Florida AG threatens Fauci investigation after Senate hearing ⁠47%

By Robert McGreevy⁠72%

7/30/2026, 9:59:12 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Burden of Proof, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 31.8% saturation with 179 hits. Analysis detected 880 faulty-reasoning hits from 563 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 42.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠47% (14,604 of 27,227 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 53.60% of the article peer group.

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said he will be opening up an investigation into Dr. 
Anthony Fauci, former National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) director, following Fauci's explosive decision to invoke his Fifth Amendment right and not answer any questions during a congressional hearing Wednesday. 
"Fauci's lack of candor to Congress is unbelievable. 
My office is launching an investigation into Dr. 
Fauci. 
It's past time we get the truth of what happened during COVID," Uthmeier wrote in a Wednesday post on X. 
Uthmeier expanded on his decision in an exclusive statement to Fox News Digital. 
**Fauci Pleads Fifth With 'Zero Legal Justification' As Critics Erupt And Demand Contempt Charges** 
"In light of recent reports exposed by Senator Rand Paul, we will investigate any and all potential violations of Florida law involving Anthony Fauci," Uthmeier told Fox News Digital. 
"Our inquiry will focus on what Fauci knew, when he knew it, and how he misled the American people. 
We will examine the physical and monetary harms to Floridians that may have resulted from his deceptions and determine whether his conduct exposes him to liability under state law," Uthmeier's statement concluded. 
**Read On The Fox News App** 
Uthmeier cited revelations published by Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Sen. 
Rand Paul, R-Ky., which revealed internal notes Fauci wrote on government computers during his time at NIAID. 
**Fauci's Newly Released Covid Diaries Reveal Bizarre Fixation On Fame As Pandemic Deaths Mounted** 
The internal notes, which Paul and others have taken to referring to as Fauci's "diary," suggest Fauci appeared to publicly overstate the death rate from COVID-19 compared to what he wrote privately. 
"[Former CDC Director] Tom Frieden called me this AM and we discussed various aspects of the outbreak," Fauci wrote on Feb. 
8, 2020. 
"He and I are on the same page in thinking tht [sic] this is acting like a bad influenza in its transmissibility and that the denominator is much greater than 34,867 (above) making the case fatality rate (CFR) more like 0.2-0.3 % rather than 2.0%," Fauci's entry concluded. 
However, a month later, in congressional testimony to the House Oversight Committee on March 11, 2020, Fauci pegged the mortality rate at 1%. 
"I think if you count all the cases of minimally symptomatic or asymptomatic infection, that probably brings the mortality rate down to somewhere around 1%, which means it is 10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu," he testified. 
When called to testify on the revelations before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday, Fauci exercised his Fifth Amendment right and refused to answer legislators' questions 111 times. 
Uthmeier is not the only Republican to take aim at the former COVID czar in light of the revelations. 
Sen. 
Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said Wednesday that Fauci should be held in congressional contempt for refusing to answer questions despite receiving a presidential pardon. 
**Click Here To Download The Fox News App** 
"I think Anthony Fauci has had contempt for Congress and contempt for the American people for decades," he said. 
"His diary shows that he deliberately lied to the American people over and over and over again." 
Paul, for his part, said his committee will vote on whether to hold Fauci in contempt next week. 
*Original article source: Florida AG threatens Fauci investigation after Senate hearing* 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 22.2%Robert McGreevy: 3.0%Associated Press: 2.1%Confirmation Bias22.2%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.7%Associated Press: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Robert McGreevy: 1.6%Associated Press: 2.7%Availability Heuristic5.2%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.3%Associated Press: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 4.1%Robert McGreevy: 0.3%Associated Press: 0.4%Hindsight Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 3.1%Associated Press: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 5.0%Robert McGreevy: 9.0%Associated Press: 4.8%Framing Effect5.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.3%Associated Press: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.3%Associated Press: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 3.3%Associated Press: 1.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Robert McGreevy: 0.7%Associated Press: 1.1%Pessimism Bias3.6%This article: 31.8%Robert McGreevy: 5.3%Associated Press: 6.7%Negativity Bias31.8%This article: 4.1%Robert McGreevy: 3.1%Associated Press: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.5%Associated Press: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.1%Associated Press: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 1.5%Associated Press: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.9%Associated Press: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 1.2%Associated Press: 3.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 1.1%Associated Press: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.2%Associated Press: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.0%Robert McGreevy: 1.1%Associated Press: 0.8%Ad Hominem3.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.2%Associated Press: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.2%Robert McGreevy: 4.3%Associated Press: 3.4%Appeal to Authority5.2%This article: 4.1%Robert McGreevy: 1.2%Associated Press: 0.9%False Dilemma4.1%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.5%Associated Press: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.3%Associated Press: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.4%Robert McGreevy: 2.6%Associated Press: 2.8%Hasty Generalization6.4%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.2%Associated Press: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 6.6%Robert McGreevy: 0.4%Associated Press: 0.5%Bandwagon6.6%This article: 9.8%Robert McGreevy: 4.9%Associated Press: 4.0%Appeal to Emotion9.8%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 1.7%Associated Press: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 3.8%Associated Press: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 4.1%Robert McGreevy: 0.5%Associated Press: 0.1%Tu Quoque4.1%This article: 16.5%Robert McGreevy: 0.9%Associated Press: 0.5%Burden of Proof16.5%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.2%Associated Press: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.5%Robert McGreevy: 1.0%Associated Press: 1.6%Anecdotal2.5%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.1%Associated Press: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.7%Robert McGreevy: 1.5%Associated Press: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.7%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.1%Associated Press: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 1.4%Robert McGreevy: 0.1%Associated Press: 0.0%Personal Incredulity1.4%This article: 2.5%Robert McGreevy: 0.1%Associated Press: 0.1%Special Pleading2.5%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.1%Associated Press: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 1.6%Associated Press: 1.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 3.9%Robert McGreevy: 1.8%Associated Press: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection3.9%This article: 6.4%Robert McGreevy: 4.3%Associated Press: 5.1%Biased Writer Voice6.4%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 1.4%Associated Press: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 0.1%Associated Press: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Robert McGreevy: 3.7%Associated Press: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.5%Robert McGreevy: 0.6%Associated Press: 2.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.5%

563 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers57%attributed speech240writer words
Selected voice

Ted Cruz

100%flagged-word coverage
59 attributed words18% of attributed speech78% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-15.0 ptsWriter: 15.0%Ted Cruz: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-9.2 ptsWriter: 9.2%Ted Cruz: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.8 ptsWriter: 5.8%Ted Cruz: 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.