NTD100%

Rep. Dave Joyce: Judiciary Under Siege! Protecting Our Judges!98%

7/14/2026, 9:49:12 PM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 36.7% saturation with 55 hits. Analysis detected 344 faulty-reasoning hits from 141 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 97.3% and a BS Rank of 98% (391 of 15,741 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 97.50% of the video peer group.

Rep. Dave Joyce: Judiciary Under Siege! Protecting Our Judges! 
New technologies have become accessible for bad actors. 
The threat environment facing our federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court, has evolved substantially. 
Chief Justice Roberts himself wrote in his 2024 year-end report that he was troubled by the U.S. Marshals Service data showing that hostile threats and communications toward judges had more than tripled over the preceding decade. 
And the Marshals had investigated more than 1,000 serious threats against federal justices in just the last 5 years. 
This committee does not take these facts lightly. 
We are reminded of Daniel Anderl, the son of Federal Judge Esther Anderl, who was killed by a disgruntled attorney at the door of his family home. 
And the threat to Justice Kavanaugh in '22 stopped in large part thanks to the presence of two Deputy U.S. Marshals protecting the residence and local law enforcement support. 
Confirmation Bias
19.3%
Anchoring Bias
33.3%
Availability Heuristic
36.7%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
20.7%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
11.3%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
5.3%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
12.7%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
24%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
18%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
24%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
18%
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%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
6%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

150 words analyzed.

Analysis

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