Townhall⁠86%

The United States Is Still Talking to Iran After Big Strikes ⁠52%

By Cameron Arcand⁠75%

7/9/2026, 6:04:58 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Confirmation Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 41.6% saturation with 251 hits. Analysis detected 1,478 faulty-reasoning hits from 604 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 51.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠52% (10,219 of 21,170 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 51.70% of the article peer group.

Trump Administration Threatens Oregon Leaders With Criminal Prosecution for Letting Illega... 
More Platner Grappling in the Press; An ICE Shooting Has the Bulwark Gang... 
Democrats Unanimously Opposed the Working Families Tax Cuts. 
Now They're Trying to Take... 
250 Years After Independence, New Index Asks Whether Government Is Stifling America's Char... 
How Low Can She Go? 
As Prosecutors Lay Out Case Against Tyler Robinson,... 
Here's the Problem With Modern-Day Immigration, According to Milton Friedman 
It's Not Just Democrats Who Have Lost Faith in the Free Market 
NH Casino Owner Pleads Guilty to Stealing $255K in COVID-19 Relief Funds 
Boston Accounting Firm Owner Sentenced in $1.6 Million Under-the-Table Pay Scheme 
West Virginia Woman Pleads Guilty to Stealing $160K From Disabled Veteran 
This Canadian Woman Just Exposed the Fatal Flaws of Universal Healthcare 
Boston Store Owner Sentenced After $7 Million SNAP Fraud Scheme 
Susan Collins Already Defeated One of Her Possible Democrat Challengers 
Talarico Has Another Tenet of His Fake Christianity 
Technical talks between the United States and Iran are ongoing despite recent strikes and apparent rising tensions. 
A United States official confirmed to Townhall that “the United States is still committed to finding a resolution, and technical talks continue,” adding that “Iran can never possess a nuclear weapon.” 
The official added that the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the two countries last month “is performance-based, and Iran’s actions constitute failed performance at an unacceptable level.” 
NEW: @townhallcom can independently confirm other reporting that Iran talks are ongoing despite recent strikes. 
From a U.S. official: 
“President Trump made his feelings very clear yesterday in no uncertain terms. 
Iran’s attacks on these innocent vessels are acts of terrorism. 
… 
— Cameron Arcand (@cameron_arcand) July 9, 2026 
Technical talks with the Iranians continue, a U.S. official tells me @NewsNation 
"The United States is still committed to finding a resolution, and technical talks continue. 
Iran can never possess a nuclear weapon." 
— Libbey Dean (@LibbeyDean_) July 9, 2026 
“ President Trump made his feelings very clear yesterday in no uncertain terms,” the official continued, as the president suggested the U.S. just “finish the job” and referred to Iranian negotiators as “scum” who are difficult to work with. 
How Low Can She Go? 
As Prosecutors Lay Out Case Against Tyler Robinson, Owens Offers to Help Defense 
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION 
“Iran’s attacks on these innocent vessels are acts of terrorism,” the official added. 
In response to cargo ship strikes by Iran in the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. unleashed strikes on roughly 170 “Iranian military targets” on Tuesday and Wednesday. 
“U.S. forces struck approximately 90 Iranian military targets including air defense systems, coastal surveillance assets, missile and drone storage sites, naval capabilities, and military logistics infrastructure along Iran’s coastline,” U.S. 
Central Command wrote on X Wednesday night, stating that “the latest strikes follow successful execution of offensive strikes in Iran the night before.” 
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Townhall's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? 
Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. 
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership. 
Platner Is a Hilarious Symptom of Progressive Failure 
Mamdani's Embittered Fourth of July Rant to America 
Democrats Unanimously Opposed the Working Families Tax Cuts. 
Now They're Trying to Take Credit for It. 
Scott Jennings Reveals the Real Reason Democrats Turned on Graham Platner 
Trending on Townhall Videos 
State Dept Responds Accordingly to News of Mamdani Official's Plan to Meet With Iran's UN Ambassador 
