White House Rushes to Trump’s Defense After Alan Ritchson Torches President Over Epstein Files ⁠90%

By Charisma Madarang⁠48%

7/25/2026, 4:25:48 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Recency Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Biased Writer Voice, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 49.5% saturation with 150 hits. Analysis detected 1,131 faulty-reasoning hits from 303 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 82.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠90% (2,354 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 89.20% of the article peer group.

The White House came to Donald Trump's defense after Reacher star Alan Ritchson <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-news/alan-ritchson-donald-trump-epstein-files-new-interview-1235598526/">slammed</a><a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-news/alan-ritchson-donald-trump-epstein-files-new-interview-1235598526/"> the president over his handling of the Epstein files</a>. 
“Just as President Trump has said, he&rsquo;s been totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein,” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement to <em>Entertainment Weekl</em>y. 
“And by releasing thousands of pages of documents, cooperating with the House Oversight Committee&rsquo;s subpoena request, signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act, and calling for more investigations into Epstein&rsquo;s Democrat friends, President Trump has done more for Epstein&rsquo;s victims than anyone before him.” 
The response arrived a day after Ritchson's interview with the&nbsp;<em>Happy Sad Confused</em>&nbsp;podcast. 
The actor called the president a &ldquo;bitch&rdquo; and a &ldquo;fucking rapist,&#8221; and criticized the government over the sluggish release of the Jeffrey Epstein files and the president&rsquo;s alleged association with the convicted pedophile. &ldquo;The Epstein files, the fucking Epstein files! 
&rdquo; Ritchson said. &ldquo;Goddamn it! 
Where are they? 
It&rsquo;s a fucking law, bitch. 
Show it. 
You fucking pedophiles! 
&rdquo; (Trump has repeatedly denied rape allegations against him.) 
Launching into his tirade, Ritchson added, &ldquo;This is my fucking politics, dude. 
I would fucking railroad these fuckers. 
I would get those Epstein files out in two seconds. 
Fucking move out of the way. 
I don&rsquo;t care what room they&rsquo;re in, bitch, move. 
Give me the fucking manila envelope. 
I will get you the Epstein files. 
Don&rsquo;t you want to see what&rsquo;s in there, so that we can hold people accountable? 
These fucking rapists! 
We&rsquo;re just cool with it? 
&rdquo; 
While there has been significant <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.npr.org/2026/04/03/nx-s1-5766260/epstein-files-arrests-doj-prosecutors" target="_blank">legal and political fallout in the U.K.</a> since the release of the files in 2025 and 2026, there have been no related arrests in the U.S.&nbsp;to date. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 31.0%Charisma Madarang: 3.5%Rolling Stone: 2.9%Confirmation Bias31.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.1%Rolling Stone: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.6%Charisma Madarang: 3.6%Rolling Stone: 3.2%Availability Heuristic11.6%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.2%Rolling Stone: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.2%Rolling Stone: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 5.3%Charisma Madarang: 1.3%Rolling Stone: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 6.5%Rolling Stone: 5.6%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.9%Rolling Stone: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 14.2%Charisma Madarang: 1.0%Rolling Stone: 0.8%Status Quo Bias14.2%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.2%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.3%Charisma Madarang: 2.4%Rolling Stone: 2.0%Optimism Bias3.3%This article: 3.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.3%Rolling Stone: 1.1%Pessimism Bias3.0%This article: 49.5%Charisma Madarang: 11.2%Rolling Stone: 7.5%Negativity Bias49.5%This article: 23.1%Charisma Madarang: 3.2%Rolling Stone: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias23.1%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.3%Rolling Stone: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 4.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.5%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias4.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 2.3%Rolling Stone: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.4%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 6.2%Rolling Stone: 4.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.1%Rolling Stone: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 41.6%Charisma Madarang: 3.5%Rolling Stone: 1.3%Recency Bias41.6%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.1%Rolling Stone: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 2.0%Charisma Madarang: 1.2%Rolling Stone: 1.1%Ad Hominem2.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.1%Rolling Stone: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 14.2%Charisma Madarang: 5.4%Rolling Stone: 3.4%Appeal to Authority14.2%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.8%Rolling Stone: 1.5%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.8%Rolling Stone: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 25.7%Charisma Madarang: 5.3%Rolling Stone: 5.5%Hasty Generalization25.7%This article: 2.0%Charisma Madarang: 1.4%Rolling Stone: 0.4%Red Herring2.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.5%Rolling Stone: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 37.3%Charisma Madarang: 9.9%Rolling Stone: 5.8%Appeal to Emotion37.3%This article: 13.9%Charisma Madarang: 0.9%Rolling Stone: 0.7%Begging the Question13.9%This article: 15.5%Charisma Madarang: 2.8%Rolling Stone: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)15.5%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.2%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.7%Charisma Madarang: 0.7%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.7%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.5%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 2.9%Rolling Stone: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.2%Rolling Stone: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 2.8%Rolling Stone: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 1.7%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Special Pleading1.7%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 3.6%Rolling Stone: 1.5%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 21.5%Charisma Madarang: 2.8%Rolling Stone: 1.3%Quote-first Misdirection21.5%This article: 32.0%Charisma Madarang: 6.6%Rolling Stone: 8.6%Biased Writer Voice32.0%This article: 8.9%Charisma Madarang: 1.6%Rolling Stone: 1.3%Indoctrination8.9%This article: 11.6%Charisma Madarang: 2.1%Rolling Stone: 1.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias11.6%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.4%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Charisma Madarang: 0.3%Rolling Stone: 3.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

303 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers55%attributed speech135writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageAbigail Jackson • 27 words • 100.0% coverageAbigail Jackson • 43 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 3 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 2 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 12 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 6 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 10 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 6 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 9 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 6 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 7 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 15 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 3 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 5 words • 0.0% coverageAlan Ritchson • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Abigail Jackson

100%flagged-word coverage
70 attributed words42% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%32.5%65.0%Biased Writer Voice+21.4 ptsWriter: 40.0%Abigail Jackson: 61.4%61.4%Quote-first Misdirection-48.1 ptsWriter: 48.1%Abigail Jackson: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+38.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Abigail Jackson: 38.6%38.6%Politically Left Leaning B-25.9 ptsWriter: 25.9%Abigail Jackson: 0.0%0.0%

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.