One Weird Trick for Torpedoing Todd Blanche’s Hearing 100%

By Sarah Longwell98%

7/12/2026, 11:04:21 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 9 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Indoctrination, and Negativity Bias, with Politically Left Leaning Bias as the most egregious example at 93.3% saturation with 112 hits. Analysis detected 417 faulty-reasoning hits from 120 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of 100% (46 of 14,814 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 99.70% of the article peer group.

WHEN ATTORNEY GENERAL–DESIGNATE Todd Blanche appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Democratic senators are going to have a lot of opportunities to make him look like a corrupt, unqualified, incompetent hack. 
He’s certainly played the part. 
There are the conflicts of interest, the DOJ purges, the slush fund, the January 6th pardons and attempted self-pardons, the nakedly political prosecutions, his “war” on judges, and the stonewalling of oversight efforts. 
Democrats shouldn’t ignore all of that as they go about grilling President Trump’s nominee to be our nation’s top law enforcement official. 
But there is one area they should really focus on—an area that, far more than any others, could be Blanche’s undoing: 
Confirmation Bias
4.2%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
70.8%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
53.3%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
25.8%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
4.2%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
27.5%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
6.7%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
61.7%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
93.3%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

120 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Analysis

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