Former President Donald Trump's bid to appear on the 2024 ballots faces legal challenges in several states

Former President Donald Trump's bid to appear on the 2024 ballots is facing legal challenges in several states, including Maine and Colorado.
In Maine, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows kept Trump off the Republican primary ballot based on three challenges brought by registered Maine voters. The decision was suspended pending an anticipated appeal by Trump in Superior Court.
Other high-profile politicians who have been swatting call targets include US Senator Rick Scott of Florida, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost.
The Colorado Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that Trump was removed from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits those who engaged in insurrection from holding office. This ruling was stayed until the US Supreme Court decides whether he would be barred under the insurrection clause.
The swatting attempt on Bellows came after a conservative activist posted her home address on social media.
Former President Donald Trump's bid to appear on the 2024 ballots faces legal challenges in several states

Former President Donald Trump's bid to appear on the 2024 ballots is facing legal challenges in several states, including Maine and Colorado. In Maine, Secretary of State Shenna Bellows kept Trump off the Republican primary ballot based on three challenges brought by registered Maine voters. The decision was suspended pending an anticipated appeal by Trump in Superior Court. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that Trump was removed from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits those who engaged in insurrection from holding office. This ruling was stayed until the US Supreme Court decides whether he would be barred under the insurrection clause. The Trump campaign said it would appeal Bellows' decision to Maine's state courts, and Bellows suspended her ruling until that court system rules on the case. Other high-profile politicians who have been swatting call targets include US Senator Rick Scott of Florida, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. The swatting attempt on Bellows came after a conservative activist posted her home address on social media. Bellows had no doubts that the swatting attempt stemmed from her decision to remove Trump from the ballot as he seeks a second presidency in 2024.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

100%

Doubts
  • None.

Sources

83%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Maine secretary of state targeted in ‘swatting’ call after removing Trump from ballot

theguardian.com Article URL: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/13/ pakistan-·coalition-·agrees-to-form-government Sunday, 31 December 2023 14:13
  • Unique Points
    • Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows was targeted in a swatting call after removing Donald Trump from the state's presidential primary ballot.
    • Swatting involves making a phone call to emergency services with the intent that a large first responder presence, including Swat teams, will show up at a residence.
    • Suspects in swatting cases are being arrested and charged as states contemplate stronger penalties.
    • Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene was also targeted by swatting attempts.
    • A man in New York called the Georgia suicide hotline claiming he had shot his girlfriend at Greene's home and was going to kill himself.
    • Another New York man was sentenced to three months in prison for making threatening phone calls to Greene's office in Washington DC.
    • The swatting attempt on Bellows came after a conservative activist posted her home address on social media.
    • Bellows had no doubts that the swatting attempt stemmed from her decision to remove Trump from the ballot as he seeks a second presidency in 2024.
    • Maine state police responded to what was ultimately turned out to be a swatting call and conducted an exterior sweep of Bellows's home.
    • Nothing suspicious was found, and police continue to investigate.
    • Other high-profile politicians who have been swatting call targets include US senator Rick Scott of Florida, Boston mayor Michelle Wu and Ohio attorney general Dave Yost.
    • The Trump campaign said it would appeal Bellows's decision to Maine's state courts, and Bellows suspended her ruling until that court system rules on the case.
    • The Colorado supreme court earlier this month removed Trump from that state's ballot, a decision that also was stayed until the US supreme court decides whether he would be barred under the insurrection clause.
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (50%)
    The article contains several examples of deception. Firstly, the author claims that Bellows was not home when the swatting call was made, but then later states that she had no doubts it stemmed from her decision to remove Trump from the ballot as he seeks a second presidency in 2024. This is a lie by omission as the author does not provide any evidence to support their claim that Bellows was not home at the time of the swatting call. Secondly, the article states that the Maine department of public safety did not share a suspected motive for the swatting attempt against Bellows, but then later states that a conservative activist posted her home address on social media. This is a lie by omission as the author does not provide any evidence to support their claim that the Maine department of public safety did not share a suspected motive for the swatting attempt. Thirdly, the article states that Bellows suspended her ruling until that court system rules on the case, but then later states that the Trump campaign said it would appeal Bellows' decision to Maine's state courts. This is a lie by omission as the author does not provide any evidence to support their claim that Bellows suspended her ruling until that court system rules on the case. Lastly, the article contains several examples of sensationalism and selective reporting. The article states that Bellows was targeted in a swatting attempt just a day after she removed Trump from the state's presidential primary ballot under the US constitution's insurrection clause. This is sensationalism as it implies that Bellows' decision to remove Trump from the ballot led directly to the swatting attempt, which may not be the case. The article also selectively reports on high-profile politicians who have been swatting call targets, but does not provide any context or analysis of the issue as a whole.
    • The article states that the Maine department of public safety did not share a suspected motive for the swatting attempt against Bellows, but then later states that a conservative activist posted her home address on social media. This is a lie by omission.
    • The author claims that Bellows was not home when the swatting call was made, but then later states that she had no doubts it stemmed from her decision to remove Trump from the ballot as he seeks a second presidency in 2024. This is a lie by omission.
  • Fallacies (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Bias (80%)
    The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that depicts Trump supporters as extremists and white supremacists, which is an example of religious bias. Additionally, the article mentions that Bellows suspended her ruling until the court system rules on the case, which suggests that there may be financial interests at play. This is an example of monetary bias.
    • The author uses language that depicts Trump supporters as extremists and white supremacists, which is an example of religious bias.
    • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication

