GASLIGHTING: Sunday Shows Platform 'Seditious' Congresscritters
Slotkin defended the video and discussed her concerns about unlawful orders during an interview on ABC.
SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYNewsbusters is an opinion-oriented outlet, and this article uses strongly partisan language and advances a clear argument about the lawmakers and broadcast hosts. The named author and extensive quoted material provide some transparency, but the article offers limited independent sourcing for its legal assessment.
- Source type — Opinion-oriented outlet; the article is explicitly argumentative and uses partisan framing.
- Author attribution — A named author is identified.
- Transparency — The article reproduces interview excerpts and the text of the statute it discusses.
- Editorial standards — The piece makes forceful claims but gives little detail about its sourcing for the legal conclusion.
The article includes lengthy interview excerpts and the text of a cited statute, but its framing is strongly one-sided. It relies on the author's interpretation of the interviews and gives little substantiation for its assertion about how the statute applies.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The article quotes the interviews and shows some host pushback, but its own narration consistently condemns the lawmakers’ claims and the broadcasts. It does not offer a meaningful defense of the video or independently establish the competing legal interpretations.
- Loaded language — The author repeatedly uses pejorative terms and presents the interviews as “gaslighting.”
- Counterarguments presented — Includes lawmakers’ explanations and some host challenges, but does not develop their reasoning beyond the interview excerpts.
- Opinion vs reporting — The writer’s conclusions and evaluations dominate the presentation.
- Source diversity — The article refers generally to experts but does not name or quote them.
The article adopts a strongly conservative, pro-Trump framing, describing the lawmakers’ statements as gaslighting and faulting the hosts for not challenging them more forcefully. Its language and selection of evidence consistently support that criticism.
- Language tone — Uses loaded terms including “gaslighting,” “Elitist Media” and “seditious.”
- Framing — Presents the lawmakers’ claims as misleading and the hosts’ responses as inadequate.
- Source selection — Emphasizes interview excerpts that support the author's criticism, with little independent analysis from opposing perspectives.
Jorge Bonilla argues that ABC and CBS hosts did not adequately challenge Elissa Slotkin, Jason Crow and Mark Kelly when they discussed a video about unlawful military orders. He also argues that the video could fall under a federal law on urging insubordination in the military.
Bonilla criticizes ABC’s Martha Raddatz and CBS’s Margaret Brennan for what he describes as inadequate fact-checking during interviews with Slotkin, Crow and Kelly. He focuses on their remarks about President Trump and the video they defended, while characterizing the hosts’ questioning as weak or absent. The article presents the lawmakers’ statements and the hosts’ responses, then argues that the video may implicate a federal law concerning efforts to cause insubordination in the military.
The article quotes Slotkin saying that officers had raised concerns about unlawful orders and discussing a past account involving Trump and protesters. Crow says the video was intended to prompt discussion about unlawful orders; Kelly describes past statements by Trump that he says concerned him. Bonilla questions the factual basis for their claims and quotes the text of 18 USC §2387, while asserting that the video may meet the law’s elements.
Community verdict
6 VOTES- Readers of left-leaning coverage: not enough votes yet
- Readers of right-leaning coverage: 60% good look
People in this story
SWIPE →Senator interviewed about the video on unlawful military orders
Representative interviewed about the video on unlawful military orders
Crow's version of this story ↗Senator interviewed about the video on unlawful military orders
Kelly's version of this story ↗President discussed in the lawmakers’ claims about unlawful orders
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…



