MS NOW95%

Facing pushback over his Reflecting Pool fixation, Trump quietly changes his story 72%

By Steve Benen98%

5/13/2026, 8:07:52 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 46.8% saturation with 246 hits. Analysis detected 1,109 faulty-reasoning hits from 526 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 64.8% and a BS Rank of 72% (4,823 of 16,813 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 71.30% of the article peer group.

It’s never been altogether clear why exactly Donald Trump began fixating on renovating the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, but like his beloved ballroom vanity project, it’s not going smoothly. 
The endeavor is not only facing a new lawsuit, the price tag has climbed to $13.1 million  more than seven times the original cost the president touted  as part of a no-bid contract that circumvented federal procurement laws for dubious reasons. 
In fact, it’s reached the point where Trump has quietly changed his story about his role in the project, in ways that suggest he would prefer to put some distance between himself and the undertaking. 
A few weeks ago, for example, the president boasted in an official White House video about his direct, hands-on role in choosing a contractor: “I said, ‘What we’re going to do is, I’m going to call all three of these people that have worked for me in the past, doing swimming pools.’ ... 
And I said, ‘Give me a good price.’” 
Last week, he repeated the story in similar terms: “I said, ‘Do me a favor, fellas, go take a look at the Reflecting Pool that sits in between Lincoln and Washington, the beautiful, what should be beautiful, Reflecting Pool.’ 
And one of them who came back, who’s really, I would say the best, but they’re all good. 
He came back, he said, ‘What an exciting job, sir.’” 
As CNN’s Daniel Dale noted, this week Trump replaced his recent claims with an entirely new story. 
On Tuesday morning, the president published a lengthy rant to his social media platform that included this nugget: 
... 
I didn’t give out the contract, “Interior” did, to a contractor I did not know, and have never used before. 
Thank you for your attention to this matter! 
That the president’s version of events is already evolving suggests he realizes he has a burgeoning political problem on his hands. 
Complicating matters, the list of troubles appears to be getting longer. 
The New York Times reported Tuesday: 
Interior Department staff members have raised concerns about the quality and speed of the repair work that a contractor is performing on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington, according to government documents seen by The New York Times. 
The staff members said that bubbles and small holes had appeared in one of the layers meant to waterproof the iconic pool. 
And uneven application of the tinted waterproofing left the pool mottled in varying shades of blue, the documents indicate. 
A day later, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum faced questions about the project from House Democrats, and his answers clearly fell short. 
Democratic Rep. 
Joe Neguse of Colorado, for example, reminded Burgum that the Trump administration, to justify its no-bid contract, relied on a power designed for emergencies, under a statute that specifies that a bureaucratic delay would bring “serious injury” to the government. 
Burgum replied that there are several fountains across Washington, D.C., that didn’t work. 
No wonder Trump is trying to pass the buck before this mess gets messier. 
This post updates our related earlier coverage. 
Confirmation Bias
17.5%
Anchoring Bias
8.2%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
5.5%
Hindsight Bias
4%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
5.7%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
10.3%
Negativity Bias
34.8%
Self-Serving Bias
6.7%
Fundamental Attribution Error
4%
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
10.6%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
4.4%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
2.7%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
11.6%
Begging the Question
4%
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)
10.6%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0.2%
Quote-first Misdirection
17.5%
Biased Writer Voice
46.8%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
5.9%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

526 words analyzed.

Analysis

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