How Trump Decided to Go to War with Iran, with Jonathan Swan ⁠10%

By Aaron MacLean⁠89%

7/21/2026, 9:01:58 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 3 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 51.4% saturation with 36 hits. Analysis detected 84 faulty-reasoning hits from 70 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠10% (19,688 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 90.00% of the article peer group.

Jonathan Swan, a White House reporter for *The New York Times*, joins *School of War* to discuss the reporting behind his new book, *Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump*, co-authored with Maggie Haberman. 
How does Donald Trump make geopolitical decisions? 
What drove him to join Israel’s war against Iran? 
How has his thinking on Ukrai… 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 6.8%The FP: 5.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 8.5%The FP: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 2.3%The FP: 4.1%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 2.6%The FP: 1.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 3.5%The FP: 1.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.5%The FP: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.1%Aaron MacLean: 18.7%The FP: 9.5%Framing Effect17.1%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 2.6%The FP: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.3%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 5.3%The FP: 1.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 9.1%The FP: 10.8%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 1.9%The FP: 1.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 2.8%The FP: 2.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 1.9%The FP: 2.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 51.4%Aaron MacLean: 21.0%The FP: 3.2%Appeal to Authority51.4%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 6.7%The FP: 2.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 5.5%The FP: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 1.5%The FP: 8.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 1.2%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 8.8%The FP: 5.8%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 3.8%The FP: 1.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 5.7%The FP: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 3.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.0%The FP: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 0.9%The FP: 2.5%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 4.6%The FP: 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 15.4%The FP: 15.0%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 1.5%The FP: 2.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 3.4%The FP: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Aaron MacLean: 3.4%The FP: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 51.4%Aaron MacLean: 13.9%The FP: 4.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…51.4%

70 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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