Mediaite70%

Dan Abrams Calls Out Liberals Who Have Attacked Supreme Court as Illegitimate: They Again Showed They’re ‘Not in the Tank!’ 49%

By Zoe Engels55%

6/30/2026, 10:24:17 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Framing Effect, and In-Group Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 29.1% saturation with 137 hits. Analysis detected 772 faulty-reasoning hits from 470 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 49.5% and a BS Rank of 49% (11,291 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 51.60% of the article peer group.

Mediaite founder Dan Abrams called out liberals who have attacked the Supreme Court as illegitimate after it dealt multiple blows to President Donald Trump's administration in recent days. 
In a 6-3 vote on Tuesday, the Supreme Court essentially voted to uphold the 14th Amendment, rejecting Trump's attempt to declare that children born to people in the U.S. temporarily or illegally are not citizens. 
The decision comes after the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 on Monday to uphold a Mississippi law that allows officials to count mail-in ballots received up to five days after Election Day if they are postmarked by Election Day. 
Republican-appointed Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the majority vote, among the three Democratic-appointed justices. 
On Tuesday's edition of The Dan Abrams Show on SiriusXM, Abrams  the founder of Mediaite  questioned whether "liberals who have been whining about how illegitimate the Supreme Court is" will now apologize, given the Supreme Court's continued penchant for handing down decisions which are unfavorable to the Trump administration. 
"Are we finally going to be able to admit that the court is a very conservative court, but it still has nuance, it still reviews these things case by case, they're not just going to defend Donald Trump at all costs?" 
Abrams asked. 
While he emphasized that people have the right to disagree with Supreme Court rulings, he slammed those who have undermined "the integrity of the court" and questioned its legitimacy. 
"That's the problem, that's what we've seen liberals doing again and again and again," he said. 
"And once again, the Supreme Court has shown that it's not in the tank! 
It's a very conservative court. 
I disagree with some of the rulings, I agree with others. 
In fact, I agree with a lot of the rulings they've issued in the last couple of days. 
That's not the question. 
The question is not, do you agree with every ruling? 
The question is...questioning the legitimacy of the court." 
Abrams equally criticized those on the far right who have been "whining" about the Supreme Court, such as those bemoaning Amy Coney Barrett's vote to uphold the Mississippi Law. 
"Oh stop it, this is what justices are supposed to do!" 
he said. 
"This nonsense about, 'Well you know the liberals all stick together'  the liberals are all sticking together because there is no question that what the President has been trying to do is radical. 
He is trying to overturn precedent. 
He is trying to change the rules. 
And so it's not surprising that the three liberals on the court are not going to be supportive of that radical effort to overturn precedent. 
That's not the liberals sticking together." 
Listen above, via SiriusXM. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.4%Zoe Engels: 4.3%Mediaite: 5.0%Confirmation Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.7%Mediaite: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.4%Zoe Engels: 4.4%Mediaite: 3.8%Availability Heuristic3.4%This article: 1.1%Zoe Engels: 0.1%Mediaite: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic1.1%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 1.2%Mediaite: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 1.2%Mediaite: 2.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 13.8%Zoe Engels: 5.4%Mediaite: 9.1%Framing Effect13.8%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.5%Mediaite: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.7%Mediaite: 1.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.5%Mediaite: 1.6%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 29.1%Zoe Engels: 8.6%Mediaite: 14.7%Negativity Bias29.1%This article: 8.7%Zoe Engels: 1.3%Mediaite: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias8.7%This article: 5.3%Zoe Engels: 1.4%Mediaite: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error5.3%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 13.4%Zoe Engels: 4.2%Mediaite: 2.1%In-Group Bias13.4%This article: 3.4%Zoe Engels: 5.3%Mediaite: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 2.8%Mediaite: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.4%Mediaite: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.8%Zoe Engels: 1.6%Mediaite: 2.3%Recency Bias3.8%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.4%Mediaite: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 6.4%Mediaite: 3.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 4.2%Mediaite: 1.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 1.2%Mediaite: 3.5%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 10.9%Zoe Engels: 4.5%Mediaite: 2.4%False Dilemma10.9%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 1.2%Mediaite: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.6%Zoe Engels: 12.9%Mediaite: 7.6%Hasty Generalization9.6%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 1.1%Mediaite: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.3%Zoe Engels: 2.7%Mediaite: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion2.3%This article: 8.1%Zoe Engels: 2.2%Mediaite: 1.6%Begging the Question8.1%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.6%Mediaite: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 1.8%Mediaite: 1.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 5.3%Zoe Engels: 0.5%Mediaite: 0.3%Composition/Division5.3%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.7%Mediaite: 3.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 5.3%Zoe Engels: 0.5%Mediaite: 0.1%No True Scotsman5.3%This article: 3.0%Zoe Engels: 1.8%Mediaite: 2.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 1.2%Mediaite: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.0%Mediaite: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.9%Mediaite: 3.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 2.1%Mediaite: 3.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 21.3%Zoe Engels: 10.7%Mediaite: 8.3%Biased Writer Voice21.3%This article: 6.2%Zoe Engels: 1.6%Mediaite: 1.6%Indoctrination6.2%This article: 0.0%Zoe Engels: 0.7%Mediaite: 2.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Zoe Engels: 0.6%Mediaite: 1.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias6.0%This article: 0.9%Zoe Engels: 0.2%Mediaite: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.9%

470 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker57%attributed speech203writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 51 words • 100.0% coverageDan Abrams • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageDan Abrams • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 5 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 18 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 4 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 10 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageDan Abrams • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 34 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 6 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 25 words • 0.0% coverageDan Abrams • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Dan Abrams

91%flagged-word coverage
267 attributed words100% of attributed speech62% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Biased Writer Voice-5.0 ptsWriter: 24.1%Dan Abrams: 19.1%19.1%Indoctrination-14.3 ptsWriter: 14.3%Dan Abrams: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -13.8 ptsWriter: 13.8%Dan Abrams: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.0 ptsWriter: 2.0%Dan Abrams: 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.