CBS News98%

U.S. attorney who served for less than an hour suing Trump administration over firing 46%

7/23/2026, 5:33:24 PM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Begging the Question, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 27.9% saturation with 145 hits. Analysis detected 1,070 faulty-reasoning hits from 520 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.9% and a BS Rank of 46% (11,960 of 21,887 videos). This video is better (less manipulative) than 54.60% of the video peer group.

A US attorney who served, get this, for less than an hour is now suing the Trump administration over his firing. 
Roger Rogoff is asking a federal court to reinstatement as US attorney for the Western District of Washington. 
Last week, a US district court appointed him to the post after it sat vacant for months. 
Then 54 minutes later, President Trump fired Rogoff and accused the judges of failing to consult the White House. 
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch defended the termination, saying, quote, "Dist court judges can appoint a temporary US attorney and the president can fire them." 
CBS News legal contributor and Loyola Law School professor Jessica Levenson is here to answer the question of basically who decides this constitutional question. 
So, uh, Jessica, how are US attorney positions filled? 
So the typical way that they're filled is that the president nominates and then the Senate decides whether or not to confirm. 
It's very similar to what happens with respect to federal judges. 
But there is also of course this avenue where by congressional statute the attorney general has the power to appoint somebody as interm basically temporary US attorney but only for 120 days. 
Then the federal statute says after that 120 days, a group of federal judges from that judicial district can appoint somebody. 
And we've seen this frankly play out far more than was typical in other administrations. 
Of course, what just happened as you said is that there was somebody who was appointed to one of the after, excuse me, the district court judges appointed a US attorney. 
54 minutes later, the president says, "You're fired." 
And as you said, this really does become a who decides question. 
>> So, does the president then have the power to remove a US attorney? 
>> Yes. 
And so I think the legal tension here comes with the fact that when you're talking about an appointment, as we just discussed, that really is a process where the Constitution and federal law envisions that you're sharing power. 
Either it's the president and the Senate for a permanent position or it's the attorney general for a temporary position and then federal judges. 
But what we have right now is a president who is looking at people who are appointed by a group of federal judges and then saying you're fired. 
The question is whether or not he can do that or if it undermines the appointment power sharing structure. 
>> So what's at stake here in this lawsuit? 
>> So I think what's really at stake is frankly what's at stake in so many other areas which is the power of this president. 
And in this case, it's the power of the president to fire these heads of federal prosecutor's offices, these US attorneys. 
And if he can do so in a way that essentially undermines in a way that essentially undermines again the Constitution and the federal law that says the president cannot do this by himself. 
>> Okay, Jessica Levenson, thank you. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 25.6%CBS Miami: 2.2%Confirmation Bias25.6%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.9%CBS Miami: 2.5%Availability Heuristic6.9%This article: 6.3%CBS Miami: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic6.3%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%CBS Miami: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias7.5%This article: 11.3%CBS Miami: 6.1%Framing Effect11.3%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.9%CBS Miami: 1.9%Optimism Bias2.9%This article: 11.3%CBS Miami: 1.1%Pessimism Bias11.3%This article: 27.9%CBS Miami: 6.7%Negativity Bias27.9%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 8.8%CBS Miami: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error8.8%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.6%CBS Miami: 1.6%Halo Effect4.6%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.5%CBS Miami: 1.1%Recency Bias8.5%This article: 4.6%CBS Miami: 0.3%Primacy Effect4.6%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%CBS Miami: 0.8%Ad Hominem5.4%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 16.9%CBS Miami: 4.3%Appeal to Authority16.9%This article: 4.6%CBS Miami: 1.1%False Dilemma4.6%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.0%CBS Miami: 2.5%Hasty Generalization9.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.2%CBS Miami: 4.1%Appeal to Emotion4.2%This article: 14.0%CBS Miami: 0.7%Begging the Question14.0%This article: 3.7%CBS Miami: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.7%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.9%CBS Miami: 1.2%Anecdotal6.9%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 12.5%CBS Miami: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)12.5%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.1%CBS Miami: 0.1%Middle Ground2.1%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 2.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.5%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

520 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers8.3%attributed speech477writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageRoger Rogoff • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageTodd Blanch • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Todd Blanch

100%flagged-word coverage
25 attributed words58% of attributed speech84% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

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.