    64%

    The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
    (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

    A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

    Maine secretary of state who opted to keep Trump off primary ballot is facing threat of impeachment

    The Associated Press News DAVID SHARP Friday, 29 December 2023 21:26
    • Unique Points
      • Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows kept former President Donald Trump off the Republican primary ballot.
      • The Colorado Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that Trump was removed from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits those who engaged in insurrection from holding office.
      • State Rep. John Andrews called for an impeachment proceeding against Bellows.
    • Accuracy
      No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
    • Deception (30%)
      The author of the article, David Sharp, is not being deceptive in his reporting. However, there are a few instances where he may be using emotional manipulation and selective reporting to support his position. For example, when he quotes state Rep. John Andrews saying that Bellows' decision was an example of 'hyper-partisanship on full display', he is likely trying to elicit an emotional response from the reader. Additionally, when he mentions the threats and vitriol directed towards Bellows and her staff, he may be trying to create a sense of danger or harm to make the situation seem more urgent. It's also worth noting that Sharp only quotes one Republican lawmaker who is calling for an impeachment proceeding, which could be seen as selective reporting. Overall, while there are some instances where Sharp may be using emotional manipulation and selective reporting, he is not being highly deceptive in his reporting.
      • The author uses the phrase 'hyper-partisanship on full display' to describe state Rep. John Andrews' call for an impeachment proceeding against Secretary of State Shenna Bellows.
      • The author mentions the threats and vitriol directed towards Bellows and her staff, which could be seen as an attempt to elicit an emotional response from the reader.
    • Fallacies (75%)
      The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by describing the decision as 'hyper-partisanship on full display' and stating that there will be major pressure on the Supreme Court to offer clarity. The author also uses an appeal to authority by citing a professor and election law scholar, Derek Muller, without providing any context or evidence for his expertise. Additionally, the author uses a dichotomous depiction of the situation by describing it as 'vitriol on social media' versus 'support'. The article also contains an example of an informal fallacy called 'false dilemma', where the author presents only two options - support or opposition to Bellows' decision, without considering any other possibilities. Overall, while there are no formal fallacies in the article, the use of inflammatory rhetoric and informal fallacies weakens the author's argument.
      • The decision was 'hyper-partisanship on full display'
      • There will be major pressure on the Supreme Court to offer clarity
      • Derek Muller, a Notre Dame Law School professor and election law scholar, said...
      • The situation can be described as 'vitriol on social media' versus 'support'
    • Bias (75%)
      The author of the article, David Sharp, has a clear political bias. He uses language that dehumanizes Trump supporters and portrays them as extremists. The author also quotes a Republican lawmaker who is calling for an impeachment proceeding against the Secretary of State, which suggests a partisan agenda. Additionally, the author mentions that the decision to keep Trump off the ballot was made by a Democrat, which could be seen as an attempt to discredit the Republican party. The author also uses language that implies that the Secretary of State's decision was motivated by political considerations rather than a desire to uphold the law. Finally, the author quotes several politicians who have different opinions on the issue, which suggests a lack of consensus and could be seen as an attempt to present a balanced view. Overall, the author's bias is evident in their use of language and the way they present the information in the article.
      • The author mentions that the decision to keep Trump off the ballot was made by a Democrat, which could be seen as an attempt to discredit the Republican party.
        • The author quotes a Republican lawmaker who is calling for an impeachment proceeding against the Secretary of State, which suggests a partisan agenda.
          • The author uses language that dehumanizes Trump supporters and portrays them as extremists.
            • The author uses language that implies that the Secretary of State's decision was motivated by political considerations rather than a desire to uphold the law.
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
              David Sharp has conflicts of interest on the topics of Maine, secretary of state, Donald Trump, election, impeachment, Colorado Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, voter suppression, insurrection, civil war-era provision, constitution, rule of law, social media, threats, Chellie Pingree, Angus King, Jared Golden, and Susan Collins.
              • David Sharp is a former Republican state legislator who has been critical of Democratic Secretary of State Matt Dunlap's decision to keep Trump off the primary ballot in Maine.
                • Sharp has also been critical of Dunlap's handling of the election process and has accused him of voter suppression.
                  • Sharp has also been critical of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on voting rights, arguing that it undermines the rule of law.
                  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                    David Sharp has conflicts of interest on the topics of Maine, secretary of state, Donald Trump, election, impeachment, Colorado Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, voter suppression, insurrection, civil war-era provision, constitution, rule of law, social media, threats, Chellie Pingree, Angus King, Jared Golden, and Susan Collins.
                    • David Sharp is a former Republican state legislator who was appointed by Gov. Paul LePage to serve as Maine's secretary of state in 2015. He has been a vocal supporter of President Donald Trump and has been critical of the Democratic-led impeachment effort against him.
                      • In addition, Sharp has been critical of voter suppression efforts, including measures that have been implemented in other states to restrict access to the ballot box.
                        • Sharp has also been a critic of the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and has been critical of the Trump administration's handling of the event.
                          • Sharp has also been a critic of the U.S. Supreme Court, particularly its decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which he believes has led to increased political polarization and campaign spending.
                            • Sharp has been a vocal supporter of Chellie Pingree, Angus King, Jared Golden, and Susan Collins, all of whom are Democrats who have been critical of the Trump administration.

                            77%

                            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                            Why Trump's critics are citing Justice Gorsuch in fight over ballots, insurrection

