BS Summary: This article contains 14 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Framing Effect, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 19.6% saturation with 108 hits. Analysis detected 566 faulty-reasoning hits from 550 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 19.5% and a BS Rank of 9% (26,284 of 28,846 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 91.10% of the article peer group.

WASHINGTON (AP)  The Trump administration’s activation of a long-dormant court to seek an Afghan woman’s deportation violates her constitutional rights, a defense lawyer argued Thursday at a hearing for the first case to be heard in the obscure court since its creation 30 years ago. 
The woman’s attorney, Matthew Farley, urged the chief judge of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court to dismiss the case against Nazira Haji Zada and immediately release his client, who the government alleges is an Islamic State supporter. 
Ericksen, a senior judge who sits in Minnesota and was nominated to the bench by Republican President George W. 
Bush, acknowledged that the court was operating without a clear blueprint. 
“This is a runaround for bringing a criminal case,” Farley said during the court’s first-ever public hearing. 
“We probably read the same law review articles. 
There aren’t that many,” the judge told Farley. 
An FBI memo dated July 15 said it “developed information” that Zada is an IS supporter who had her children pledge their loyalty to the terrorist group. 
The memo says she “supported” a plot by relatives to carry out an ISIS-inspired attack in the United States. 
Zada was led into the courtroom by U.S. 
Marshals Service deputies. 
Interpreters translated the proceedings for Zada, who answered the judge’s questions with head nods instead of words. 
The judge cautioned that the court was still in the process of building up its “infrastructure.” 
“This is not a criminal matter,” the judge told her. 
“This is a civil matter that arises under the immigration code.” 
Justice Department attorney Hayden O’Byrne read aloud a brief summary of the case but noted that the FBI’s investigation of Zada involves classified information that cannot be made public. 
The judge assured Zada that the federal courts routinely handle cases involving classified information, even though her case is the first of its kind. 
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement that Congress created the court to deport “alien terrorists who never should have been here in the first place.” 
“The allegations in this case show the matriarch of an ISIS-sympathizing family aiding in a plot to launch a mass casualty attack on American voters on Election Day. 
The Department’s application in this court makes clear that terrorists have no place in the United States of America,” Blanche added. 
The case against Zada opens a new, untested front for President Donald Trump’s aggressive deportation campaign, which has flooded the nation’s federal court system with immigration proceedings, sometimes based on novel or shaky legal foundations. 
FBI agents arrested her Tuesday at her Fort Worth, Texas, home. 
She is not charged with any crimes. 
Her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, was sentenced in November to 15 years in prison and court records show he previously agreed to be removed from the U.S. after his release. 
Her son-in-law, Nasir Ahmad Tawhedi, previously worked as a security guard for an American military installation in Afghanistan. 
He pleaded guilty to conspiring and attempting to provide material support to IS. 
Prosecutors have said he took steps to advance his attack plans by ordering AK-47 rifles, liquidating his family’s assets and buying one-way tickets for his wife and child to travel home to Afghanistan. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.1%Michael Kunzelman: 1.6%AP News: 1.9%Confirmation Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.6%AP News: 2.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 6.0%Michael Kunzelman: 1.8%AP News: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic6.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.3%AP News: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.2%Michael Kunzelman: 6.6%AP News: 7.2%Framing Effect8.2%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.4%AP News: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.4%AP News: 2.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 6.4%Michael Kunzelman: 0.5%AP News: 1.9%Pessimism Bias6.4%This article: 19.6%Michael Kunzelman: 4.0%AP News: 8.7%Negativity Bias19.6%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 1.0%AP News: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.6%AP News: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%Michael Kunzelman: 0.1%AP News: 1.0%In-Group Bias3.8%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 1.5%AP News: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 3.9%AP News: 1.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.3%AP News: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.6%AP News: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 1.5%AP News: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.2%AP News: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 1.1%AP News: 3.3%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 3.8%Michael Kunzelman: 0.3%AP News: 1.0%False Dilemma3.8%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.2%AP News: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.4%Michael Kunzelman: 1.5%AP News: 2.3%Hasty Generalization6.4%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.1%AP News: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.1%Michael Kunzelman: 3.8%AP News: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion5.1%This article: 5.1%Michael Kunzelman: 1.1%AP News: 0.5%Begging the Question5.1%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.1%AP News: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 1.3%AP News: 1.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.2%Michael Kunzelman: 1.8%AP News: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.2%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.0%AP News: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.1%Michael Kunzelman: 0.7%AP News: 1.8%Unattributed Quote5.1%This article: 8.2%Michael Kunzelman: 1.3%AP News: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection8.2%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 3.0%AP News: 2.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 12.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.5%AP News: 0.5%Indoctrination12.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 2.9%AP News: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.3%AP News: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Michael Kunzelman: 0.2%AP News: 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

550 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers29%attributed speech390writer words
Selected voice

Todd Blanche

100%flagged-word coverage
77 attributed words48% of attributed speech17% writer coverage
0%32.5%65.0%Indoctrination+63.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Todd Blanche: 63.6%63.6%Unattributed Quote+36.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Todd Blanche: 36.4%36.4%Quote-first Misdirection+36.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Todd Blanche: 36.4%36.4%

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.