KUER0%

ICE, Iran war drives the latest Salt Lake City No Kings protest against Trump 76%

By Hugo Rikard-Bell0%

3/28/2026, 6:14:01 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Framing Effect, and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 28.8% saturation with 225 hits. Analysis detected 1,248 faulty-reasoning hits from 781 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 67.7% and a BS Rank of 76% (5,319 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 75.70% of the article peer group.

On a bluebird Utah day, protesters flooded State Street during the latest No Kings march from Salt Lake City’s Washington Square Park to the Capitol. 
It was one of more than a dozen happening across the state. 
Hundreds of handmade signs shed light on protestors’ grievances with President Donald Trump’s administration, namely its handling of the SAVE America Act, Iran, the Epstein files and federal agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 
ICE, notably, has ramped up its presence with a warehouse purchase in Salt Lake City, intending to use it for detention. 
A number of veterans were out in force, too, easy to spot during the protest with hats that highlighted the war they fought in or their unit. 
“I'm happy to have served my country, but I'm ashamed of where we are today as a country,” said Navy veteran Russ Juillerat. 
He said he served in the Vietnam War and grew up in a traditional conservative family. 
He sees the same errors made in Vietnam being made in America's current war with Iran. 
“I'm not happy with our country because I served, I thought, for a good purpose. 
Years later, to be honest with you, I'm not so sure.” 
He said he started engaging in left-leaning politics a number of years ago after the GOP became “no longer anything that resembles the Republican Party” he grew up with. 
When asked if he felt there was still power to protest, he simply responded, “I hope it changes things.” 
Political historian and University of Utah associate professor Tim Chambless said it can. 
In his studies, he said, “you see a direct causal relationship” between protests and fundamental changes like the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s and the eventual end of the Vietnam War. 
However, he described the current administration as “tone deaf” to current protests because Trump is a lame duck president who can't seek another term. 
Chambless said he believes this has led him to act “almost like Louis the 14th,” the longest-reigning King of France known for exercising an absolute monarchy. 
Chambless believes every voice counts. 
“I just say that Americans need to speak out. 
They cannot be the bystander. 
They cannot rely upon others to protest for them.” 
Still, some No Kings attendees had reservations about being publicly identified. 
In the middle of the crowd, public school teacher Amy was dressed all in blue. 
She did not want to be identified for fear of her job. 
She held a sign expressing her concerns over Sen. 
Mike Lee’s SAVE America Act, a federal bill that requires proof of citizenship to vote. 
She said it threatens the voting rights of women and lower-income people. 
“My birth certificate doesn't match my passport name. 
It doesn't because I'm married, I changed my name,” she said. 
“I feel like they're trying to take the rights of people to vote away. 
If people have to pay for a passport, that feels like a poll tax; that it's going to make fewer people able to vote and have their voices heard.” 
The SAVE Act has passed the House and is stalled in the Senate. 
Three men who went by ‘Ox’, ‘H’ and ‘Jackie’ stood on the outskirts of the growing crowd in Washington Square. 
They wore red berets with hammer and sickle insignia, body armor and openly carried AR-15 style rifles. 
They did not give KUER their full names. 
Ox said the show of firearms was in “response to the extreme fascism that we’ve seen on full display” within the government. 
He pointed to places like Minnesota, where two civilians were shot and killed by ICE agents earlier this year. 
At last year’s inaugural No Kings protest, bystander Afa Ah Loo was fatally shot when a volunteer perceived a man who was openly carrying a rifle as a threat. 
When asked how their presence may be seen in light of the event’s history in Utah, the three men said they were peacefully exercising their Second Amendment rights. 
“We’re not here to fight,” Ox said. 
Reflecting on the power of protest, Ox and H were skeptical whether a No Kings march in Salt Lake City would really change the course of what they describe as a tyrannical government, but Jackie was more optimistic. 
“I think protests do work,” he said, but he thinks people don’t feel safe coming out because of what they see in the news. 
In his eyes, a big crowd like the one today is a good thing. 
“I feel like the more people that come to a protest, the less chance there is for people to be oppressed.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.8%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 3.1%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias8.8%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.2%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 3.5%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic6.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.2%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.5%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 2.9%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias4.1%This article: 10.6%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 7.2%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect10.6%This article: 4.4%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.4%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion4.4%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.1%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 8.8%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 4.0%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias8.8%This article: 2.9%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 2.4%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias2.9%This article: 28.8%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 5.4%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias28.8%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 4.2%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.9%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.4%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.6%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 2.0%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect3.5%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.9%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.1%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.1%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.5%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.7%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 3.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority3.7%This article: 3.7%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 2.8%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma3.7%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.2%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.1%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 4.7%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization3.1%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.3%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 1.8%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.5%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon1.8%This article: 7.9%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 6.7%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion7.9%This article: 3.1%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.9%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question3.1%This article: 13.2%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 2.2%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)13.2%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 1.5%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.5%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof1.5%This article: 3.6%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature3.6%This article: 1.8%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division1.8%This article: 5.9%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 3.2%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal5.9%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.9%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 2.3%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.9%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.3%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.3%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.1%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.2%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote6.1%This article: 4.4%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection4.4%This article: 5.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 2.6%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice5.0%This article: 3.6%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.1%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination3.6%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 1.4%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hugo Rikard-Bell: 0.3%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

781 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers60%attributed speech312writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageRuss Juillerat • 23 words • 0.0% coverageRuss Juillerat • 16 words • 0.0% coverageRuss Juillerat • 16 words • 0.0% coverageRuss Juillerat • 15 words • 0.0% coverageRuss Juillerat • 11 words • 0.0% coverageRuss Juillerat • 29 words • 0.0% coverageRuss Juillerat • 19 words • 100.0% coverageTim Chambless • 13 words • 0.0% coverageTim Chambless • 32 words • 0.0% coverageTim Chambless • 24 words • 0.0% coverageTim Chambless • 26 words • 0.0% coverageTim Chambless • 5 words • 100.0% coverageTim Chambless • 9 words • 100.0% coverageTim Chambless • 5 words • 100.0% coverageTim Chambless • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageAmy • 12 words • 100.0% coverageAmy • 9 words • 100.0% coverageAmy • 15 words • 0.0% coverageAmy • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAmy • 8 words • 0.0% coverageAmy • 11 words • 0.0% coverageAmy • 14 words • 0.0% coverageAmy • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageOx • 22 words • 0.0% coverageOx • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageOx • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageJackie • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJackie • 14 words • 0.0% coverageJackie • 21 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jackie

100%flagged-word coverage
59 attributed words13% of attributed speech81% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-12.5 ptsWriter: 12.5%Jackie: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-10.9 ptsWriter: 10.9%Jackie: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-2.6 ptsWriter: 2.6%Jackie: 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.