Newsmax⁠75%

Manhattan District Attorney Investigates Sexual Assault Claims Against Swalwell ⁠0%

By Caroline Valetkevitch⁠0%

4/12/2026, 3:00:27 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 14 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Framing Effect, and Representativeness Heuristic, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 28.2% saturation with 88 hits. Analysis detected 458 faulty-reasoning hits from 312 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office confirmed on Saturday that it is investigating sexual assault allegations against U.S. 
Representative Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat and a leading candidate for governor of the state. 
The San Francisco Chronicle on Friday reported that a woman who previously worked in Swalwell’s district office accused him of two nonconsensual sexual encounters, one while she was employed by him in 2019 and another in 2024 after she had left his staff. 
She told CNN that he raped her during the 2024 encounter in a New York City hotel. 
Swalwell has denied the accusations as "absolutely false" and vowed to fight them, but several leading Democrats have urged him to end his bid for governor. 
The woman, whom the Chronicle and CNN did not name, was quoted as saying she had been too intoxicated on both occasions to consent, according to the report. 
CNN also reported that three other women accused Swalwell of sexual misconduct. 
The Manhattan district attorney's office urged anyone with knowledge of the allegations to contact its special victims division. 
Representative Anna Paulina Luna, a Florida Republican, posted on X that she planned to file a motion to expel Swalwell from Congress. 
Appearing on Fox News, Luna said on Saturday that it would be unacceptable for Swalwell to end his gubernatorial bid yet remain in Congress. 
She said she would file the disciplinary motion next week. 
In his denial, Swalwell noted that the allegations come ahead of the June primary in the governor's race. 
In a large field of candidates from multiple parties, Swalwell has been widely considered one of the leading contenders to advance to a runoff in California's nonpartisan voting for governor. 
The top two finishers in June's primary will advance to the general election in November, even if they are from the same party. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 3.4%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 26.6%Caroline Valetkevitch: 7.6%Newsmax: 3.2%Availability Heuristic26.6%This article: 9.6%Caroline Valetkevitch: 2.4%Newsmax: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic9.6%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 3.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 13.1%Caroline Valetkevitch: 3.3%Newsmax: 11.0%Framing Effect13.1%This article: 7.7%Caroline Valetkevitch: 1.9%Newsmax: 0.8%Loss Aversion7.7%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 4.1%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 2.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.3%Caroline Valetkevitch: 4.4%Newsmax: 10.3%Negativity Bias9.3%This article: 5.8%Caroline Valetkevitch: 5.8%Newsmax: 3.0%Self-Serving Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Caroline Valetkevitch: 1.8%Newsmax: 2.7%In-Group Bias7.1%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 1.9%Newsmax: 1.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 2.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 1.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 2.4%Newsmax: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 1.4%Newsmax: 1.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 4.8%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 7.7%Caroline Valetkevitch: 3.8%Newsmax: 2.4%False Dilemma7.7%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 1.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.8%Caroline Valetkevitch: 1.9%Newsmax: 4.2%Hasty Generalization3.8%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 7.1%Caroline Valetkevitch: 1.8%Newsmax: 0.5%Bandwagon7.1%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 6.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 5.8%Caroline Valetkevitch: 2.9%Newsmax: 3.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.8%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.9%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 1.4%Newsmax: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 28.2%Caroline Valetkevitch: 7.1%Newsmax: 3.1%Unattributed Quote28.2%This article: 5.4%Caroline Valetkevitch: 2.7%Newsmax: 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection5.4%This article: 9.6%Caroline Valetkevitch: 2.4%Newsmax: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice9.6%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 1.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Caroline Valetkevitch: 0.0%Newsmax: 1.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

312 words analyzed.

Speakers

6speakers58%attributed speech131writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageManhattan district attorney’s office • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageSan Francisco Chronicle • 43 words • 100.0% coverageCNN • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageCNN • 12 words • 0.0% coverageManhattan district attorney's office • 18 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Paulina Luna • 22 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Paulina Luna • 24 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Paulina Luna • 10 words • 0.0% coverageEric Swalwell • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

CNN

100%flagged-word coverage
29 attributed words16% of attributed speech76% writer coverage
0%30.0%60.0%Quote-first Misdirection+58.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%CNN: 58.6%58.6%Unattributed Quote+37.2 ptsWriter: 21.4%CNN: 58.6%58.6%Biased Writer Voice-22.9 ptsWriter: 22.9%CNN: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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