The Blaze⁠80%

John Doyle explains why we’ll end up missing Lindsey Graham ⁠78%

By BlazeTV Staff⁠87%

7/15/2026, 11:03:46 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Right Leaning Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 32.8% saturation with 179 hits. Analysis detected 1,584 faulty-reasoning hits from 546 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 69.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠78% (4,648 of 20,514 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 77.30% of the article peer group.

Lindsey Graham’s death marks the end of one of the most consequential — and controversial — careers in modern Republican politics. 
And while many conservatives loved to hate him while he was alive, BlazeTV host John Doyle believes that few knew how much the longtime South Carolina senator actually accomplished for their movement. 
“You may remember September 27, 2018. 
If you were online that day, you already remember exactly where you were. 
Brett Kavanaugh is being potentially confirmed to be a Supreme Court justice, and it’s not looking good,” Doyle begins. 
“He’s dying on live television. 
There are accusations from that woman ... doing the crocodile tears, and we all had to just pretend that OK, yes, believe all women. 
So true. 
Republicans on the committee are looking like hostages,” he recalls. 
“And then the man the Tea Party spent, like, a decade trying to primary just leans into his microphone and has a little bit of a patriot go-off moment. 
He says, ‘This is the most unethical sham since I’ve been in politics,’” he continues, referencing Lindsey Graham. 
“Conservative media started cutting, you know, Lindsey Graham 2.0 highlight reels. 
Literally, in my first-ever video in October 2018, I covered this story, and I called this man based,” he adds. 
Kavanaugh then got confirmed, despite the slogan “Believe all women” being repeated by feminists all over the country. 
“In a room on camera with a Supreme Court seat on the line, the senator willing to torch 20 years of his kind of, like, bipartisan reputation — that was Lindsey Graham,” Doyle says. 
“Everyone on that committee had the same microphone, and one guy chose to use it, and that was Lindsey Graham,” he adds. 
Not only that, but for the last two years, Graham chaired the Senate Budget Committee. 
“Graham was the gatekeeper. 
He shepherded the big, beautiful bill through unanimous Democrat opposition and some genuinely ugly, you know, GOP infighting. 
Then came this year’s reconciliation package, funding immigration enforcement, literally the largest increase in funding ever for the rest of Trump’s term. 
And sitting on his desk the day he died,” Doyle explains. 
“All of that was moving. 
All of that was in progress, and it was because of this guy’s effort,” he says. 
“Who’s going to chair that committee now? 
Who’s going to fill that vacuum? 
Is it going to be somebody who’s actually more effective? 
Is it going to be somebody who’s more loyal to Trump and his agenda and his party?” 
While Doyle admits there are many things he did not agree with Graham on, he does believe the senator was effective and ultimately stood for America. 
And those laughing about his passing don’t realize why they’re actually laughing. 
“You know, it’s easy to piss on a guy’s grave. 
It’s harder to be so effective that you can inspire people to want to piss on your grave,” Doyle says. 
“That’s my point.” 
Want more from John Doyle? 
To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.2%BlazeTV Staff: 8.1%Blaze Media: 5.5%Confirmation Bias9.2%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%BlazeTV Staff: 5.2%Blaze Media: 3.1%Availability Heuristic2.4%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.7%Blaze Media: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.7%Blaze Media: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%BlazeTV Staff: 3.0%Blaze Media: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias4.0%This article: 14.7%BlazeTV Staff: 10.6%Blaze Media: 9.7%Framing Effect14.7%This article: 8.2%BlazeTV Staff: 0.3%Blaze Media: 0.4%Loss Aversion8.2%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.1%Blaze Media: 1.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%BlazeTV Staff: 1.4%Blaze Media: 1.5%Pessimism Bias3.5%This article: 32.8%BlazeTV Staff: 9.3%Blaze Media: 9.6%Negativity Bias32.8%This article: 12.5%BlazeTV Staff: 1.3%Blaze Media: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias12.5%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.1%Blaze Media: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 11.0%BlazeTV Staff: 4.8%Blaze Media: 2.8%In-Group Bias11.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 2.6%Blaze Media: 1.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 9.5%BlazeTV Staff: 6.8%Blaze Media: 2.7%Halo Effect9.5%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.3%Blaze Media: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.5%Blaze Media: 1.1%Recency Bias2.0%This article: 3.7%BlazeTV Staff: 1.2%Blaze Media: 0.5%Primacy Effect3.7%This article: 2.2%BlazeTV Staff: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias2.2%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.5%Blaze Media: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 2.1%Blaze Media: 1.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.7%BlazeTV Staff: 3.7%Blaze Media: 3.8%Appeal to Authority3.7%This article: 8.8%BlazeTV Staff: 2.7%Blaze Media: 2.3%False Dilemma8.8%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.0%Blaze Media: 1.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.5%BlazeTV Staff: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.5%This article: 12.3%BlazeTV Staff: 13.4%Blaze Media: 9.1%Hasty Generalization12.3%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.7%Blaze Media: 0.8%Red Herring0.0%This article: 8.2%BlazeTV Staff: 1.8%Blaze Media: 0.9%Bandwagon8.2%This article: 24.5%BlazeTV Staff: 12.2%Blaze Media: 8.0%Appeal to Emotion24.5%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.8%Blaze Media: 1.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 4.9%BlazeTV Staff: 2.9%Blaze Media: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.9%This article: 4.4%BlazeTV Staff: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.2%Tu Quoque4.4%This article: 2.2%BlazeTV Staff: 1.3%Blaze Media: 1.0%Burden of Proof2.2%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 1.1%Blaze Media: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 4.8%BlazeTV Staff: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.3%Composition/Division4.8%This article: 14.8%BlazeTV Staff: 7.4%Blaze Media: 2.6%Anecdotal14.8%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 10.8%BlazeTV Staff: 2.0%Blaze Media: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)10.8%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.7%Blaze Media: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.8%Blaze Media: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.8%BlazeTV Staff: 2.9%Blaze Media: 2.7%Unattributed Quote6.8%This article: 2.9%BlazeTV Staff: 2.8%Blaze Media: 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection2.9%This article: 17.2%BlazeTV Staff: 11.4%Blaze Media: 10.5%Biased Writer Voice17.2%This article: 13.0%BlazeTV Staff: 7.4%Blaze Media: 4.6%Indoctrination13.0%This article: 0.0%BlazeTV Staff: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 25.5%BlazeTV Staff: 9.2%Blaze Media: 7.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias25.5%This article: 9.2%BlazeTV Staff: 6.6%Blaze Media: 2.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…9.2%

546 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers85%attributed speech83writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
John Doyle • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 32 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 13 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 19 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 5 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 29 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 18 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 11 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 34 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 4 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 11 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 5 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 7 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 26 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 10 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 20 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Doyle • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageBlazeTV • 45 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

BlazeTV

100%flagged-word coverage
45 attributed words9.7% of attributed speech82% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Indoctrination+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%BlazeTV: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +94.0 ptsWriter: 6.0%BlazeTV: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-26.5 ptsWriter: 26.5%BlazeTV: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -21.7 ptsWriter: 21.7%BlazeTV: 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.