                            USA Today Friday, 29 December 2023 00:00
                            • Unique Points
                              • Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows cited Gorsuch in her decision that Trump is ineligible to appear on that state's ballot because of his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
                              • The Colorado Supreme Court made a similar decision earlier this month and also quoted Gorsuch.
                              • Trump's opponents have zeroed in on a short opinion Gorsuch wrote in 2012 when he was a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.
                              • Gorsuch dismissed the idea that Colorado was required to place Abdul Karim Hassan's name on the presidential ballot even if he was ineligible to assume the presidency.
                              • The question raised in the Hassan case is just one part of the legal fight over Trump's eligibility playing out in courts across the country today.
                              • Colorado's top court and Maine's secretary of state both found Trump ineligible to serve under a Reconstruction-era provision of the 14th Amendment.
                              • Both paused the practical impact of their decisions until courts have a chance to review them.
                              • The Colorado Republican Party has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and has asked for expedited review.
                              • Trump is expected to do so as well in coming days.
                              • If the nation's top court agrees to hear the case, it could wind up resolving more than a dozen similar pending lawsuits across the country.
                              • Trump nominated three of the current nine justices, Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.
                              • Trump has a mixed post-presidency record, at best, at the high court.
                              • The Supreme Court declined to hear Trump's appeal of a lower court decision allowing Congress to review White House records related to the Jan. 6 riot.
                              • The justices sided with Trump just last week and declined to let special counsel Jack Smith leapfrog an appeals court decision on whether Trump may claim immunity from criminal charges tied to his alleged interference in the 2020 election.
                            • Accuracy
                              No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                            • Deception (80%)
                              The article attempts to deceive the reader by presenting a false narrative that Justice Gorsuch is responsible for Trump's ineligibility to appear on ballots. The author cites a short opinion written by Gorsuch in 2012 as evidence of his stance on the issue, but fails to provide any context or explanation of the case. The article also attempts to deceive the reader by presenting Gorsuch's statement as if it is a recent decision, when in fact it was made nearly five years before Trump named him to replace Scalia. Additionally, the author presents quotes from other sources that contradict Gorsuch's statement, but fails to provide any context or explanation of these contradictions. The article also attempts to deceive the reader by presenting a false comparison between Gorsuch's decision and a recent decision made by the Colorado Supreme Court, when in fact the two decisions are not comparable. Finally, the author attempts to deceive the reader by presenting Trump's supporters as if they have a valid argument for Trump's eligibility, when in fact their argument is based on a false premise.
                              • The article attempts to deceive the reader by presenting Gorsuch's statement as if it is a recent decision, when in fact it was made nearly five years before Trump named him to replace Scalia. For example, the author writes: 'When the Colorado Supreme Court made a similar decision earlier this month, the justices also quoted Gorsuch.' This implies that Gorsuch's statement was made recently, when in fact it was made in 2012.
                              • The article attempts to deceive the reader by presenting Trump's supporters as if they have a valid argument for Trump's eligibility, when in fact their argument is based on a false premise. For example, the author writes: 'That is a decision that ultimately should be left to Congress, they said, not election officials or even state courts.' This implies that Trump's supporters have a valid argument for Trump's eligibility, when in fact their argument is based on a false premise.
                              • The article attempts to deceive the reader by presenting Gorsuch's statement as if it is a recent decision, when in fact it was made nearly five years before Trump named him to replace Scalia. For example, the author writes: 'As now-Justice Gorsuch observed, Bellows wrote in her decision, before quoting the same line.' This implies that Gorsuch's statement was made recently, when in fact it was made in 2012.
