CBS News⁠97%

Pete Hegseth said any peace deal with Iran "will be a good deal" #shorts ⁠99%

5/31/2026, 3:27:11 AM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Right Leaning Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Overconfidence Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 48.8% saturation with 102 hits. Analysis detected 826 faulty-reasoning hits from 209 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 99% and a BS Rank of ⁠99% (314 of 20,249 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 98.50% of the video peer group.

Any deal will be a good deal. 
And I had a chance to talk to President Trump this morning. 
He He wanted me to reiterate how patient he is in ensuring that with America undertaking this kind of historic endeavor, any deal will be a good one, a great one, and he's patient in the pursuit of that because of how the implications of how that sorts out. 
And certainly our department, he we were in a cabinet meeting just a couple of days ago and the president said he will be a great deal. 
And if Iran doesn't want to make a great deal that ensures they don't get a nuclear weapon, they can deal with the guy on my left. 
That was the only time I've ever been accused of being on the left. 
And he was pointing at the war department. 
And we're serious about that. 
We our ability to recommence if necessary is we are more than capable. 
Our stockpiles are are more than suited for that both there and around the globe because of how we balance exquisite and and more plentiful munitions. 
So we're in a very good place. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 42.1%CBS Miami: 2.2%Confirmation Bias42.1%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%CBS Miami: 2.6%Availability Heuristic3.3%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.3%CBS Miami: 0.5%Hindsight Bias3.3%This article: 38.3%CBS Miami: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias38.3%This article: 30.1%CBS Miami: 6.0%Framing Effect30.1%This article: 12.9%CBS Miami: 0.3%Loss Aversion12.9%This article: 12.4%CBS Miami: 0.5%Status Quo Bias12.4%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.7%CBS Miami: 1.9%Optimism Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 6.6%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 10.5%CBS Miami: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias10.5%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 2.4%CBS Miami: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias2.4%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: 12.9%CBS Miami: 1.7%Halo Effect12.9%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: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%CBS Miami: 0.3%Primacy Effect5.7%This article: 6.7%CBS Miami: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 48.8%CBS Miami: 4.3%Appeal to Authority48.8%This article: 12.9%CBS Miami: 1.1%False Dilemma12.9%This article: 12.9%CBS Miami: 0.5%Slippery Slope12.9%This article: 12.4%CBS Miami: 0.1%Circular Reasoning12.4%This article: 30.1%CBS Miami: 2.5%Hasty Generalization30.1%This article: 6.2%CBS Miami: 0.2%Red Herring6.2%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.2%CBS Miami: 3.9%Appeal to Emotion6.2%This article: 3.3%CBS Miami: 0.7%Begging the Question3.3%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%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: 3.3%CBS Miami: 0.2%Composition/Division3.3%This article: 19.6%CBS Miami: 1.2%Anecdotal19.6%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%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: 1.9%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.7%CBS Miami: 1.4%Biased Writer Voice6.7%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: 45.0%CBS Miami: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias45.0%This article: 0.0%CBS Miami: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

209 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker93%attributed speech14writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 7 words • 100.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 12 words • 100.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 49 words • 0.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 27 words • 100.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 27 words • 100.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 14 words • 0.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 8 words • 0.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 5 words • 0.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 13 words • 0.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 26 words • 0.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 7 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Pete Hegseth

100%flagged-word coverage
195 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-100.0 ptsWriter: 100.0%Pete Hegseth: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -59.0 ptsWriter: 100.0%Pete Hegseth: 41.0%41.0%

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.