MS NOW94%

Hunter Biden and Candace Owens find common ground in conspiracy theories 57%

By Anthony L. Fisher0%

5/23/2026, 10:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Ad Hominem, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 56.2% saturation with 514 hits. Analysis detected 2,868 faulty-reasoning hits from 914 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 54.3% and a BS Rank of 57% (8,902 of 20,447 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 56.50% of the article peer group.

Watching Hunter Biden’s nearly two-hour interview with the antisemitic megastar podcaster Candace Owens was, as you might expect, not an intellectually rewarding experience. 
But that’s not to say it didn’t have some accidentally illuminating moments. 
Despite Owens’ considerable talent for monetizing content that appeals to bigots and conspiracy theorists  a significant portion of the MAGA movement  she is not well-read, appears to have no principles that can’t be jettisoned at a moment’s notice and her body of work serves as further evidence backing up the scientifically documented link between racism and stupidity. 
Hunter Biden, it’s hard to believe these days, was just a couple of years ago a very influential person by virtue of nothing more than being President Joe Biden’s son. 
He was a key voice in the Biden inner circle and infamously urged his father to continue his doomed re-election campaign even after his disastrous debate performance. 
That was absurdly inept counsel that proved to be a hugely important factor in returning Trump to office. 
Hunter Biden’s comeback tour has him playing the self-pitying sad-sack, whining to Owens that people think he’s just some “ne’er do well who never did anything in their life.” 
But that wasn’t the only way Hunter Biden was of great value to the Trump campaign. 
Although multiple investigations into his foreign business affairs found no evidence that the elder Biden did anything wrong, Trump and MAGA portrayed the Biden son’s alleged attempts at low-level influence-peddling as the ultimate examples in self-dealing and government corruption. 
People including Owens often said Hunter Biden was emblematic of the “Biden crime family.” 
(Owens also said in 2021 that Joe Biden was “an illegitimate President” and a “true dictator.”) 
What a difference a few years makes. 
The current president and his family have enriched themselves to the tune of billions of dollars since he’s been back in power, with investments in industries and cash-infusions from foreign entities with business considerations before the U.S. government. 
Meanwhile, Hunter Biden’s comeback tour has him playing the self-pitying sad-sack, whining to Owens that people think he’s just some “ne’er do well who never did anything in their life.” 
To his detractors, he says in the interview, “Go look at my goddamn resume!” 
He cited his Yale Law education and serving on “16 boards” among his accomplishments. 
Much of the excruciatingly boring first hour focused on Biden’s struggles with addiction, to which Owens showed great sympathy  even if she advertised the interview as being poised to “crack the internet.” 
(Get it?) 
Biden explained, convincingly, why the cocaine found at the White House in November 2023 was not his, and there was a lot of vaguely pious meandering chatter about finding salvation in his Catholic faith. 
Among the interview’s few revealing moments included Biden assailing what he described as Israel’s “wholesale murder of a population in Gaza.” 
That’s interesting, if only because there’s ample data showing that President Biden’s “bear hug” strategy (throwing the occasional criticism toward Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over his war on Gaza, but doing almost nothing to stem the brutality) was deeply unpopular among many Democratic constituencies and helped Trump win crucial swing states like Michigan. 
Hunter Biden had his father’s ear when he gave him the horrible advice to stay in the 2024 race, but did he ever tell his father what a tactical, political and moral mistake he was making by rubber-stamping Bibi’s endless war? 
If he did, he didn’t mention it to Owens. 
Owens, at one point, pointedly called out the Trump family’s shameless profiting off of the presidency, correctly comparing their galactic levels of corruption with the comparatively small potatoes of Hunter’s alleged chicanery. 
Then came the truly unhinged portions of the interview, where Biden praised Owens’ supposed bravery “for asking questions” about the official narrative surrounding her close friend Charlie Kirk’s assassination in September 2025. 
Although the alleged assassin reportedly confessed to the crime and left a trail of evidence suggesting the killing was politically motivated, Owens has for months speculated that there was instead a conspiracy involving the Israeli government and perhaps even Kirk’s widow. 
The whole thing has a professional wrestling kayfabe vibe to it. 
It’s worth noting that Owens’ rise was enabled by “anti-woke” critics of identity politics who nonetheless rarely skipped an opportunity to cite Owens’ identity for culture war street credibility. 
Bari Weiss praised her in a 2018 New York Times feature about the “intellectual dark web” as “a sharp, young, black conservative  a telegenic speaker with killer instincts,” and Christina Hoff Sommers wrote around that same time that Owens “is the pseudo-left’s worst nightmare: A formidable young black woman saying the emperor has no clothes.” 
Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire site also hosted Owens’ show for years. 
She has since fallen out of favor with that crowd because of her antisemitism, but the damage is done: She’s a massively influential right-wing media star with nearly six million YouTube subscribers. 
