NOLA.com⁠29%

Liz Murrill joins Alabama and Florida attorneys general in Dr. Fauci investigation ⁠44%

By NOLA.com staff report⁠27%

8/1/2026, 2:28:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Recency Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 18.9% saturation with 31 hits. Analysis detected 197 faulty-reasoning hits from 164 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 40.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠44% (15,440 of 27,322 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 56.50% of the article peer group.

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill announced Saturday that her office would be investigating former top government scientist Dr. 
Anthony Fauci, joining Alabama and Florida’s attorneys general. 
The announcement comes days after a Senate committee hearing where, when asked about the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Fauci repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment right to protect against self-incrimination. 
"Fauci lied. 
Louisiana and Missouri deposed Dr. 
Fauci. 
At the time, he claimed to not recall many key details of his own actions and now we are discovering contemporaneous records he kept," Murrill said in a statement. 
"Louisiana will join Alabama and Florida in investigating Fauci and whether he committed any other offenses that could be pursued in our State courts.” 
After Murrill’s announcement, Gov. 
Jeff Landry posted a statement on X, writing, “As someone who was Attorney General alongside Eric Schmitt, and deposed Dr. 
Fauci, I am happy to have Louisiana join Alabama and Florida!” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 2.4%nola.com: 2.0%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.4%nola.com: 2.0%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 4.9%nola.com: 3.2%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 3.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 18.9%NOLA.com staff report: 6.3%nola.com: 3.3%Negativity Bias18.9%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 12.2%NOLA.com staff report: 2.4%nola.com: 0.7%In-Group Bias12.2%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 18.3%NOLA.com staff report: 2.3%nola.com: 0.9%Recency Bias18.3%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 2.2%nola.com: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 2.5%nola.com: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 3.9%nola.com: 2.3%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 2.2%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 12.2%NOLA.com staff report: 5.1%nola.com: 0.4%Bandwagon12.2%This article: 17.7%NOLA.com staff report: 4.6%nola.com: 2.3%Appeal to Emotion17.7%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.2%nola.com: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 18.3%NOLA.com staff report: 2.3%nola.com: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)18.3%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.2%NOLA.com staff report: 0.2%nola.com: 1.8%Anecdotal1.2%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.3%nola.com: 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.2%NOLA.com staff report: 1.9%nola.com: 1.4%Unattributed Quote1.2%This article: 1.2%NOLA.com staff report: 0.9%nola.com: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection1.2%This article: 18.9%NOLA.com staff report: 2.4%nola.com: 2.1%Biased Writer Voice18.9%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%NOLA.com staff report: 0.0%nola.com: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

164 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers55%attributed speech73writer words
Selected voice

Jeff Landry

100%flagged-word coverage
20 attributed words22% of attributed speech44% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Unattributed Quote-2.7 ptsWriter: 2.7%Jeff Landry: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-2.7 ptsWriter: 2.7%Jeff Landry: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.7 ptsWriter: 2.7%Jeff Landry: 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.