WHCA president vows ‘we will not be intimidated’ in dinner opening remarks 30%

By Molly Parks21%

7/24/2026, 5:27:22 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and False Dilemma, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 14.6% saturation with 62 hits. Analysis detected 633 faulty-reasoning hits from 424 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.7% and a BS Rank of 30% (15,464 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 70.70% of the article peer group.

Outgoing White House Correspondents’ Association President Weijia Jiang of CBS News greeted the crowd gathered for the redo WHCA dinner with a resilient message to start the evening, quipping that the members of the association “always have a follow-up.” 
“Tonight, our message is this: We are back. 
We will not be intimidated. 
We refuse to let violence have the final word,” Jiang said. 
White House pool members, Beltway reporters, and Trump administration officials all gathered in the Waldorf Astoria hotel on Friday evening for the second White House Correspondents’ Association dinner of 2026, as security is heightened at the event. 
The July dinner was scheduled in early June , with both the WHCA and President Donald Trump announcing they were determined not to let the gunman who attempted to breach the doors of the first dinner deter the group from celebrating the nation’s free press. 
“This announcement is a very good thing in that we cannot allow Lunatics to change our way of life, or even its scheduling,” Trump posted on Truth Social in June. 
Jiang was the first person to speak at Friday evening’s event, reflecting on the first late April dinner and the quick response of the reporters in the room, the security teams staffing the event, and the Trump administration officials present. 
She declared that the April night will “go down in history, and so will our response.” 
“You came as guests, but within moments you went to work,” Jiang said. 
“You shifted into reporters taking notes, capturing videos, streaming live, even as uncertainty and anxiety filled the room. 
Law enforcement ran toward danger. 
Administration officials met backstage to gather facts. 
And, Mr. 
President, you went straight to the podium in the White House briefing room to answer questions from journalists  all of us still in our gowns and tuxedos.” 
Jiang also struck a unifying tone to start the evening, echoing Trump’s words that “the ballroom was totally unified” on April 25, declaring, “three months later, it still is.” 
“Whatever may divide us, we stand together against political violence. 
An assassination attempt on our president is an attack on democracy itself,” Jiang said. 
Several administration officials are present at the Friday evening event, including Trump, War Secretary Pete Hegseth , Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick , and press secretary Karoline Leavitt . 
Later in the evening, the WHCA will give out awards and Trump will give remarks to the room. 
Christian Datoc and James Downs contributed to this report. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 2.2%Washington Examiner: 5.3%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.2%Washington Examiner: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 3.1%Washington Examiner: 3.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.2%Washington Examiner: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 10.6%Molly Parks: 0.4%Washington Examiner: 0.8%Hindsight Bias10.6%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 2.4%Washington Examiner: 2.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Molly Parks: 7.1%Washington Examiner: 8.6%Framing Effect5.2%This article: 2.6%Molly Parks: 0.7%Washington Examiner: 0.6%Loss Aversion2.6%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.5%Washington Examiner: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 13.4%Molly Parks: 2.3%Washington Examiner: 1.7%Optimism Bias13.4%This article: 1.2%Molly Parks: 0.8%Washington Examiner: 1.8%Pessimism Bias1.2%This article: 14.6%Molly Parks: 7.1%Washington Examiner: 9.3%Negativity Bias14.6%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 4.1%Washington Examiner: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.1%Washington Examiner: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 9.4%Molly Parks: 3.1%Washington Examiner: 2.2%In-Group Bias9.4%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.3%Washington Examiner: 1.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.1%Molly Parks: 2.7%Washington Examiner: 2.3%Halo Effect3.1%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.8%Washington Examiner: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.8%Molly Parks: 1.7%Washington Examiner: 1.7%Recency Bias6.8%This article: 5.7%Molly Parks: 0.2%Washington Examiner: 0.5%Primacy Effect5.7%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Molly Parks: 1.0%Washington Examiner: 2.3%Ad Hominem7.1%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.3%Washington Examiner: 1.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 4.2%Washington Examiner: 4.0%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 11.3%Molly Parks: 1.1%Washington Examiner: 3.0%False Dilemma11.3%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.5%Washington Examiner: 1.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 6.8%Molly Parks: 0.2%Washington Examiner: 0.2%Circular Reasoning6.8%This article: 3.8%Molly Parks: 2.2%Washington Examiner: 8.9%Hasty Generalization3.8%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 1.6%Washington Examiner: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 13.0%Molly Parks: 7.9%Washington Examiner: 6.0%Appeal to Emotion13.0%This article: 5.9%Molly Parks: 2.3%Washington Examiner: 1.8%Begging the Question5.9%This article: 10.6%Molly Parks: 2.7%Washington Examiner: 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.6%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 1.0%Washington Examiner: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.5%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.2%Molly Parks: 1.6%Washington Examiner: 2.2%Anecdotal4.2%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.5%Molly Parks: 1.2%Washington Examiner: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.5%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.6%Washington Examiner: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.8%Molly Parks: 4.0%Washington Examiner: 2.3%Unattributed Quote6.8%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 2.7%Washington Examiner: 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.3%Molly Parks: 3.7%Washington Examiner: 11.5%Biased Writer Voice3.3%This article: 3.3%Molly Parks: 2.8%Washington Examiner: 3.5%Indoctrination3.3%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.1%Washington Examiner: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 1.8%Washington Examiner: 4.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Molly Parks: 0.0%Washington Examiner: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

424 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers66%attributed speech146writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Weijia Jiang • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 45 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWeijia Jiang • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

100%flagged-word coverage
75 attributed words27% of attributed speech1.4% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Biased Writer Voice-1.4 ptsWriter: 1.4%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.