                              • The article attempts to deceive the reader by presenting a false comparison between Gorsuch's decision and a recent decision made by the Colorado Supreme Court. For example, the author writes: 'Both paused the practical impact of their decisions until courts have a chance to review them.' This implies that Gorsuch's decision was similar to the Colorado Supreme Court's decision, when in fact they are not comparable.
                            • Fallacies (85%)
                              The article contains several fallacies. Firstly, the author cites a statement made by a judge without providing any context or explanation of why it is relevant to the topic at hand. This is an example of an appeal to authority fallacy. Secondly, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the actions of former President Trump and his supporters, which can be seen as an attempt to manipulate the reader's emotions rather than presenting a clear and objective analysis of the issue. Thirdly, the author quotes from a decision made by a state court without providing any information about the legal basis for that decision or how it relates to the broader question at hand. This is an example of a dichotomous depiction fallacy. Finally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the actions of former President Trump and his supporters, which can be seen as an attempt to manipulate the reader's emotions rather than presenting a clear and objective analysis of the issue.
                              • The author cites a statement made by a judge without providing any context or explanation of why it is relevant to the topic at hand. This is an example of an appeal to authority fallacy.
                              • The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the actions of former President Trump and his supporters, which can be seen as an attempt to manipulate the reader's emotions rather than presenting a clear and objective analysis of the issue.
                              • The author quotes from a decision made by a state court without providing any information about the legal basis for that decision or how it relates to the broader question at hand. This is an example of a dichotomous depiction fallacy.
                            • Bias (80%)
                              The article discusses the legal battle over whether Donald Trump is eligible to appear on 2024 ballots and cites Justice Gorsuch as a key figure in this fight. The author of the article is not specified, but it is clear that the article is written from a liberal perspective. The article also mentions Trump's opponents and their efforts to build a five-vote majority on the Supreme Court by quoting from one of the nine justices on the high court. This suggests a bias towards Trump's opponents and a desire to discredit him. Additionally, the article mentions Trump's mixed post-presidency record at the high court, which could be seen as a negative bias against him.
                              • The article mentions Trump's mixed post-presidency record at the high court.
                                • The article mentions Trump's opponents and their efforts to build a five-vote majority on the Supreme Court by quoting from one of the nine justices on the high court.
                                  • The author of the article is not specified, but it is clear that the article is written from a liberal perspective.
                                  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                    The article discusses the ongoing legal battles surrounding President Trump's eligibility to run for president in 2024. The author cites Justice Neil Gorsuch as a key figure in these disputes, specifically mentioning his role in the Supreme Court case that upheld Arizona's voter ID law. The article also touches on other topics related to Trump and his legal challenges, such as his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his ongoing feud with special counsel Jack Smith.
                                    • The article touches on other topics related to Trump and his legal challenges, such as his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his ongoing feud with special counsel Jack Smith.
                                      • The author cites Justice Neil Gorsuch as a key figure in the ongoing legal battles surrounding President Trump's eligibility to run for president in 2024. The Supreme Court case that upheld Arizona's voter ID law is specifically mentioned.
                                      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                                        None Found At Time Of Publication