And now she appears to be, at least superficially, pals with Joe Biden’s son. 
The interview might not have “cracked the internet” as Owens promised, but there is something remarkable about the former Democratic president’s son chumming it up with an overt bigot, fabulist and purveyor of brain-rotting innuendos who relentlessly smeared him and his family for years. 
The whole thing has a professional wrestling kayfabe vibe to it  with heroes and villains regularly swapping roles amid performative shouting. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 20.9%Anthony L. Fisher: 15.1%MS NOW: 7.6%Confirmation Bias20.9%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.7%MS NOW: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Anthony L. Fisher: 1.6%MS NOW: 3.7%Availability Heuristic3.5%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.4%MS NOW: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 5.8%Anthony L. Fisher: 4.6%MS NOW: 1.3%Hindsight Bias5.8%This article: 3.7%Anthony L. Fisher: 5.0%MS NOW: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias3.7%This article: 10.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 12.3%MS NOW: 15.5%Framing Effect10.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.5%MS NOW: 2.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%Anthony L. Fisher: 4.9%MS NOW: 3.2%Pessimism Bias9.1%This article: 56.2%Anthony L. Fisher: 38.2%MS NOW: 19.3%Negativity Bias56.2%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.3%MS NOW: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 2.6%MS NOW: 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Anthony L. Fisher: 3.3%MS NOW: 3.5%In-Group Bias4.3%This article: 3.2%Anthony L. Fisher: 5.2%MS NOW: 2.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.2%This article: 10.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 2.9%MS NOW: 2.2%Halo Effect10.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 5.6%MS NOW: 1.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.1%MS NOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.6%Anthony L. Fisher: 1.2%MS NOW: 1.8%Recency Bias5.6%This article: 6.1%Anthony L. Fisher: 1.9%MS NOW: 0.6%Primacy Effect6.1%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 21.2%Anthony L. Fisher: 18.8%MS NOW: 4.8%Ad Hominem21.2%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 3.4%MS NOW: 1.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 19.6%Anthony L. Fisher: 7.5%MS NOW: 5.4%Appeal to Authority19.6%This article: 1.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 1.5%MS NOW: 2.2%False Dilemma1.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 2.9%MS NOW: 2.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 13.3%MS NOW: 8.1%Hasty Generalization8.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.5%MS NOW: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 11.8%Anthony L. Fisher: 18.1%MS NOW: 9.9%Appeal to Emotion11.8%This article: 3.5%Anthony L. Fisher: 3.5%MS NOW: 2.4%Begging the Question3.5%This article: 7.8%Anthony L. Fisher: 4.6%MS NOW: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.8%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 1.0%MS NOW: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 8.6%Anthony L. Fisher: 2.1%MS NOW: 1.0%Burden of Proof8.6%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.6%MS NOW: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 1.4%MS NOW: 2.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.9%MS NOW: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 3.3%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.7%MS NOW: 0.3%Personal Incredulity3.3%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 1.1%MS NOW: 1.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.5%Anthony L. Fisher: 2.4%MS NOW: 2.5%Unattributed Quote4.5%This article: 20.0%Anthony L. Fisher: 3.0%MS NOW: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection20.0%This article: 50.4%Anthony L. Fisher: 45.7%MS NOW: 14.2%Biased Writer Voice50.4%This article: 4.2%Anthony L. Fisher: 3.2%MS NOW: 2.1%Indoctrination4.2%This article: 1.5%Anthony L. Fisher: 18.9%MS NOW: 5.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias1.5%This article: 6.5%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.5%MS NOW: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias6.5%This article: 3.6%Anthony L. Fisher: 0.3%MS NOW: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.6%

914 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers3.3%attributed speech884writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 59 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageCandace Owens • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageHunter Biden • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 53 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 56 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Candace Owens

0%flagged-word coverage
16 attributed words53% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Biased Writer Voice-52.1 ptsWriter: 52.1%Candace Owens: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-20.7 ptsWriter: 20.7%Candace Owens: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -6.7 ptsWriter: 6.7%Candace Owens: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-4.6 ptsWriter: 4.6%Candace Owens: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-4.3 ptsWriter: 4.3%Candace Owens: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.7 ptsWriter: 3.7%Candace Owens: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-1.6 ptsWriter: 1.6%Candace Owens: 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…

Analysis

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