Raw Story⁠93%

‘Shockingly lazy’: Trump’s ‘bizarre nocturnal habits’ uncovered in new analysis ⁠71%

By Alexander Willis⁠88%

7/3/2026, 1:37:44 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and Unattributed Quote, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 46.3% saturation with 167 hits. Analysis detected 835 faulty-reasoning hits from 361 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 63.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠71% (6,492 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 70.30% of the article peer group.

President Donald Trump, who turned 80 last month, made only three public appearances in Washington before 11 a.m. during the entire month of June, according to a Daily Beast analysis of his official schedule and White House pool reports published Friday. 
The Daily Beast's review found that the president's “shockingly lazy” schedule listed "Executive Time" beginning at 8 a.m. for 26 of the 30 days in June. 
Public events, when they occurred, were typically scheduled for the afternoon or later. 
The same pattern held in the preceding months, the outlet found. 
Trump had "Executive Time" listed on his schedule 26 mornings in May and every day in April. 
He had public appearances before 11 a.m. on 11 days in May – four of them golf outings and three during a trip to China – and on six days in April. 
Scheduled morning events have also frequently run late or been canceled, according to the Daily Beast's review. 
A bill-signing set for June 10 at 10 a.m. was delayed more than an hour. 
A housing bill signing scheduled for noon on June 24 was called off entirely – Trump announced the cancellation in a social media post sent shortly before 11 a.m., after Republican lawmakers had already set up for the event in the Capitol's Statuary Hall. 
The White House did not directly address the Daily Beast's questions about the president's schedule or the meaning of "Executive Time." 
A spokesman sent the outlet a statement describing Trump as sharp and energetic and criticizing past media coverage of former President Joe Biden's health, without addressing Trump's own schedule. 
The Daily Beast also cited reporting from a recent book on the administration by New York Times journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, which described Trump as a "night owl" prone to staying up through the night on the phone or watching television. 
On one such occasion, the book recounted, "an aide checked on the President only to find that he was still asleep in the residence." 
The book also reported that Trump and first lady Melania Trump maintain separate bedrooms at the White House. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.0%Alexander Willis: 6.9%Rawstory: 8.4%Confirmation Bias3.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.9%Alexander Willis: 7.3%Rawstory: 4.5%Availability Heuristic11.9%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.0%Rawstory: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.6%Rawstory: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.6%Rawstory: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 21.9%Alexander Willis: 18.2%Rawstory: 13.4%Framing Effect21.9%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.9%Rawstory: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.8%Rawstory: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.6%Rawstory: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.7%Rawstory: 0.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 3.1%Rawstory: 2.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 33.5%Alexander Willis: 28.1%Rawstory: 21.6%Negativity Bias33.5%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.9%Rawstory: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.2%Rawstory: 2.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.9%Rawstory: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.1%Rawstory: 2.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.6%Rawstory: 1.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.4%Rawstory: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.6%Rawstory: 1.8%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.6%Rawstory: 0.7%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 3.7%Rawstory: 6.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.9%Rawstory: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.9%Alexander Willis: 4.3%Rawstory: 4.1%Appeal to Authority11.9%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.6%Rawstory: 3.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.1%Rawstory: 1.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.4%Alexander Willis: 8.9%Rawstory: 12.1%Hasty Generalization11.4%This article: 8.0%Alexander Willis: 1.7%Rawstory: 0.7%Red Herring8.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.1%Rawstory: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.8%Alexander Willis: 10.9%Rawstory: 9.2%Appeal to Emotion2.8%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.3%Rawstory: 1.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 12.2%Alexander Willis: 2.7%Rawstory: 3.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.2%This article: 8.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.6%Tu Quoque8.0%This article: 7.2%Alexander Willis: 2.2%Rawstory: 1.7%Burden of Proof7.2%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 8.9%Alexander Willis: 0.4%Rawstory: 0.5%Composition/Division8.9%This article: 46.3%Alexander Willis: 6.7%Rawstory: 3.9%Anecdotal46.3%This article: 5.8%Alexander Willis: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.3%No True Scotsman5.8%This article: 11.9%Alexander Willis: 2.8%Rawstory: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)11.9%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.4%Rawstory: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 13.9%Alexander Willis: 8.1%Rawstory: 5.3%Unattributed Quote13.9%This article: 10.0%Alexander Willis: 5.8%Rawstory: 4.1%Quote-first Misdirection10.0%This article: 2.8%Alexander Willis: 13.1%Rawstory: 15.7%Biased Writer Voice2.8%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.0%Rawstory: 3.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 7.0%Rawstory: 8.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.9%Rawstory: 1.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.4%Rawstory: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

361 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker24%attributed speech275writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageDaily Beast • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDaily Beast • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageDaily Beast • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Daily Beast

100%flagged-word coverage
86 attributed words100% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Quote-first Misdirection+26.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Daily Beast: 30.2%30.2%Unattributed Quote+21.5 ptsWriter: 8.7%Daily Beast: 30.2%30.2%Biased Writer Voice-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Daily Beast: 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.