WBUR News16%

Helicopter carrying Trump and commercial flight have close call over Washington 52%

By The Associated Press73%

8/5/2026, 11:29:58 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Post Hoc (False Cause), and Negativity Bias, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 23.9% saturation with 126 hits. Analysis detected 1,015 faulty-reasoning hits from 527 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 43.3% and a BS Rank of 52% (14,853 of 30,584 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 51.40% of the article peer group.

It's not clear why a plane was allowed to take off as President Trump’s helicopter was approaching Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport on Tuesday afternoon in an apparent violation of safety procedures put in place after last year’s midair collision near the busy airport. 
Both the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday they were investigating what happened when a commercial jet took off just as Marine One left the White House for Andrews Air Force Base with the president aboard for the first leg of a West Coast trip. 
The FAA decided after 67 people died on Jan. 29, 2025, when an airliner collided with an Army Black Hawk helicopter that all takeoffs and landings at the Washington, D.C., airport would be halted anytime a helicopter passes by on a conflicting route. 
The airspace near the White House and Reagan is heavily congested with military and commercial aircraft. 
The airplane that took off Tuesday was climbing above Marine One as the helicopter approached, so the two aircraft were not on a collision course. 
The FAA said in a statement that a preliminary investigation showed “there was a momentary loss of separation after which the aircraft continued to move away from one another.” 
“The air traffic controller was in contact with both the commercial pilot and Marine One pilot during the loss of separation,” the FAA said. 
The White House emphasized that Trump was never in danger. 
“Marine One flights are piloted by some of the best aviators in the world, and at no point was the President in harm’s way,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement. 
The Marine Corps defended the actions of their helicopter pilots. 
“There were no ‘close calls’ with the routine Marine One movement,” Marine Corps spokesperson Capt. 
Jacob Sugg said in an email. 
“Washington National Tower did not delay the helicopter crew, ask them to hold, or otherwise alter their flight profile.” 
The Wall Street Journal first reported the incident. 
Poor communication between the military and the civilian air traffic controllers at Reagan has been an issue in the past. 
It came out last spring after one of the hearings on the midair collision that a hotline connecting the Pentagon to the tower at Reagan hadn't been working for more than three years, and the FAA hadn't even realized it. 
The FAA took steps to ensure that helicopters and airplanes would no longer share the same airspace around the airport shortly after the investigation into last year's collision began. 
The rules also require air traffic controllers to use radar  and not rely on pilots' eyes  to maintain separation and require all military aircraft to broadcast their locations. 
The main group of family members of the victims of last year's crash questioned why the government hasn't done more to prevent collisions in the crowded airspace around Reagan in a post Wednesday on the social platform X. 
The family members have been urging Congress to reach a compromise and pass the package of aviation safety reforms that the NTSB recommended after the midair collision. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 23.9%The Associated Press: 2.2%Cognoscenti: 2.1%Confirmation Bias23.9%This article: 8.2%The Associated Press: 1.0%Cognoscenti: 0.3%Anchoring Bias8.2%This article: 6.8%The Associated Press: 2.4%Cognoscenti: 1.6%Availability Heuristic6.8%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.6%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.5%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 1.4%Cognoscenti: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.1%The Associated Press: 8.3%Cognoscenti: 3.0%Framing Effect2.1%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.4%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.5%The Associated Press: 0.6%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Status Quo Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.9%The Associated Press: 2.3%Cognoscenti: 2.2%Optimism Bias1.9%This article: 5.1%The Associated Press: 1.3%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Pessimism Bias5.1%This article: 15.0%The Associated Press: 8.4%Cognoscenti: 3.9%Negativity Bias15.0%This article: 12.9%The Associated Press: 1.7%Cognoscenti: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias12.9%This article: 8.3%The Associated Press: 0.9%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error8.3%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.2%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 1.6%Cognoscenti: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.7%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 6.3%The Associated Press: 1.5%Cognoscenti: 1.3%Halo Effect6.3%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%The Associated Press: 1.5%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Recency Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.3%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.7%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.2%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.6%The Associated Press: 2.8%Cognoscenti: 2.0%Appeal to Authority4.6%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.9%Cognoscenti: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.6%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.8%The Associated Press: 2.3%Cognoscenti: 2.7%Hasty Generalization3.8%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.3%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 7.2%The Associated Press: 0.4%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Bandwagon7.2%This article: 13.5%The Associated Press: 4.0%Cognoscenti: 3.5%Appeal to Emotion13.5%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.6%Cognoscenti: 0.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 15.7%The Associated Press: 2.1%Cognoscenti: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)15.7%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.1%The Associated Press: 0.4%Cognoscenti: 0.3%Burden of Proof5.1%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.2%Composition/Division3.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 1.0%Cognoscenti: 1.9%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 2.8%The Associated Press: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%No True Scotsman2.8%This article: 16.7%The Associated Press: 1.3%Cognoscenti: 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)16.7%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.0%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.1%Cognoscenti: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.2%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.3%The Associated Press: 1.4%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Unattributed Quote6.3%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.8%Cognoscenti: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 10.2%The Associated Press: 2.9%Cognoscenti: 1.9%Biased Writer Voice10.2%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.5%Cognoscenti: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.6%Cognoscenti: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.2%Cognoscenti: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%The Associated Press: 0.3%Cognoscenti: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

527 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers18%attributed speech434writer words
Selected voice

Kush Desai

100%flagged-word coverage
33 attributed words35% of attributed speech80% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kush Desai: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-10.1 ptsWriter: 10.1%Kush Desai: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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