Why the U.S.-Iran MOU Fell Apart ⁠5%

By Steve Hayes⁠18% Jonah Goldberg⁠33% Mike Nelson⁠40% David French⁠5%

7/24/2026, 7:00:00 AM

Topics: Podcast

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Availability Heuristic, and Recency Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 7.7% saturation with 7 hits. Analysis detected 41 faulty-reasoning hits from 91 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 20.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠5% (20,856 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 95.30% of the article peer group.

Steve Hayes is joined by Mike Nelson, David French, and Jonah Goldberg to discuss the latest round of strikes on Iran, the prospect of nuclear proliferation by the Saudi Arabian government, and President Volodymyr Zelensky’s shake-up of Ukraine’s military leadership. 
**The Agenda:** 
—What and why are we striking? 
—[Trump is losing MAGA](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/22/poll-maga-souring-iran-war-costs-trump-01006976) 
—[Dwindling U.S. weapons stockpiles](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/07/20/us-prepares-all-out-war-iran-sending-more-jets-middle-east/) 
—What will victory look like? 
—[Leadership change in Ukraine](https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/morning/ukraines-military-shake-up/) 
—[Nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia](https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/boilingfrogs/trump-saudi-nuclear-power-iran/) 
—NWYT:[Laura Loomer](https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/2079598033130414320? 
s=20) 
**Show notes:** 
—[Buy Dispatch merch](https://store.thedispatch.com/) 
—[New York Times: Both sides demand victory](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/09/world/middleeast/us-iran-talks-war.html) 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 3.0%The Dispatch: 4.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 2.2%The Dispatch: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Steve Hayes: 0.9%The Dispatch: 1.9%Availability Heuristic4.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.7%The Dispatch: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.9%The Dispatch: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 6.9%The Dispatch: 4.8%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.5%The Dispatch: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 1.5%The Dispatch: 1.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.5%The Dispatch: 2.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 7.7%Steve Hayes: 3.1%The Dispatch: 5.3%Negativity Bias7.7%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 1.2%The Dispatch: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 4.2%The Dispatch: 1.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.1%The Dispatch: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.4%Steve Hayes: 1.3%The Dispatch: 1.2%Recency Bias4.4%This article: 4.4%Steve Hayes: 0.1%The Dispatch: 0.3%Primacy Effect4.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.1%The Dispatch: 1.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.9%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 4.5%The Dispatch: 3.5%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 4.4%Steve Hayes: 0.5%The Dispatch: 2.4%False Dilemma4.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.4%The Dispatch: 6.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.4%Steve Hayes: 2.3%The Dispatch: 2.7%Appeal to Emotion4.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.7%The Dispatch: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 3.5%The Dispatch: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.2%The Dispatch: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.2%Steve Hayes: 0.2%The Dispatch: 1.1%Anecdotal2.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 1.6%The Dispatch: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.2%Steve Hayes: 1.6%The Dispatch: 1.3%Unattributed Quote2.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.4%The Dispatch: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 7.7%Steve Hayes: 3.2%The Dispatch: 7.1%Biased Writer Voice7.7%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Hayes: 0.0%The Dispatch: 1.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Steve Hayes: 4.0%The Dispatch: 5.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.3%

91 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.