Newsmax⁠75%

New York Post Pins Blame on 'Radical Left' ⁠90%

By Newsmax Wires⁠73%

4/26/2026, 10:57:49 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Right Leaning Bias, Burden of Proof, and Unattributed Quote, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 55.3% saturation with 244 hits. Analysis detected 2,174 faulty-reasoning hits from 441 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 83.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠90% (2,217 of 21,169 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 89.50% of the article peer group.

A New York Post editorial published Sunday placed responsibility on what it described as the "radical left" for fostering a political climate that may be contributing to repeated assassination attempts against President Donald Trump. 
The editorial followed the latest incident Saturday night, in which a suspect came close to carrying out an attack on Trump at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner — marking the third such attempt in recent years. 
Trump was not injured. 
"For the third time, an assassin Saturday night came far too close to killing Trump," the Post wrote, "in what's starting to seem like a pattern, the suspect was clearly a radicalized lefty." 
According to the editorial, the suspect, identified as Cole Tomas Allen, expressed extreme anti-Trump views in a manifesto that echoed rhetoric often heard in political discourse. 
"I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes," Allen allegedly wrote, referencing Trump. 
The Post argued that such views do not emerge in a vacuum, pointing to repeated claims from political figures and commentators portraying Trump as authoritarian. 
"Barely a day goes by without some Dem calling Trump an autocrat, a king, a dictator, Hitler," the editorial stated. 
The piece also highlighted Allen's reported attendance at a "No Kings" protest, noting that such events reinforce the message that Trump represents a threat to democracy. 
In addition, the editorial criticized efforts by some Democrats to link Trump to Jeffrey Epstein, saying those claims lack evidence. 
It also cited remarks from Rep. 
Ted Lieu, D-Calif., as part of what it described as a pattern of inflammatory accusations. 
Beyond rhetoric, the Post argued that some voices on the left have downplayed or even glorified political violence. 
It pointed to commentary and media appearances that it said frame extreme actions as justified. 
"Please: How does murder square with democracy and law and order?" 
the editorial asked. 
The Post acknowledged that individuals who carry out such acts are often mentally unstable, but argued that repeated exposure to extreme messaging can influence them. 
"Sick individuals who hear outrageous charges from people considered authorities ... are apt to act on what they hear," it wrote. 
The editorial also referenced past incidents involving threats or violence against public officials and institutions, suggesting a broader trend tied to heightened political tensions. 
With three assassination attempts now targeting Trump, the Post warned of escalating risks if rhetoric does not cool. 
"Violent #Resistance won't end well for anyone," the editorial concluded, urging political leaders and media figures to "knock off the inflammatory rhetoric" for the good of the country. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.9%Newsmax Wires: 4.8%Newsmax: 3.4%Confirmation Bias5.9%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 1.2%Newsmax: 0.9%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 22.9%Newsmax Wires: 3.6%Newsmax: 3.2%Availability Heuristic22.9%This article: 19.3%Newsmax Wires: 1.1%Newsmax: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic19.3%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.4%Newsmax: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 4.3%Newsmax: 3.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 38.8%Newsmax Wires: 12.1%Newsmax: 11.0%Framing Effect38.8%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.9%Newsmax: 0.8%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.9%Newsmax: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.1%Newsmax: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.7%Newsmax Wires: 4.7%Newsmax: 4.1%Optimism Bias5.7%This article: 10.4%Newsmax Wires: 3.9%Newsmax: 2.9%Pessimism Bias10.4%This article: 28.1%Newsmax Wires: 9.7%Newsmax: 10.3%Negativity Bias28.1%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 3.6%Newsmax: 3.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Newsmax Wires: 1.2%Newsmax: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error4.8%This article: 5.9%Newsmax Wires: 0.4%Newsmax: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias5.9%This article: 4.1%Newsmax Wires: 1.7%Newsmax: 2.7%In-Group Bias4.1%This article: 3.4%Newsmax Wires: 1.1%Newsmax: 1.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 1.6%Newsmax: 2.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.2%Newsmax: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 13.8%Newsmax Wires: 2.2%Newsmax: 1.9%Recency Bias13.8%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.4%Newsmax: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 1.4%Newsmax: 1.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.2%Newsmax: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.8%Newsmax Wires: 6.3%Newsmax: 4.8%Appeal to Authority4.8%This article: 6.6%Newsmax Wires: 2.7%Newsmax: 2.4%False Dilemma6.6%This article: 9.5%Newsmax Wires: 2.2%Newsmax: 1.4%Slippery Slope9.5%This article: 3.4%Newsmax Wires: 0.3%Newsmax: 0.2%Circular Reasoning3.4%This article: 28.1%Newsmax Wires: 4.3%Newsmax: 4.2%Hasty Generalization28.1%This article: 3.4%Newsmax Wires: 0.1%Newsmax: 0.3%Red Herring3.4%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.6%Newsmax: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 22.2%Newsmax Wires: 4.9%Newsmax: 6.0%Appeal to Emotion22.2%This article: 7.5%Newsmax Wires: 1.2%Newsmax: 1.1%Begging the Question7.5%This article: 36.3%Newsmax Wires: 3.9%Newsmax: 3.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)36.3%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.2%Newsmax: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 39.9%Newsmax Wires: 0.7%Newsmax: 0.5%Burden of Proof39.9%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.1%Newsmax: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.2%Newsmax: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 5.9%Newsmax Wires: 0.6%Newsmax: 0.9%Anecdotal5.9%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.1%Newsmax: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 2.5%Newsmax: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.0%Newsmax: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.2%Newsmax: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.1%Newsmax: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.2%Newsmax: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.2%Newsmax: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 39.5%Newsmax Wires: 4.0%Newsmax: 3.1%Unattributed Quote39.5%This article: 9.3%Newsmax Wires: 2.1%Newsmax: 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection9.3%This article: 55.3%Newsmax Wires: 4.7%Newsmax: 4.1%Biased Writer Voice55.3%This article: 16.1%Newsmax Wires: 1.0%Newsmax: 1.0%Indoctrination16.1%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 0.4%Newsmax: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 42.2%Newsmax Wires: 1.9%Newsmax: 1.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias42.2%This article: 0.0%Newsmax Wires: 1.3%Newsmax: 1.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

441 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers87%attributed speech58writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageNew York Post • 33 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 26 words • 100.0% coverageCole Tomas Allen • 24 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 25 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 20 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 26 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageTed Lieu • 15 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 18 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 15 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageNew York Post • 25 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 21 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 24 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 18 words • 100.0% coverageNew York Post • 28 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

New York Post

100%flagged-word coverage
344 attributed words90% of attributed speech78% writer coverage
0%40.0%80.0%Biased Writer Voice-19.7 ptsWriter: 77.6%New York Post: 57.8%57.8%Politically Right Leaning +33.6 ptsWriter: 13.8%New York Post: 47.4%47.4%Unattributed Quote+39.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%New York Post: 39.2%39.2%Indoctrination+20.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%New York Post: 20.6%20.6%Quote-first Misdirection-4.2 ptsWriter: 13.8%New York Post: 9.6%9.6%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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