Speaker summary
56%17 analyzed articles/videos1,208.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Katherine Clark results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Self-Serving Bias, and Framing Effect, with Status Quo Bias as the most egregious example at 11.1% saturation with 231 hits. Analysis detected 2,303.609 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,208.333 analyzed words across 17 articles, generating a BS Score of 4.7% and a BS Rank of 3% (26,157 of 26,730 speakers). This Katherine Clark is better (less manipulative) than 97.90% of the peer group.

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

2% percentile
02550751002.1% percentile
4.7% BS Score17 analyzed videos1.2K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 11.9%11.9%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 5.1%5.1%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 14.9%14.9%Status Quo BiasSitewide 2.2%Speaker 11.1%11.1%Begging the QuestionSitewide 1.7%Speaker 10.3%10.3%Hasty GeneralizationSitewide 8.1%Speaker 0.9%0.9%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 6.2%6.2%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 7.4%7.4%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 8.8%8.8%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Speaker 0.9%0.9%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Framing Effect: Speaker 11.9%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 5.1%, sitewide 19.2%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 12.7%, sitewide 15.9%Ad Hominem: Speaker 14.9%, sitewide 2.2%Status Quo Bias: Speaker 11.1%, sitewide 2.2%Begging the Question: Speaker 10.3%, sitewide 1.7%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 8.8%, sitewide 3.7%Hasty Generalization: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 8.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 4.9%, sitewide 7.5%False Dilemma: Speaker 7.4%, sitewide 1.5%In-Group Bias: Speaker 6.4%, sitewide 6.9%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 6.2%, sitewide 0.0%Optimism Bias: Speaker 2.5%, sitewide 6.0%Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 5.3%Anecdotal: Speaker 0.9%, sitewide 5.2%Pessimism Bias: Speaker 4.9%, sitewide 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 0.8%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 1.1%, sitewide 4.6%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 4.3%, sitewide 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Speaker 1.8%, sitewide 3.1%Tu Quoque: Speaker 3.1%, sitewide 0.2%Middle Ground: Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 0.1%Loss Aversion: Speaker 2.0%, sitewide 2.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Speaker 1.1%, sitewide 2.0%Framing EffectSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos

Caribbean American Lawmakers Back Continued U.S. Military Aid To Israel; Both Received AIPAC Donations54%
Grenada Chronicle84%By cb_usr30%7/19/2026, 10:53:49 PM
AIPAC removes donation options for House Democrats who voted to cut aid to Israel on site77%
The Jerusalem Post29%By JERUSALEM POST STAFF0%7/18/2026, 12:45:51 PM
Once unthinkable vote: Over 100 House Democrats back cutting Israel aid82%
ARY News0%By AFP50%7/18/2026, 7:48:31 AM
Over 100 Democrats voted to end aid to Israel. They’ve received nearly $11 million from AIPAC59%
Washington Examiner74%By Lauren Green46% James A. Downs0%7/17/2026, 8:50:22 PM
Vote to cut Israel aid too little, too late, say Dem. challengers for Mass. House seats72%
GBH0%By Adam Reilly0%7/17/2026, 5:47:41 PM
This Vote on Israeli Aid Reveals Just How Over the Cliff Democrats Are Going76%
RedState91%By Nick Arama94%7/16/2026, 8:30:00 PM
Kansas U.S. House delegation in unison on funding for Israel75%
Little Apple Post0%7/16/2026, 6:00:00 PM
Washington still voted to send Israel $3.3 billion in aid — but over half of the House Democrats revolted54%
Fortune54%By Lisa Mascaro53% Nick Lichtenberg62% The Associated Press65%7/16/2026, 12:21:28 PM
US House defeats bid to cut off Israel aid in vote dividing Democrats72%
Geo News0%By Reuters69%7/16/2026, 11:13:00 AM
House defeats cut to Israel military aid despite large Democrat support - UPI.com51%
UPI65%By Jill Keppeler0%7/15/2026, 11:26:25 PM