Raw Story⁠93%

'Smells really bad': Legal expert flattens Jeanine Pirro's latest prosecution attempt ⁠72%

By Bennito L. Kelty⁠84%

7/3/2026, 12:08:24 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Biased Writer Voice, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 41.9% saturation with 135 hits. Analysis detected 984 faulty-reasoning hits from 322 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 64.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠72% (5,950 of 20,921 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 71.60% of the article peer group.

A legal expert pulled apart the Trump administration's prosecution of a U.S. 
Olympian accused of vandalizing the Reflecting Pool. 
During an appearance on CNN, Ryan Goodman, a former Pentagon lawyer and the editor-in-chief of Just Security, said that the case, led by U.S. 
Attorney Jeanine Pirro, "smells really bad." 
Goodman blasted Pirro's claim that her office would prosecute Olympic canoeist David Hearn based on "evidence" that he vandalized the pool. 
Hearn said he reached into the pool and touched a piece of detached liner, but didn't actually remove it. 
"I wish I could believe her that it was just according to the evidence and not according to the president's behest," Goodman said. 
"But there's a pattern." 
Hearn was originally given a misdemeanor citation in June, and "the next day, the president of the United States said that for people committing that act, they need to spend years in jail," Goodman noted. 
"The only way you spend years in jail is if you committed a felony," he explained. 
"And then a couple of days later, the president of the United States said that people who committed these acts can spend up to ten years in jail. 
And then lo and behold, we have the shock that the man has been charged with a felony and up to ten years in jail." 
Goodman also pointed to Pirro's criminal investigation against former Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell as evidence of a "pattern" that she follows Trump's orders. 
"She also, in her office, tried to bring seditious conspiracy charges against members of Congress because the president of the United States said that they made a video about the military not having to follow unlawful orders," Goodman said, referring to an incident earlier this year. 
He said the case against Hearn "smells really bad" because "it's in lockstep with the president," as in other similar cases. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 41.9%Bennito L. Kelty: 12.0%Rawstory: 7.7%Confirmation Bias41.9%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.8%Rawstory: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%Bennito L. Kelty: 3.5%Rawstory: 4.4%Availability Heuristic7.5%This article: 8.7%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.8%Rawstory: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic8.7%This article: 7.8%Bennito L. Kelty: 1.2%Rawstory: 1.0%Hindsight Bias7.8%This article: 5.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 2.5%Rawstory: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias5.0%This article: 5.3%Bennito L. Kelty: 11.4%Rawstory: 13.7%Framing Effect5.3%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.2%Rawstory: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.3%Rawstory: 0.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.7%Bennito L. Kelty: 2.7%Rawstory: 2.8%Pessimism Bias3.7%This article: 33.2%Bennito L. Kelty: 18.4%Rawstory: 21.8%Negativity Bias33.2%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 1.5%Rawstory: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 14.3%Bennito L. Kelty: 3.6%Rawstory: 2.9%Fundamental Attribution Error14.3%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.5%Rawstory: 2.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 1.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.8%Rawstory: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.7%Rawstory: 1.7%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.7%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Bennito L. Kelty: 2.6%Rawstory: 6.4%Ad Hominem6.5%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.2%Rawstory: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.5%Bennito L. Kelty: 4.9%Rawstory: 3.8%Appeal to Authority7.5%This article: 5.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 1.6%Rawstory: 2.9%False Dilemma5.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 1.1%Rawstory: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 14.3%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.9%Rawstory: 0.3%Circular Reasoning14.3%This article: 15.2%Bennito L. Kelty: 6.9%Rawstory: 11.9%Hasty Generalization15.2%This article: 7.5%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.7%Red Herring7.5%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 19.6%Bennito L. Kelty: 7.5%Rawstory: 9.2%Appeal to Emotion19.6%This article: 1.2%Bennito L. Kelty: 1.7%Rawstory: 1.6%Begging the Question1.2%This article: 32.9%Bennito L. Kelty: 9.3%Rawstory: 3.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)32.9%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 14.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 2.4%Rawstory: 1.5%Burden of Proof14.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.5%Bennito L. Kelty: 3.5%Rawstory: 3.9%Anecdotal6.5%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 3.0%Rawstory: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.9%Bennito L. Kelty: 8.9%Rawstory: 5.4%Unattributed Quote1.9%This article: 3.4%Bennito L. Kelty: 4.3%Rawstory: 4.2%Quote-first Misdirection3.4%This article: 28.9%Bennito L. Kelty: 9.5%Rawstory: 15.6%Biased Writer Voice28.9%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 1.1%Rawstory: 3.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 7.6%Rawstory: 8.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 0.9%Rawstory: 0.9%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bennito L. Kelty: 1.3%Rawstory: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

322 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers91%attributed speech30writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 24 words • 100.0% coverageJeanine Pirro • 6 words • 100.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 21 words • 100.0% coverageDavid Hearn • 19 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 23 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 4 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 35 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 16 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 28 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 25 words • 100.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 24 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 46 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Goodman • 21 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jeanine Pirro

100%flagged-word coverage
6 attributed words2.1% of attributed speech77% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Jeanine Pirro: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-76.7 ptsWriter: 76.7%Jeanine Pirro: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-36.7 ptsWriter: 36.7%Jeanine Pirro: 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.