Insecure President Insists His Poorly Attended Rally Was “Packed” ⁠74%

By Malcolm Ferguson⁠72%

6/25/2026, 6:44:53 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Confirmation Bias, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 59.9% saturation with 130 hits. Analysis detected 708 faulty-reasoning hits from 217 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 65.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠74% (5,524 of 20,515 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.10% of the article peer group.

President Trump, who definitely has not read all of the media coverage of the weak attendance at his rally on the National Mall on Wednesday night, insists that the event was “packed to the brim.” 
“The Crowd was incredible last night, packed to the brim — At least 45,000 people were there, with a huge Television and online audience. 
I wish we were able to have an even larger area, which we will be able to do on July 4th when I’ll be speaking again,” the president wrote Thursday afternoon on Truth Social. 
“The airplane flyovers and music were fantastic. 
Everybody stayed right until the end of my Speech because they loved hearing about a truly successful America.” 
Images of the rally, which kicked off the Great American State Fair, show that there was ample space to move around. 
Footage also shows that multiple people left right in the middle of Trump’s speech and did not stay “right until the end” as the president claimed. 
At least one person fell asleep. 
Trump has long enjoyed inflating his crowd numbers. 
He has claimed his July 4, 2019 speech and his infamous J6 rally in 2021 were both bigger than the 250,000-person March on Washington in 1963. 
Neither was true. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 20.3%Malcolm Ferguson: 5.9%newrepublic.com: 6.1%Confirmation Bias20.3%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.6%newrepublic.com: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 12.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 3.1%newrepublic.com: 3.3%Availability Heuristic12.4%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.7%newrepublic.com: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.2%newrepublic.com: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Malcolm Ferguson: 12.7%newrepublic.com: 8.0%Framing Effect4.1%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.4%newrepublic.com: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.1%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.2%newrepublic.com: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 8.3%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.7%newrepublic.com: 1.0%Optimism Bias8.3%This article: 1.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.2%newrepublic.com: 2.5%Pessimism Bias1.4%This article: 50.7%Malcolm Ferguson: 19.5%newrepublic.com: 13.0%Negativity Bias50.7%This article: 16.1%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.1%newrepublic.com: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias16.1%This article: 19.8%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.1%newrepublic.com: 1.9%Fundamental Attribution Error19.8%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.4%newrepublic.com: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.3%newrepublic.com: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.1%newrepublic.com: 1.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.2%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.6%newrepublic.com: 1.3%Halo Effect3.2%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.4%newrepublic.com: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.7%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.8%newrepublic.com: 1.4%Recency Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.4%newrepublic.com: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 19.8%Malcolm Ferguson: 5.9%newrepublic.com: 3.7%Ad Hominem19.8%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.7%newrepublic.com: 1.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 3.1%newrepublic.com: 3.4%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.7%newrepublic.com: 1.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.6%newrepublic.com: 2.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.4%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 12.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 7.0%newrepublic.com: 7.9%Hasty Generalization12.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.7%newrepublic.com: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 14.3%Malcolm Ferguson: 9.4%newrepublic.com: 6.3%Appeal to Emotion14.3%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.3%newrepublic.com: 1.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.3%newrepublic.com: 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.1%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 1.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.6%newrepublic.com: 0.9%Burden of Proof1.4%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 59.9%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.7%newrepublic.com: 2.0%Anecdotal59.9%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.7%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.9%newrepublic.com: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.7%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.2%newrepublic.com: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 11.1%Malcolm Ferguson: 3.3%newrepublic.com: 2.2%Unattributed Quote11.1%This article: 11.1%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.4%newrepublic.com: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection11.1%This article: 47.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 17.4%newrepublic.com: 15.2%Biased Writer Voice47.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.8%newrepublic.com: 2.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 11.1%newrepublic.com: 7.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.7%newrepublic.com: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.3%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

217 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker38%attributed speech134writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 24 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 34 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDonald Trump • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Donald Trump

59%flagged-word coverage
83 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%40.0%80.0%Biased Writer Voice-76.1 ptsWriter: 76.1%Donald Trump: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+28.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Donald Trump: 28.9%28.9%Quote-first Misdirection+28.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Donald Trump: 28.9%28.9%

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.