Why the U.S.-Iran MOU Fell Apart 4%

By Steve Hayes18% Jonah Goldberg32% Mike Nelson48% David French0%

7/24/2026, 7:00:00 AM

Topics: Podcast

BS Summary: This article contains 4 faulty reasoning types, including False Dilemma, Quote-first Misdirection, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 8.8% saturation with 8 hits. Analysis detected 22 faulty-reasoning hits from 91 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 17% and a BS Rank of 4% (20,468 of 21,187 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 96.60% of the article peer group.

Steve Hayes is joined by Mike Nelson, David French, and Jonah Goldberg to discuss the latest round of strikes on Iran, the prospect of nuclear proliferation by the Saudi Arabian government, and President Volodymyr Zelensky’s shake-up of Ukraine’s military leadership. 
**The Agenda:** 
—What and why are we striking? 
—[Trump is losing MAGA](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/22/poll-maga-souring-iran-war-costs-trump-01006976) 
—[Dwindling U.S. weapons stockpiles](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/07/20/us-prepares-all-out-war-iran-sending-more-jets-middle-east/) 
—What will victory look like? 
—[Leadership change in Ukraine](https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/morning/ukraines-military-shake-up/) 
—[Nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia](https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/boilingfrogs/trump-saudi-nuclear-power-iran/) 
—NWYT:[Laura Loomer](https://x.com/LauraLoomer/status/2079598033130414320? 
s=20) 
**Show notes:** 
—[Buy Dispatch merch](https://store.thedispatch.com/) 
—[New York Times: Both sides demand victory](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/09/world/middleeast/us-iran-talks-war.html) 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
0%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
8.8%
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
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
7.7%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
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
4.4%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
3.3%

91 words analyzed.

Analysis

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