Breitbart82%

Report: Reflecting Pool ‘Looking Good’ After Algae, Alleged Vandalism 63%

By Elizabeth Weibel68%

6/25/2026, 12:06:08 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Framing Effect, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Self-Serving Bias as the most egregious example at 20.8% saturation with 69 hits. Analysis detected 626 faulty-reasoning hits from 331 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 58.2% and a BS Rank of 63% (7,874 of 21,172 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 62.80% of the article peer group.

The Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool was seen “looking good” after reports of algae and alleged vandalism on the recently renovated pool, according to a report from TMZ. 
TMZ’s Charlie Cotton shared a video to X of the water in Washington, D.C.’s Reflecting Pool looking “blue” and cleaner. 
“The Reflecting Pool is looking magnificent this morning,” Cotton said in his video. 
“Like, if you’re going to say it looks crap when it looks crap, then you gotta say when it just looks like you want to swim in it.” 
Cotton pointed out that there was “better reflection when there’s no wind and it’s all still.” 
TMZ reported that “the clearer water makes a mysterious jagged line at the bottom of the pool more evident”: 
The clearer water makes a mysterious jagged line at the bottom of the pool more evident. 
This is what President Trump was apparently zeroing in on to make a case the Reflecting Pool was vandalized by a sharp object. 
Breitbart News’s Jasmyn Jordan reported that in a Truth Social post on June 20, President Donald Trump shared that the U.S. 
Park Police had “arrested multiple individuals for vandalizing” the Reflecting Pool. 
“Who would do such a thing?” 
Trump questioned. 
“These are very serious crimes having to do with the destruction of National Monuments. 
Years in jail! 
Work will begin immediately on its repair.” 
Trump has also previously highlighted in another Truth Social post how his administration has “cleaned, renovated, and beautified over 45 Monuments and Memorials, 28 Statues, and 22 Fountains” in the District of Columbia. 
While Trump admitted that his administration has had “some real problems with vandalism” occurring at the Reflecting Pool, he also noted that “the algae is 75% gone.” 
“The algae is 75% gone, and the condition will soon be completely remedied, and the area that was vandalized, fortunately, is just a small area of damage, and will be fixed early next week,” Trump continued. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 19.9%Elizabeth Weibel: 5.9%Breitbart: 4.5%Confirmation Bias19.9%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.5%Breitbart: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.8%Breitbart: 3.9%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 1.3%Breitbart: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.2%Breitbart: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 1.4%Breitbart: 3.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.8%Elizabeth Weibel: 12.4%Breitbart: 11.8%Framing Effect17.8%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.4%Breitbart: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 16.9%Elizabeth Weibel: 3.1%Breitbart: 3.6%Optimism Bias16.9%This article: 0.9%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.0%Breitbart: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.9%This article: 16.6%Elizabeth Weibel: 9.1%Breitbart: 9.8%Negativity Bias16.6%This article: 20.8%Elizabeth Weibel: 4.5%Breitbart: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias20.8%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.5%Breitbart: 1.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.3%Breitbart: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 3.7%Breitbart: 4.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 1.0%Breitbart: 2.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 5.3%Breitbart: 3.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.5%Breitbart: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.1%Breitbart: 1.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 3.9%Breitbart: 2.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.0%Breitbart: 1.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 5.4%Breitbart: 4.3%Appeal to Authority10.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.2%Breitbart: 2.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.7%Breitbart: 1.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.4%Breitbart: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.9%Elizabeth Weibel: 5.5%Breitbart: 8.0%Hasty Generalization6.9%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.4%Breitbart: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 1.6%Breitbart: 1.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.4%Elizabeth Weibel: 9.9%Breitbart: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion15.4%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 1.5%Breitbart: 1.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 17.8%Elizabeth Weibel: 5.9%Breitbart: 3.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)17.8%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.9%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.7%Breitbart: 1.0%Burden of Proof0.9%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 4.4%Breitbart: 2.5%Anecdotal6.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.5%Breitbart: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 15.7%Elizabeth Weibel: 1.8%Breitbart: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)15.7%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.5%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.2%Breitbart: 0.1%Middle Ground8.5%This article: 1.8%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.0%Personal Incredulity1.8%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.3%Breitbart: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 5.4%Breitbart: 2.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.7%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.8%Breitbart: 2.0%Quote-first Misdirection2.7%This article: 3.9%Elizabeth Weibel: 2.6%Breitbart: 7.8%Biased Writer Voice3.9%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 1.5%Breitbart: 2.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.0%Breitbart: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.3%Elizabeth Weibel: 5.9%Breitbart: 7.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias6.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Weibel: 0.6%Breitbart: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

331 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers69%attributed speech102writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageCharlie Cotton • 20 words • 0.0% coverageCharlie Cotton • 13 words • 100.0% coverageCharlie Cotton • 28 words • 0.0% coverageCharlie Cotton • 16 words • 0.0% coverageTMZ • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageJasmyn Jordan • 21 words • 100.0% coveragePark Police • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 6 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 2 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 3 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 36 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

98%flagged-word coverage
101 attributed words44% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Quote-first Misdirection-8.8 ptsWriter: 8.8%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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