to be polyurethane expanding foam, which is used to fill cracks ― oozing out of the structure. 
Not surprisingly, the latest video and related images have drawn a fair amount of online snark. 
“Quality work! 
Just like the Reflecting Pool,” one person wrote on X, alluding to the ongoing controversy over Trump’s $14.7 million renovations to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. 
Added another: “Apparently this is a work in progress now. 
Did they add the columns in the middle of the night?” 
HuffPost reached out to representatives for Freedom 250, which organized the Great American State Fair, for comment on the arch’s current state but did not immediately hear back. 
A spokesperson for the group, however, told The Daily Beast that the model is “just a replica” of the Triumphal Arch and urged the outlet to “maybe try celebrating the 250th anniversary and stop writing nonsense articles.” 
“The event features everyone from deep blue California and New York to purple states like Colorado, Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, Virginia, to red ones,” the spokesperson continued. 
“Cover real news.” 
As for Trump himself, the president has been on the defensive amid widespread scrutiny over the Great American State Fair, which is meant to honor America’s 250th anniversary and runs through July 10. 
Immediately after the fair’s June 24 kickoff, Trump boasted on Truth Social that “at least 45,000 people” were in attendance for his opening night speech ― a figure disputed by NBC News and The Washington Post, among other outlets. 
On Monday, he congratulated himself yet again. 
“Do you think people appreciate what a fantastic job we did in building and operating the Great American State Fair at the National Mall, packed with happy people, and everybody loving it?” 
he wrote on Truth Social. 
“Ask yourself this simple question: ‘DO YOU THINK THAT OBUMA OR SLEEPY JOE BIDEN COULD HAVE DONE IT?” 
THE ANSWER IS NO!’” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.9%AP: 3.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 13.2%Curtis M. Wong: 4.7%AP: 2.8%Availability Heuristic13.2%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.9%Curtis M. Wong: 3.1%AP: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.9%This article: 7.8%Curtis M. Wong: 2.5%AP: 9.9%Framing Effect7.8%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.6%Curtis M. Wong: 1.4%AP: 0.3%Status Quo Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 3.5%AP: 1.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Curtis M. Wong: 0.6%AP: 2.4%Pessimism Bias2.4%This article: 22.3%Curtis M. Wong: 15.7%AP: 13.5%Negativity Bias22.3%This article: 8.5%Curtis M. Wong: 4.1%AP: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias8.5%This article: 7.2%Curtis M. Wong: 1.8%AP: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error7.2%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 14.3%Curtis M. Wong: 4.6%AP: 2.2%In-Group Bias14.3%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 1.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 15.2%Curtis M. Wong: 3.8%AP: 1.5%Recency Bias15.2%This article: 3.9%Curtis M. Wong: 1.0%AP: 0.2%Primacy Effect3.9%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 4.0%AP: 2.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 1.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.7%Curtis M. Wong: 0.2%AP: 2.6%Appeal to Authority0.7%This article: 3.9%Curtis M. Wong: 2.9%AP: 1.9%False Dilemma3.9%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 2.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.6%AP: 6.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 5.6%Curtis M. Wong: 2.8%AP: 0.4%Red Herring5.6%This article: 3.5%Curtis M. Wong: 2.3%AP: 0.5%Bandwagon3.5%This article: 10.8%Curtis M. Wong: 5.0%AP: 6.2%Appeal to Emotion10.8%This article: 10.2%Curtis M. Wong: 2.7%AP: 1.3%Begging the Question10.2%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 8.0%Curtis M. Wong: 2.0%AP: 0.1%Tu Quoque8.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 10.2%Curtis M. Wong: 2.5%AP: 1.3%Anecdotal10.2%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 21.7%Curtis M. Wong: 11.7%AP: 2.7%Unattributed Quote21.7%This article: 2.2%Curtis M. Wong: 1.2%AP: 2.0%Quote-first Misdirection2.2%This article: 22.8%Curtis M. Wong: 9.2%AP: 12.7%Biased Writer Voice22.8%This article: 4.1%Curtis M. Wong: 3.2%AP: 1.6%Indoctrination4.1%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.5%AP: 4.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Curtis M. Wong: 0.0%AP: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

461 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers51%attributed speech228writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageJim Acosta • 26 words • 0.0% coverageMoore • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageHuffPost • 28 words • 0.0% coverageFreedom 250 • 37 words • 100.0% coverageFreedom 250 • 26 words • 0.0% coverageFreedom 250 • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 5 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 18 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 4 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Freedom 250

100%flagged-word coverage
66 attributed words28% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%30.0%60.0%Unattributed Quote+28.4 ptsWriter: 27.6%Freedom 250: 56.1%56.1%Biased Writer Voice-46.1 ptsWriter: 46.1%Freedom 250: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-2.5 ptsWriter: 7.0%Freedom 250: 4.5%4.5%Quote-first Misdirection-4.4 ptsWriter: 4.4%Freedom 250: 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.