Senate Votes to Hold Dr. Anthony Fauci in Contempt; Obtains His Phone 26%

By Matt Taibbi0%

8/6/2026, 6:46:35 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 13 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Framing Effect, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 12.3% saturation with 54 hits. Analysis detected 363 faulty-reasoning hits from 438 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 30.4% and a BS Rank of 26% (22,838 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 74.70% of the article peer group.

The Senate Homeland Security Committee voted Thursday to hold Dr. 
Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress over his refusal to answer questions during testimony before the committee last week, arguing that he inappropriately invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. 
“Holding a witness in contempt is a serious thing, and it should be rare,” Sen. 
Rand Paul, the committee chairman, said as the panel gathered Thursday. 
“But the contempt power exists for precisely this circumstance.” 
The contempt resolution described how Fauci would be “proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law,” pursuant to two statutes ( 2 U.S.C. 192 and 2 U.S.C. 194 ), for refusal to “answer questions pertinent to the subject under inquiry.” 
Paul indicated that if the committee voted as it did, he’d immediately refer the matter to the Department of Justice, which is not obligated to prosecute. 
The DOJ told the Washington Post it “seriously reviews all congressional referrals.” 
Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal broke another story last night: 
A Senate panel investigating Dr. 
Anthony Fauci has obtained a copy of the doctor’s iPhone, potentially securing even more records related to the doctor’s actions during the Covid-19 pandemic. 
The copy of the phone was transferred by the Department of Health and Human Services to the Senate Homeland Security Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which is chaired by Sen. 
Ron Johnson (R., Wis.). 
This revelation comes just days after copies of Fauci’s journals were publicly released following their transfer from HHS to Congress. 
Two Republican senators, Johnson and Rand Paul of Kentucky, have increased pressure on Fauci in recent days to answer questions related to pandemic health measures and the origins of Covid-19. 
Data from Fauci’s phone is a good bet add to public understanding both of Covid’s origins and the official response to the pandemic. 
As noted above, Paul already released Fauci’s diaries , in addition to a less-covered batch of  investigation records  posted last Tuesday. 
Racket has two stories in the works about the new materials, and I’m also going to do a livestream with Dr. 
Matt Bivens tomorrow summarizing the evidence for and against a lab leak, as the ongoing mystery as to Covid’s origins remains the most important story. 
Bivens and I will go through individual “investigation records” and also look at previously released records and video that were largely overlooked in coverage. 
Check this space tomorrow morning for information about the time of the livestream. 
We’ll likely do it mid-afternoon, around 3 p.m. 
Standby also for a piece on the “investigation records.” 
More to come. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 13.0%Racket News: 13.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.3%Matt Taibbi: 0.6%Racket News: 0.6%Availability Heuristic10.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 1.9%Racket News: 1.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.6%Racket News: 0.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 7.3%Matt Taibbi: 1.8%Racket News: 1.8%Framing Effect7.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 10.7%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Optimism Bias10.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 2.1%Racket News: 2.1%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Matt Taibbi: 3.7%Racket News: 3.7%In-Group Bias6.8%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.7%Racket News: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 1.3%Racket News: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.6%Matt Taibbi: 0.5%Racket News: 0.5%Recency Bias4.6%This article: 5.7%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Primacy Effect5.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 2.2%Racket News: 2.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.7%Matt Taibbi: 1.1%Racket News: 1.1%Appeal to Authority2.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.7%Racket News: 0.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.4%Racket News: 0.4%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.3%Matt Taibbi: 3.3%Racket News: 3.3%Hasty Generalization5.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 1.1%Racket News: 1.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 1.6%Racket News: 1.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 4.6%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.4%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Unattributed Quote3.4%This article: 3.4%Matt Taibbi: 0.2%Racket News: 0.2%Quote-first Misdirection3.4%This article: 5.7%Matt Taibbi: 4.5%Racket News: 4.5%Biased Writer Voice5.7%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.6%Racket News: 0.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Taibbi: 1.5%Racket News: 1.5%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.3%Matt Taibbi: 0.0%Racket News: 0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…12.3%

438 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers26%attributed speech322writer words
Selected voice

Washington Post

100%flagged-word coverage
12 attributed words10% of attributed speech57% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -16.8 ptsWriter: 16.8%Washington Post: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-7.8 ptsWriter: 7.8%Washington Post: 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.