Judge Sparkle Rejects Court Order Dismissing Her Ruling Against Election Integrity Measure 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.7%Cameron Arcand: 3.0%Townhall: 5.2%Confirmation Bias14.7%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.3%Cameron Arcand: 2.3%Townhall: 2.7%Availability Heuristic11.3%This article: 7.1%Cameron Arcand: 0.4%Townhall: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic7.1%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.1%Townhall: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.3%Cameron Arcand: 4.0%Townhall: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias6.3%This article: 8.6%Cameron Arcand: 15.2%Townhall: 11.3%Framing Effect8.6%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.3%Townhall: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.6%Townhall: 0.3%Status Quo Bias6.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 1.1%Townhall: 1.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.8%Cameron Arcand: 0.7%Townhall: 1.9%Pessimism Bias0.8%This article: 41.6%Cameron Arcand: 14.2%Townhall: 13.5%Negativity Bias41.6%This article: 2.2%Cameron Arcand: 5.9%Townhall: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias2.2%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.7%Townhall: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.7%Townhall: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Cameron Arcand: 3.2%Townhall: 4.6%In-Group Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 1.1%Townhall: 3.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.9%Townhall: 1.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.8%Townhall: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.6%Cameron Arcand: 2.0%Townhall: 1.3%Recency Bias3.6%This article: 3.3%Cameron Arcand: 0.5%Townhall: 0.6%Primacy Effect3.3%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Cameron Arcand: 3.9%Townhall: 5.0%Ad Hominem10.4%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.3%Townhall: 2.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 14.2%Cameron Arcand: 4.3%Townhall: 4.5%Appeal to Authority14.2%This article: 3.8%Cameron Arcand: 2.0%Townhall: 2.0%False Dilemma3.8%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.1%Townhall: 1.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 4.5%Cameron Arcand: 3.1%Townhall: 9.1%Hasty Generalization4.5%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 1.6%Townhall: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.5%Cameron Arcand: 0.5%Townhall: 1.3%Bandwagon3.5%This article: 18.7%Cameron Arcand: 10.9%Townhall: 11.3%Appeal to Emotion18.7%This article: 10.6%Cameron Arcand: 3.0%Townhall: 2.3%Begging the Question10.6%This article: 4.5%Cameron Arcand: 3.1%Townhall: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.5%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 1.0%Townhall: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.5%Cameron Arcand: 0.4%Townhall: 1.5%Burden of Proof2.5%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.8%Cameron Arcand: 0.8%Townhall: 1.4%Anecdotal1.8%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.2%Townhall: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 18.0%Cameron Arcand: 2.4%Townhall: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)18.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.6%Townhall: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 10.1%Cameron Arcand: 5.8%Townhall: 3.4%Unattributed Quote10.1%This article: 10.9%Cameron Arcand: 5.0%Townhall: 3.0%Quote-first Misdirection10.9%This article: 5.1%Cameron Arcand: 7.7%Townhall: 16.2%Biased Writer Voice5.1%This article: 7.3%Cameron Arcand: 3.1%Townhall: 5.6%Indoctrination7.3%This article: 0.0%Cameron Arcand: 0.0%Townhall: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.8%Cameron Arcand: 6.2%Townhall: 13.9%Politically Right Leaning Bias1.8%This article: 7.3%Cameron Arcand: 3.7%Townhall: 5.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…7.3%

604 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers9.6%attributed speech546writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageSusan Collins • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageCameron Arcand • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageLibbey Dean • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageCentral Command • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageScott Jennings • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Scott Jennings

100%flagged-word coverage
11 attributed words19% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Quote-first Misdirection-12.1 ptsWriter: 12.1%Scott Jennings: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-9.9 ptsWriter: 9.9%Scott Jennings: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-8.1 ptsWriter: 8.1%Scott Jennings: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -8.1 ptsWriter: 8.1%Scott Jennings: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-5.7 ptsWriter: 5.7%Scott Jennings: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -2.0 ptsWriter: 2.0%Scott Jennings: 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.