New Footage of Fatal ICE Shooting in Texas Sparks Fresh Outrage 56%

By Malcolm Ferguson68%

7/9/2026, 9:23:34 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 36% saturation with 186 hits. Analysis detected 1,308 faulty-reasoning hits from 517 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 53.2% and a BS Rank of 56% (9,773 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 55.40% of the article peer group.

ICE agents shot and killed Lorenzo Salgado Araujo during a traffic stop in Texas on Tuesday morning. 
The agents stated that Salgado Araujo ignored verbal instructions and tried to ram their vehicle. 
Newly obtained footage puts a massive asterisk over those claims of self-defense. 
Surveillance video footage obtained by local outlet KHOU 11 shows the agents using their unmarked black SUV in an attempt to box in Salgado Araujo—initiating the conflict. 
Salgado Araujo makes a U-turn and heads in the other direction, and the agents then turn around to follow him. 
While the video did not capture the final moments of the shooting, separate footage showed no damage to the ICE vehicle, again weakening federal agents’ claim that Salgado Araujo tried to ram them. 
Video shows the moments before ICE shot a worker who lived for 35 years in the United States. 
It appears to show it was ICE attempting to initiate contact with his vehicle, not the worker attempting to "ram" ICE agents pic.twitter.com/Rv8KsHPf8J 
 David J. 
Bier (@David_J_Bier) July 9, 2026 
This discrepancy between the agents’ statements and the video footage has led to widespread calls for an independent investigation into Salgado Araujo’s death. 
Complicating that is the fact that the Department of Homeland Security detained the three other immigrant men in the car with Salgado Araujo—one of whom is Salgado Araujo’s brother—and is pressuring them to self-deport , preventing them from serving as witnesses. 
“What we have heard  is that they’re being told to sign voluntary departures. 
They’re being told to cooperate with the version [of events] that ICE has released,” Immigrant Families and Students in the Fight head Cesar Espinosa told Democracy Now! 
on Thursday. 
“Threatening them that they’re going to file charges if they don’t, or that they’re going to be deported expeditiously. 
And what we fear is that this is another effort from ICE to cover up something that they did very, very wrong.” 
ICE also arrested and detained witnesses after the killing of Alex Pretti in January. 
And this isn’t the first time it’s offered this version of events, either. 
When Marimar Martinez was shot five times in her car last year, ICE initially claimed that when the officers exited their vehicle, Martinez tried to run them over, “forcing the officers to fire defensively.” 
Bodycam footage showed no such thing, and her charges were dismissed. 
“They are being approached by unmarked vehicles. 
These vehicles, many times, often, start ramming vehicles, trying to get them to stop. 
And when people jump out, they’re not wearing insignia saying ‘federal agents’ or ‘ICE’ or a badge. 
They’re wearing, a lot of the times, plain clothing with vests that just say ‘police,’” Espinosa continued. 
“So, I cannot imagine the fear that a lot of people feel when they are being persecuted by somebody that’s unknown. 
And I ask people, you know, put yourself in these folks’ shoes and ask yourself: How would you react?” 
Salgado Araujo, a father of three U.S. citizens, had been in the United States for almost 35 years. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 35.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 5.6%newrepublic.com: 6.1%Confirmation Bias35.4%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 14.1%Malcolm Ferguson: 3.3%newrepublic.com: 3.3%Availability Heuristic14.1%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.4%newrepublic.com: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.6%newrepublic.com: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.0%newrepublic.com: 2.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.9%Malcolm Ferguson: 11.7%newrepublic.com: 8.0%Framing Effect8.9%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%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: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.8%newrepublic.com: 1.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.3%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.1%newrepublic.com: 2.5%Pessimism Bias8.3%This article: 36.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 17.7%newrepublic.com: 13.3%Negativity Bias36.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.0%newrepublic.com: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.9%newrepublic.com: 2.0%Fundamental Attribution Error5.2%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.4%newrepublic.com: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.7%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.2%newrepublic.com: 1.7%In-Group Bias3.7%This article: 5.2%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.1%newrepublic.com: 1.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 1.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.2%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: 2.5%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.6%newrepublic.com: 1.4%Recency Bias2.5%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: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 5.2%newrepublic.com: 3.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.5%newrepublic.com: 1.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 1.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 3.1%newrepublic.com: 3.4%Appeal to Authority1.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.6%newrepublic.com: 1.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 2.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.3%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 13.9%Malcolm Ferguson: 6.7%newrepublic.com: 8.0%Hasty Generalization13.9%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.7%newrepublic.com: 0.6%Bandwagon4.4%This article: 18.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 8.9%newrepublic.com: 6.3%Appeal to Emotion18.4%This article: 4.3%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.0%newrepublic.com: 1.8%Begging the Question4.3%This article: 5.2%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.4%newrepublic.com: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.2%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.1%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 6.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.4%newrepublic.com: 0.8%Burden of Proof6.4%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: 15.9%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.4%newrepublic.com: 2.0%Anecdotal15.9%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.7%Malcolm Ferguson: 1.7%newrepublic.com: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.7%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.0%newrepublic.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.1%newrepublic.com: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.2%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 7.9%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.5%newrepublic.com: 0.2%Special Pleading7.9%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.7%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 13.3%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.9%newrepublic.com: 2.3%Unattributed Quote13.3%This article: 6.6%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.1%newrepublic.com: 1.6%Quote-first Misdirection6.6%This article: 4.4%Malcolm Ferguson: 16.7%newrepublic.com: 15.5%Biased Writer Voice4.4%This article: 12.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 2.4%newrepublic.com: 2.4%Indoctrination12.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 10.3%newrepublic.com: 7.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.6%newrepublic.com: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Malcolm Ferguson: 0.3%newrepublic.com: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.2%

517 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers38%attributed speech320writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageICE agents • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageDavid J. Bier • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 14 words • 100.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 19 words • 100.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 7 words • 100.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 14 words • 100.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 17 words • 0.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 17 words • 0.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 21 words • 100.0% coverageCesar Espinosa • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Cesar Espinosa

100%flagged-word coverage
177 attributed words90% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Indoctrination+35.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Cesar Espinosa: 35.0%35.0%Unattributed Quote+30.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Cesar Espinosa: 30.5%30.5%Attempt to Sell a Product +15.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Cesar Espinosa: 15.3%15.3%Quote-first Misdirection-10.6 ptsWriter: 10.6%Cesar Espinosa: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-7.2 ptsWriter: 7.2%Cesar Espinosa: 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.