Sniffing Out The Suspect

At first glance, one might not question an article published by a world renowned news source, although after conducting the SMELL test on the LA times article “Trump’s unproven claims of widespread voter fraud trip up White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer” many gaps in the coherence of the piece came to light. The LA Times is an increasingly liberal news source that has not only been reliable in predicting the outcome of the recent election, but also in informing readers about politics, the economy, and social news.

This article aims to investigate the claims that as many as three to five million votes were illegally cast, leading to Donald Trump’s loss in the popular vote. These allegations were “supported” by a study conducted at Old Dominion University and a piece from a conspiracy- theory website, Infowars. The study conducted at Old Dominion University has since been widely discredited while the story ran in Infowars has not been backed up by any credible source. This article mentions “facts” without sighting where they came from or looking into the claims. When Donald Trump specifically mentions the number of illegally cast votes at the beginning of the article, he does not give solid evidence as to where this number came from or if it is sound.

During White House Secretary Sean Spicer’s briefing regarding the allocations of voter fraud, “Spicer ended the briefing abruptly after an aide walked in and placed a note on his lectern” No further investigation was done as to what the note said or as to who the aid was who delivered the note. From this, Americans can observe the significant point that the reporter on this case did not “check the freezer”. In other words, the reporter implies the witnesses this scenario, but does not make any reference to the aide themselves nor the information which they revealed to Spicer. Additionally, when Spicer was questioned he used ambiguous words such as “appears” and “it seemed”, further leading to the conclusion of the lack of evidence throughout this article. Logical and coherent articles are in nature supposed to follow the premise conclusion format.

This article does not follow that basic principle in the way that the evidence does not reasonably support the conclusion. This piece is specifically about the legitimacy of widespread voter fraud, Trump stands by the fact that it exists while this article directly states that no evidence of such fraud exists. If claims regarding voter fraud exist it would only make sense to look into such allegations. Instead, no investigation is underway.

The reasons that Donald trump may have conjured up such falsehood is seemingly evident, he wanted to give himself and the public a reason that he lost the popular vote in order to legitimize his presidency. This article speaks to a larger issue within the Trump administration. That being while Donald Trump recognizes and speaks out on an issue, he makes no active effort to inquire about these claims he seemingly cares deeply about.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: