Fortune74%

Trump orders Iran attack as soon as this weekend, WSJ says 71%

By Jennifer A. Dlouhy91% Bloomberg70%

7/31/2026, 3:45:12 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Unattributed Quote, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.3% saturation with 106 hits. Analysis detected 870 faulty-reasoning hits from 497 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 56.6% and a BS Rank of 71% (8,184 of 28,112 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 70.90% of the article peer group.

President Donald Trump has ordered the US military to carry out a new attack on Iran as soon as this weekend, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday. 
The strikes are intended to convince Tehran to surrender, according to the newspaper, which cited unnamed US officials. 
The report comes hours after Trump cast doubt on continued negotiations with Iran, repeating threats to retaliate forcibly after an attack on a US base in Jordan. 
“We’ll be hitting them very hard,” the president said during a Cabinet meeting Friday. 
“And at some point they’ll say we just can’t take it anymore.” 
CBS reported separately that the US is considering striking energy infrastructure, including oil refineries and power plants, which would mark a major escalation in the military campaign. 
Deliberate bombing of civilian targets could be considered war crimes, according to advocacy groups. 
WTI rose above $86 a barrel in post-settlement trading on Friday afternoon following the CBS report. 
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt did not directly address reports about an impending assault, but said in a statement that “Iran will continue to pay until they come to the table in, what President Trump deems, a meaningful way.” 
Why Trump’s Iran Threats Raise War Crime Concerns: Explainer 
The president has frequently threatened sweeping escalation only to shift his stance soon afterward. 
At the same time, the war has depleted US munitions, particularly air defense interceptors crucial to stopping attacks on bases. 
Unintended consequences have marked the conflict, which began on Feb. 28 with massive airstrikes by the US and Israel. 
Iran swiftly and essentially sealed off the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for oil, natural gas and fertilizer shipments. 
While the Iranian armed forces were no match for America’s military might, Tehran’s attacks on Persian Gulf neighbors with drones and missiles disrupted business and everyday life across the region. 
Just this week, Egypt was drawn into the fray when two ships carrying liquefied natural gas were struck by drones at the port of Damietta. 
Oil prices have shot up with each round of clashes, and Americans who were already frustrated about the cost of food, housing and other items now pay significantly more for gasoline. 
With control of Congress at stake in November’s midterm elections, polls show that voters by a wide margin disapprove of Trump’s management of the war  and the economy. 
Earlier: Trump Casts Doubt on New Iran Negotiations as War Drags On 
Earlier Friday, he told reporters during the meeting at the Camp David presidential retreat in Maryland that he was “losing faith in them because they do lie and do, they do misrepresent.” 
“And at some point they’ll say we just can’t take it anymore,” he added. 
Confidence between the parties appears to be at rock bottom, with Iranian leaders echoing Trump’s latest complaints by saying the Americans have reneged on commitments and can’t be trusted. 
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.8%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.4%Fortune: 3.8%Confirmation Bias2.8%This article: 4.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.0%Fortune: 1.3%Anchoring Bias4.0%This article: 8.7%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 3.2%Fortune: 3.1%Availability Heuristic8.7%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 2.7%Fortune: 2.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 9.7%Fortune: 6.1%Framing Effect4.2%This article: 6.2%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 3.1%Fortune: 0.5%Loss Aversion6.2%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.3%Fortune: 3.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 16.7%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 4.2%Fortune: 2.2%Pessimism Bias16.7%This article: 21.3%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 9.8%Fortune: 6.2%Negativity Bias21.3%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.6%Fortune: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.5%Fortune: 0.8%In-Group Bias6.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.6%Fortune: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.5%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 5.2%Fortune: 1.5%Recency Bias10.5%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.8%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 4.9%Fortune: 4.1%Appeal to Authority5.8%This article: 8.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 3.5%Fortune: 1.9%False Dilemma8.0%This article: 5.2%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.3%Fortune: 1.1%Slippery Slope5.2%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.8%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 5.9%Fortune: 5.3%Hasty Generalization2.8%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 5.8%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.5%Fortune: 0.5%Bandwagon5.8%This article: 6.2%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 6.3%Fortune: 2.8%Appeal to Emotion6.2%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 1.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 14.9%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 3.7%Fortune: 3.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.9%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 5.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.3%Fortune: 2.1%Anecdotal5.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.7%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 2.4%Fortune: 1.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.7%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 14.5%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 8.1%Fortune: 1.5%Unattributed Quote14.5%This article: 2.8%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.7%Fortune: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection2.8%This article: 8.2%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 4.2%Fortune: 3.8%Biased Writer Voice8.2%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 1.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 0.0%Fortune: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%Jennifer A. Dlouhy: 1.4%Fortune: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.4%

497 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers28%attributed speech358writer words
Selected voice

Karoline Leavitt

100%flagged-word coverage
40 attributed words29% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+91.1 ptsWriter: 8.9%Karoline Leavitt: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-11.5 ptsWriter: 11.5%Karoline Leavitt: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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