Mediaite⁠70%

Tucker Carlson Reveals Last Time He Spoke to Trump Following Nasty Insult ⁠49%

By Zachary Leeman⁠75%

6/25/2026, 11:32:20 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and False Dilemma, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.1% saturation with 88 hits. Analysis detected 678 faulty-reasoning hits from 417 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 49.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠49% (11,162 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 51.00% of the article peer group.

Tucker Carlson revealed the last time he spoke to President Donald Trump as his verbal warpath against the president continued this week, including recently flat-out telling the president "shut up, b*tch." 
Carlson spoke with Sky News' Yalda Hakim and revealed he hasn't spoken to Trump since the start of the Iran war, which began on February 28th. 
"I spoke to him the 27th. 
I haven't talked to him since. 
I don't hate him. 
I feel sorry for him. 
What he did is a catastrophe. 
He knew it would be and he did it anyways. 
The question is why," Carlson said. 
While once one of Trump's most vocal supporters, Carlson has become one of his fiercest critics over a number of issues, the main issue being the Iran conflict. 
Carlson recently announced he's officially done with the Republican Party, declaring they are "not loyal to the United States." 
In a Wednesday interview with Jack Neel on his podcast, Carlson argued Trump has tried to "posture" his way out of the Iran war. 
He said: 
[There are] guys who don’t say anything, just knock you cold, hit you in the face with a beer bottle and keep hitting you. 
Like those are the people you need to be afraid of. 
They’re not the posturers. 
They’re not the braggers in your [face], and I think everyone knows that intuitively. 
And Trump is very much "What’d you say?!" 
Shut up, b*tch! 
I don’t take you seriously. 
No, I’m not being mean. 
But like, come on. 
Trump has also lashed out at Carlson and other supporters-turned-critics. 
In a Truth Social post, he targeted Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, Alex Jones, and Carlson. 
He called Carlson a "low-IQ person" and "highly overrated." 
Carlson told Hakim that he got his Trump vote wrong and felt drawn to his candidacy because he provided a new option. 
It's not like I didn't know Trump had flaws. 
I know Trump intimately. 
I know Trump really, really well and I've always like him, but I know what he's like so I was eyes wide open in some ways. 
But my calculation was, and it seemed obvious, my perspective what the country needs is a choice and the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are identical in their core assumptions about the economy and foreign policy, which is what matters, and I thought Trump was an option. 
Watch above via Sky News. 
Jason Cohen contributed to this story. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 8.5%Mediaite: 5.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.0%Mediaite: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%Zachary Leeman: 4.9%Mediaite: 3.8%Availability Heuristic5.8%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.0%Mediaite: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.1%Mediaite: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 18.7%Zachary Leeman: 2.8%Mediaite: 2.1%Overconfidence Bias18.7%This article: 4.6%Zachary Leeman: 6.9%Mediaite: 9.1%Framing Effect4.6%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.0%Mediaite: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.6%Mediaite: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.4%Mediaite: 1.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Zachary Leeman: 1.3%Mediaite: 1.6%Pessimism Bias4.1%This article: 21.1%Zachary Leeman: 18.8%Mediaite: 14.7%Negativity Bias21.1%This article: 8.6%Zachary Leeman: 2.3%Mediaite: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 3.6%Mediaite: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 2.3%Mediaite: 2.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.9%Mediaite: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.1%Mediaite: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.8%Mediaite: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.5%Mediaite: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.3%Zachary Leeman: 3.2%Mediaite: 2.3%Recency Bias11.3%This article: 3.4%Zachary Leeman: 0.6%Mediaite: 0.6%Primacy Effect3.4%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Zachary Leeman: 3.9%Mediaite: 3.8%Ad Hominem7.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.9%Mediaite: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.2%Zachary Leeman: 4.7%Mediaite: 3.5%Appeal to Authority7.2%This article: 12.5%Zachary Leeman: 3.4%Mediaite: 2.4%False Dilemma12.5%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.5%Mediaite: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.6%Mediaite: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 10.4%Mediaite: 7.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.7%Mediaite: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.4%Zachary Leeman: 1.2%Mediaite: 0.9%Bandwagon3.4%This article: 3.4%Zachary Leeman: 8.5%Mediaite: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion3.4%This article: 3.4%Zachary Leeman: 2.8%Mediaite: 1.6%Begging the Question3.4%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 4.6%Mediaite: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 1.2%Zachary Leeman: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Tu Quoque1.2%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.9%Mediaite: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.3%Mediaite: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 11.5%Zachary Leeman: 0.4%Mediaite: 0.3%Composition/Division11.5%This article: 5.8%Zachary Leeman: 4.2%Mediaite: 3.0%Anecdotal5.8%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.9%Zachary Leeman: 2.7%Mediaite: 2.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.9%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.1%Mediaite: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.2%Mediaite: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.9%Mediaite: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.4%Zachary Leeman: 5.7%Mediaite: 3.3%Unattributed Quote1.4%This article: 7.4%Zachary Leeman: 3.9%Mediaite: 3.2%Quote-first Misdirection7.4%This article: 18.0%Zachary Leeman: 8.7%Mediaite: 8.3%Biased Writer Voice18.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 1.8%Mediaite: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 2.6%Mediaite: 2.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zachary Leeman: 0.3%Mediaite: 1.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.2%Zachary Leeman: 1.1%Mediaite: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.2%

417 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker48%attributed speech215writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 6 words • 100.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 6 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 6 words • 100.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 24 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 11 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 14 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 8 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 3 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 9 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 4 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 26 words • 0.0% coverageTucker Carlson • 48 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Tucker Carlson

93%flagged-word coverage
202 attributed words100% of attributed speech69% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Biased Writer Voice-29.1 ptsWriter: 32.1%Tucker Carlson: 3.0%3.0%Quote-first Misdirection-14.4 ptsWriter: 14.4%Tucker Carlson: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+3.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tucker Carlson: 3.0%3.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.3 ptsWriter: 2.3%Tucker Carlson: 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.