Trump’s acting AG Todd Blanche can’t give ‘definitive answer’ as to whether 2020 election was stolen 63%

By Josh Marcus59%

5/18/2026, 11:34:21 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Overconfidence Bias, and Burden of Proof, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 31.5% saturation with 169 hits. Analysis detected 1,658 faulty-reasoning hits from 537 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57.9% and a BS Rank of 63% (6,356 of 16,813 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 62.20% of the article peer group.

There’s a “ton of evidence” the 2020 presidential election was rigged against President Donald Trump, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said Sunday, though he soon conceded he couldn’t provide a “definitive answer” if that was actually true or when federal officials would prove it. 
“I’m not going to promise there’s going to be a definitive answer,” Blanche told Sunday Morning Futures on Fox News. 
“That wouldn’t be fair to you or anybody else, but we are looking at it, and we’re hoping to get one.” 
Speaking with host Maria Bartiromo, Trump’s former criminal defense attorney pointed to the Trump administration’s ongoing investigations in Georgia and Florida but said it was unclear what those probes would result in. 
“It takes a lot of work to uncover what happened in 2020,” he said. 
“It takes a lot of old, good-old-fashioned law enforcement, police work, which is what we’re doing, and we have great prosecutors working on it as well, and I assure the American people that as soon as we have something to say for it  whether it’s charges, whether it’s a report, whether it’s the results of an investigation  the American people will learn about what we uncovered.” 
To date, no credible evidence has been discovered that proves the 2020 election was rigged and Trump was the rightful winner. 
The Trump campaign and its allies repeatedly challenged the results in states he lost to Joe Biden in the aftermath of the 2020 election court, and subsequent court cases, recounts, committee probes and press investigations have not yielded any proof of the president’s ongoing claims that he won the contest. 
Nonetheless, top officials across the administration have echoed the president’s conspiracy theories about the election, and Trump loyalists are driving multiple highly unusual investigations across the country looking for proof six years later that the election was indeed stolen from him. 
In Florida, former Trump lawyer Joseph diGenova has been selected to lead a sprawling federal investigation about the president’s rivals, reportedly premised on the idea that various actions since 2016 constitute a “grand conspiracy” among Democratic officials to keep Republicans out of power. 
The FBI has also seized election records in Arizona. 
Earlier this year in Georgia, meanwhile, the FBI raided an elections office in the closely fought 2020 battleground state, based on a referral from election denier Kurt Olsen, who worked closely with Trump’s campaign in 2020 to challenge election results as part of a “Stop the Steal” movement. 
The warrant that prompted the search itself provided no additional evidence to support a claim of fraud, and it even noted that “many allegations” have already been “disproven.” 
“After more than five years, dozens of court cases, and over a year in total control of the federal government, this is all they’ve got?” 
elections law expert David Becker, director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, told The Independent at the time of the raid. 
The FBI has also reportedly assembled a “payback squad” of agents willing to take on political cases in an effort to expose and discredit federal law enforcement officials who investigated Trump and his allies. 
Confirmation Bias
14.5%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
8%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
20.9%
Framing Effect
0%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
2.6%
Optimism Bias
16.6%
Pessimism Bias
4.7%
Negativity Bias
31.5%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
8.9%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
12.7%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
8.9%
Straw Man
8%
Appeal to Authority
22.2%
False Dilemma
3.7%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
9.3%
Red Herring
14.9%
Bandwagon
7.6%
Appeal to Emotion
14.3%
Begging the Question
7.6%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
6.3%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
20.9%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
9.3%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
10.2%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
4.7%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
8.2%
Biased Writer Voice
11.9%
Indoctrination
12.7%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
7.6%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

537 words analyzed.

Analysis

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