Raw Story⁠93%

Fetterman sparks firestorm over Fox News interview claims: 'Look in the mirror' ⁠82%

By Nicole Charky-Chami⁠0%

7/7/2026, 12:24:18 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Ad Hominem, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 82.8% saturation with 221 hits. Analysis detected 1,109 faulty-reasoning hits from 267 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 72.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠82% (4,145 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 81.10% of the article peer group.

The internet was livid Monday after Sen. 
John Fetterman (D-PA) slammed Democrats for boosting Maine Senate candidate and Democrat Graham Platner — taking swipes at his own party and prominent leaders. 
Fetterman appeared on Fox News in an interview with anchor Laura Ingraham, as calls were mounting for the candidate to step down from the competitive Senate race after he was accused of sexual assault. 
"I would really call Bernie Sanders to apologize for pushing this kind of predator more than anyone he helped him elect," Fetterman said. 
"Maybe he should stop pushing these communists." 
Social media users called Fetterman out for his comments. 
"Says the guy also pushed on us by Bernie," Rachel Murphy Azzara, founder and executive director of Democrats Work for America, wrote on X. 
"This guy is more of a FOX maga anchor than a congressman," liberal political commentator Rodger Williams wrote on X. 
"Has Laura Ingraham or Fetterman for that matter ever pushed for Trump to resign?" 
Political writer Zaid Jilani wrote on X. 
"Democrat who trashes Democrats and appears on Fox every chance he gets wants everyone else to look in the mirror," political commentator Hemant Mehta wrote on X. 
"Have long disliked Platner, but Fetterman owes his Senate seat in large part to Bernie. 
And millions of Democrats are jusifiability [SIC] angry at Sanders pushing fake progressive Fetterman. 
'While serving as Pennsylvania's Lieutenant Governor, he was a vocal progressive Democrat who aligned with the Bernie Sanders wing of the party,'" frequent progressive commentator Janice Hough wrote on X. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.2%Nicole Charky-Chami: 4.1%Rawstory: 8.4%Confirmation Bias14.2%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.1%Rawstory: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.2%Nicole Charky-Chami: 2.7%Rawstory: 4.5%Availability Heuristic11.2%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.0%Rawstory: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Nicole Charky-Chami: 14.0%Rawstory: 13.4%Framing Effect4.5%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.8%Rawstory: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.3%Rawstory: 2.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 82.8%Nicole Charky-Chami: 20.6%Rawstory: 21.6%Negativity Bias82.8%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.8%Rawstory: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 9.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.7%Rawstory: 2.8%Fundamental Attribution Error9.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 19.1%Nicole Charky-Chami: 2.1%Rawstory: 2.5%In-Group Bias19.1%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.1%Rawstory: 1.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 18.7%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.3%Rawstory: 0.6%Halo Effect18.7%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.5%Rawstory: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 12.7%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.7%Rawstory: 1.8%Recency Bias12.7%This article: 11.2%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.4%Rawstory: 0.7%Primacy Effect11.2%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 37.8%Nicole Charky-Chami: 7.9%Rawstory: 6.3%Ad Hominem37.8%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.2%Nicole Charky-Chami: 5.1%Rawstory: 4.1%Appeal to Authority11.2%This article: 7.5%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.4%Rawstory: 3.0%False Dilemma7.5%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 1.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 19.9%Nicole Charky-Chami: 5.2%Rawstory: 12.1%Hasty Generalization19.9%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.4%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.8%Rawstory: 0.8%Bandwagon3.4%This article: 13.1%Nicole Charky-Chami: 10.8%Rawstory: 9.2%Appeal to Emotion13.1%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.7%Rawstory: 1.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 8.6%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.4%Rawstory: 3.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.6%This article: 19.1%Nicole Charky-Chami: 4.5%Rawstory: 0.6%Tu Quoque19.1%This article: 5.2%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.1%Rawstory: 1.7%Burden of Proof5.2%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.5%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.3%Rawstory: 3.9%Anecdotal6.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 13.1%Nicole Charky-Chami: 1.8%Rawstory: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)13.1%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.6%Nicole Charky-Chami: 10.3%Rawstory: 5.3%Unattributed Quote8.6%This article: 4.5%Nicole Charky-Chami: 5.4%Rawstory: 4.1%Quote-first Misdirection4.5%This article: 46.4%Nicole Charky-Chami: 6.2%Rawstory: 15.7%Biased Writer Voice46.4%This article: 3.4%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.6%Rawstory: 3.2%Indoctrination3.4%This article: 16.5%Nicole Charky-Chami: 2.3%Rawstory: 8.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias16.5%This article: 7.5%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.6%Rawstory: 1.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Nicole Charky-Chami: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

267 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers61%attributed speech105writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Fetterman • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Fetterman • 23 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Fetterman • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageRachel Murphy Azzara • 24 words • 0.0% coverageRodger Williams • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageZaid Jilani • 7 words • 0.0% coverageHemant Mehta • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageJanice Hough • 30 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Rodger Williams

100%flagged-word coverage
20 attributed words12% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Politically Right Leaning +100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Rodger Williams: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+49.5 ptsWriter: 50.5%Rodger Williams: 100.0%100.0%Politically Left Leaning B-13.3 ptsWriter: 13.3%Rodger Williams: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-11.4 ptsWriter: 11.4%Rodger Williams: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-8.6 ptsWriter: 8.6%Rodger Williams: 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.