Raw Story93%

'This is insane!' Eyes widen over teased Trump stunt during upcoming national address 68%

By Matthew Chapman84%

7/13/2026, 11:26:37 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 3 faulty reasoning types, including Slippery Slope and Quote-first Misdirection, with Politically Left Leaning Bias as the most egregious example at 24.3% saturation with 92 hits. Analysis detected 110 faulty-reasoning hits from 379 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 62.9% and a BS Rank of 68% (4,982 of 15,517 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 67.90% of the article peer group.

As President Donald Trump gears up for a mysterious Thursday-night announcement to the nation, a massive new election conspiracy theory stunt has been teased ahead of time by the conservative D.C. 
Reporter. 
Specifically, said the report, "President Trump is planning to announce that Georgia's two senators, Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, are illegitimate because of fraud, a well-placed source in Georgia tells us. 
Announcement could come as soon as tonight." 
This revelation, which comes after years of Trump asserting with no evidence the 2020 election results in Georgia were rigged or otherwise invalid and trying to have them overturned through various legal and illegal methods, triggered reactions ranging from incredulity to outrage from commenters on social media  and while MAGA voices cheered it on, few others took it remotely seriously. 
"This is insane. 
INSANE," wrote former Rep. 
Adam Kinzinger (R-IL). 
"Record-breaking Ossoff and Warnock fundraising day incoming…" wrote Rep. 
Maxwell Frost (D-FL). 
"So a Civil War instead of midterm elections," wrote Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts. 
"This is a test run for 2026," wrote progressive talk radio host Dean Obeidallah. 
"If Trump steals the 2026 election, ballots will not be enough to save us. 
It will take much more." 
"The same Georgia election that elected Republicans statewide is somehow only fake when it elected Ossoff and Warnock?" 
wrote Alex Cole of Newsitics. 
"Lol, 'well-placed source.'" 
Meanwhile, policy consultant Adam Cochran posted a comprehensive takedown of the whole thing. 
"Doesn’t work like that," he wrote. 
"First off, there was no fraud, but you seized the ballots and the paper backups to make sure no one could question it. 
Second, the constitution has no way to nullify a swearing-in. 
Only peer expulsion. 
Third, this sudden 'announcement' is when Trump is down by two Senators and desperate to pass a bill." 
"Lastly, Trump had 64 court cases to try and litigate the election, including in Georgia," Cochran continued. 
"No case turned up any evidence, including after an audit of these ballots. 
Trump’s own lawyers and advocates then admitted to making up the conspiracy about this country, and were charged for it. 
Part of the court evidence included their own email records of coming up with the plot." 
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
0%
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
0%
Slippery Slope
4%
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
0.8%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
24.3%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

379 words analyzed.

Analysis

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