Alternet87%

A 'perilous' new trap awaits for Trump AG Todd Blanche 50%

By Matthew Rozsa0%

8/9/2026, 5:34:54 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Framing Effect, and Hasty Generalization, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 29.5% saturation with 140 hits. Analysis detected 529 faulty-reasoning hits from 474 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 42.1% and a BS Rank of 50% (15,576 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 50.90% of the article peer group.

President Donald Trump’s attorney general, Todd Blanche, was confirmed over the weekend despite the initial opposition to his nomination voiced by Republican lawmakers like Sens. 
Bill Cassidy of Louisiana , John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina . 
Yet even though Blanche overcame the hurdles to taking office, a new report reveals that his biggest struggles are still ahead of him. 
“As Blanche assumes his new role, now with the imprimatur of Senate backing, walking a tightrope between satisfying Trump and fulfilling an attorney general’s obligations to the rule of law is likely to only grow more perilous,” reported The Washington Post's Jeremy Roebuck on Sunday . 
“Over the next several months, the Justice Department is expected to make a number of charging decisions in sensitive cases of keen interest to the president.” 
Roebuck added that “prosecutors in Florida have been at work for months on what Trump allies have referred to as a ‘grand conspiracy’ investigation of former Obama- and Biden-era officials, including former CIA director John Brennan, who they say engaged in a long-running scheme to violate the president’s civil rights through efforts to undermine his presidency  allegations Brennan denies.” 
The journalist continued, “Meanwhile, department investigators continue to seek evidence to back Trump’s unproven assertions that the 2020 election was stolen, that there exist broad left-wing conspiracies to oppose his second-term agenda and that his critics, including former FBI director James B. 
Comey, deserve to be put in prison.” 
If Blanche proceeds to weaponize the Justice Department to go after Trump’s political opponents, it will violate the assurances he reportedly made to Republican lawmakers who initially expressed reservations about backing him. 
While Cassidy, Cornyn and Tillis claimed that Blanche reassured them he would not allow Trump to politicize the Justice Department, Roebuck pointed out that “Blanche has repeatedly defended the president’s ‘right’ to intervene in Justice Department business  a significant departure from long-standing norms.” 
The Post then quoted Blanche saying “if we have discussions where we have to talk about a case and whether we’re going to charge a case or whether we have charged a case, that’s okay. 
I’m not concerned about that.” 
Despite Blanche’s statements that he will allow Trump to meddle in Justice Department business, the three Republicans who flipped to support him claimed to have been reassured. 
“In casting the pivotal votes, Sens. 
John Cornyn (R-Texas), Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) and Bill Cassidy (R-Louisiana) each said they worried about Blanche’s ability to put the interests of the American people above those of his former client,” Roebuck reported. 
He then wrote, “But each said Blanche had provided them with personal assurances that had assuaged their doubts about his ability to effectively counsel Trump when the president’s instincts run contrary to the rule of law.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 29.5%Matthew Rozsa: 14.8%Alternet: 9.5%Confirmation Bias29.5%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 2.3%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 16.5%Matthew Rozsa: 14.1%Alternet: 7.9%Framing Effect16.5%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 2.4%Alternet: 2.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 21.5%Matthew Rozsa: 10.8%Alternet: 10.1%Negativity Bias21.5%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.4%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 2.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 2.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 9.3%Matthew Rozsa: 4.6%Alternet: 3.1%False Dilemma9.3%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 5.7%Matthew Rozsa: 2.8%Alternet: 0.1%Circular Reasoning5.7%This article: 12.7%Matthew Rozsa: 6.3%Alternet: 7.0%Hasty Generalization12.7%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 2.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 6.8%Matthew Rozsa: 3.4%Alternet: 0.7%Begging the Question6.8%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.9%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 2.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 9.7%Matthew Rozsa: 4.9%Alternet: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection9.7%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 7.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 5.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 2.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matthew Rozsa: 0.0%Alternet: 0.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

474 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers61%attributed speech183writer words
Selected voice

Jeremy Roebuck

73%flagged-word coverage
251 attributed words86% of attributed speech74% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Quote-first Misdirection+18.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Jeremy Roebuck: 18.3%18.3%

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

Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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