Raw Story⁠93%

Trump delivers first public post since troop deaths — with sanctions talk: 'Important!' ⁠80%

By Alexander Willis⁠88%

7/19/2026, 12:49:34 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Emotion, and Actor-Observer Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 47.8% saturation with 130 hits. Analysis detected 579 faulty-reasoning hits from 272 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 71.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠80% (4,214 of 20,921 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 79.90% of the article peer group.

President Donald Trump published his first post on Truth Social Sunday since the killing of at least two U.S. service members in Jordan, but rather than addressing the fallen soldiers, he issued a call for GOP lawmakers to amend a sanctions bill. 
“Republicans should add Iran to the Russian Sanctions Bill,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social. 
“That’s what Lindsey [Graham] wanted to do, and it was going to happen. 
IMPORTANT!!!” 
Trump’s statement comes amid a flare-up of violence in the Middle East, with the United States and Iran exchanging fire over the past week. 
On Friday, at least two U.S. service members were killed at the Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan from Iranian strikes, which were launched in response to U.S. strikes targeting Iran’s southern coast. 
U.S. 
Central Command announced the deaths of the two U.S. service members on Saturday, also announcing that a third U.S. service member was missing. 
Notably, Trump had issued no formal public statement on the deaths, though he did respond to questions Saturday from NewsNation's Hannah Brandt, who reached him by phone, and called the soldiers' deaths "a very sad thing." 
The Atlantic columnist Tom Nichols expressed outrage at this wording — and demanded a detailed explanation from Trump. 
"Two more deaths are not, as Trump calls them, merely a 'very sad thing,'" Nichols wrote. 
"Before one more member of the U.S. military is killed, he should return to the airwaves—and stand before Congress—to explain what he’s doing in Iran and how many more lives he’s willing to risk." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 6.7%Rawstory: 7.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.8%Alexander Willis: 7.1%Rawstory: 4.4%Availability Heuristic8.8%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.9%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: 0.4%Alexander Willis: 18.7%Rawstory: 13.7%Framing Effect0.4%This article: 12.5%Alexander Willis: 1.0%Rawstory: 0.4%Loss Aversion12.5%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.6%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: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.9%Alexander Willis: 3.1%Rawstory: 2.8%Pessimism Bias5.9%This article: 47.8%Alexander Willis: 27.6%Rawstory: 21.8%Negativity Bias47.8%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.6%Rawstory: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.2%Rawstory: 2.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 15.4%Alexander Willis: 0.9%Rawstory: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias15.4%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 2.2%Rawstory: 2.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 1.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.6%Rawstory: 0.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.5%Rawstory: 0.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.4%Alexander Willis: 2.8%Rawstory: 1.7%Recency Bias0.4%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.4%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: 3.8%Rawstory: 6.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.0%Rawstory: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.8%Alexander Willis: 4.1%Rawstory: 3.8%Appeal to Authority4.8%This article: 5.9%Alexander Willis: 2.5%Rawstory: 2.9%False Dilemma5.9%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.1%Rawstory: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 8.0%Rawstory: 11.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.8%Rawstory: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.2%Rawstory: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 18.8%Alexander Willis: 11.2%Rawstory: 9.2%Appeal to Emotion18.8%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 1.3%Rawstory: 1.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 12.1%Alexander Willis: 2.5%Rawstory: 3.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.1%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 12.5%Alexander Willis: 2.3%Rawstory: 1.5%Burden of Proof12.5%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.0%Rawstory: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.4%Rawstory: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 6.3%Rawstory: 3.9%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.1%Rawstory: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 13.6%Alexander Willis: 3.0%Rawstory: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)13.6%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: 6.6%Alexander Willis: 7.5%Rawstory: 5.4%Unattributed Quote6.6%This article: 5.9%Alexander Willis: 5.8%Rawstory: 4.2%Quote-first Misdirection5.9%This article: 28.7%Alexander Willis: 13.4%Rawstory: 15.6%Biased Writer Voice28.7%This article: 12.9%Alexander Willis: 2.0%Rawstory: 3.2%Indoctrination12.9%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 7.3%Rawstory: 8.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.8%Rawstory: 0.9%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alexander Willis: 0.5%Rawstory: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

272 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers45%attributed speech149writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 18 words • 100.0% coverageTrump • 13 words • 0.0% coverageTrump • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageU.S. Central Command • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageTom Nichols • 18 words • 0.0% coverageTom Nichols • 16 words • 100.0% coverageTom Nichols • 34 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Tom Nichols

100%flagged-word coverage
68 attributed words55% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Biased Writer Voice-52.3 ptsWriter: 52.3%Tom Nichols: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+50.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tom Nichols: 50.0%50.0%Quote-first Misdirection+23.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tom Nichols: 23.5%23.5%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.