MS NOW95%

Team Trump’s latest no-bid contract: $5 million to coat horse statues in gold 78%

By Steve Benen98%

5/29/2026, 1:00:52 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 49.4% saturation with 271 hits. Analysis detected 1,372 faulty-reasoning hits from 549 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 70.5% and a BS Rank of 78% (3,771 of 16,813 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 77.60% of the article peer group.

Donald Trump and his team haven’t exactly been subtle about their gold fixation. 
Since the president returned to power, Americans have seen an emphasis on everything from “Gold Cards” to a “Golden Dome” to a “Golden Fleet” of U.S. battleships. 
(And don’t get me started on the many gold trinkets Trump plastered on the walls of the Oval Office.) 
So perhaps it’s not too surprising that the Republican’s administration is also adding gold coats to the White House’s aggressive renovation agenda for the nation’s capital. 
NOTUS reported: 
Four massive bronze horses positioned along the roads surrounding the Lincoln Memorial still shine in the sun from their first restoration in the 1970s. 
But their gold-toned coating is faded and patchy, and their heavy stone bases are cracked and dirty. 
The Trump administration wants them glittering with a fresh coat of gold in time for America’s 250th anniversary on July 4. 
So in mid-April, the National Park Service handed a $5 million contract to a gilding studio in Maryland to repair the statues and cover them with a thick layer of 23.75-karat gold leaf. 
According to National Park Service documents reviewed by NOTUS, this was one of the administration’s many no-bid contracts. 
It’s easy to imagine the White House and its allies arguing that there’s nothing inherently wrong with trying to make some cosmetic improvements around Washington, D.C., ahead of the nation’s 250th birthday celebrations in July. 
Indeed, that might seem vaguely reasonable under the historic circumstances. 
But the details matter. 
For one thing, we’ve known that the United States’ semiquincentennial was coming  it’s not like the occasion sneaked up on anyone  so the administration’s overreliance on no-bid contracts, based on “emergency” conditions, is inherently dubious. 
What’s more, there are practical considerations to keep in mind. 
As The New Republic summarized, “All of these projects are being rushed so that they are completed before the July 4 America 250th anniversary. 
The lack of a bidding process means that the government, and by extension, taxpayers, could easily be overcharged by contractors, and the rushed projects mean that the work could be shoddy and cause permanent damage to important landmarks in the nation’s capital.” 
As for the politics, all of this is likely to be a tough sell with the American mainstream. 
As families struggle with weak economic growth, weak job growth and an affordability crisis, they see their executive branch spending $5 million to apply a gold coat to some horse statues. 
It comes against a backdrop of a president focused on his ballroom vanity project, the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, the installation of a White House helipad, the construction of a massive “triumphal arch” near Arlington National Cemetery, renovating the White House Treaty Room and the Kennedy Center, his plans for a “statue garden,” his sudden interest in fountains around the nation’s capital and a dozen or so additional renovation projects he’s prioritized in and around the White House complex. 
A recent Fox News poll asked respondents, “Do you think Donald Trump cares about people like you, or not?” 
Only 37% of Americans said they believe the president does in fact care about people like them. 
There’s no reason to assume that number can’t sink lower. 
Confirmation Bias
20.8%
Anchoring Bias
3.1%
Availability Heuristic
19.3%
Representativeness Heuristic
8.2%
Hindsight Bias
6.7%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
17.1%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
1.8%
Pessimism Bias
17.5%
Negativity Bias
26.8%
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
3.1%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
11.1%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
7.7%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
1.8%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
5.6%
Begging the Question
6.7%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
4.7%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
7.7%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
14.4%
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
12%
Quote-first Misdirection
4.4%
Biased Writer Voice
49.4%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

549 words analyzed.

Analysis

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