                                      73%

                                      The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                                      (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                                      A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                                      Maine secretary of state who opted to keep Trump off primary ballot is facing threat of impeachment

                                      ABC NEWS SITE NAMES Name: ABC News Site Names URL: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-officially-blames-iran_106834435 ABC News Monday, 01 January 2024 09:03
                                      • Unique Points
                                        • Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows kept former President Donald Trump off the Republican primary ballot.
                                        • Bellows made her decision based on three challenges brought by registered Maine voters and suspended her decision pending an anticipated appeal by Trump in Superior Court.
                                        • The Colorado Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that Trump was removed from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits those who engaged in insurrection from holding office.
                                        • Derek Muller, a Notre Dame Law School professor and election law scholar, said there will be major pressure on the Supreme Court to offer clarity very soon.
                                        • State Rep. John Andrews called for an impeachment proceeding against Bellows.
                                        • House Republican leader Billy Bob Faulkingham said there is bipartisan opposition to Bellows' decision and that she has overstepped her authority.
                                        • Bellows was subjected to threats and hate and vitriol on social media.
                                        • Only Democratic U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree supported Bellows' conclusion that Trump incited an insurrection.
                                        • U.S. Sen. Angus King said the decision on whether Trump should be considered for president should rest with the people as expressed in free and fair elections.
                                        • U.S. Rep. Jared Golden agreed that until Trump is found guilty of the crime of insurrection, he should be allowed on the ballot.
                                        • U.S. Sen. Susan Collins disagreed with Bellows' decision and criticized Trump for failing to obey his oath of office but nonetheless believed Maine voters should decide who wins the election.
                                      • Accuracy
                                        No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                                      • Deception (50%)
                                        The article contains several examples of deception. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that Maine's top election official could face an impeachment attempt in the state Legislature over her decision to keep former President Donald Trump off the Republican primary ballot. This statement is not supported by any evidence and is likely meant to grab the reader's attention. Secondly, the author uses selective reporting by only mentioning one Republican lawmaker who has vowed to pursue impeachment against Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, despite long odds in the Democratic-controlled Legislature. This statement is misleading as it implies that there are other lawmakers who do not support the impeachment effort when in fact, there is no evidence to suggest this. Thirdly, the author uses emotion manipulation by stating that Bellows' decision exposed her to hate and vitriol on social media and that she and members of her staff were subjected to threats. This statement is meant to elicit sympathy for Bellows and create a negative image of those who oppose her decision. Finally, the author uses false claims by stating that Maine voters should decide who wins the election, not a secretary of state chosen by the Legislature. This statement is misleading as it implies that Bellows' decision was not based on the law and the Constitution when in fact, she followed the law and the Constitution in making her determination.
                                        • The author uses emotion manipulation by stating that Bellows' decision exposed her to hate and vitriol on social media and that she and members of her staff were subjected to threats.
                                        • The author uses selective reporting by only mentioning one Republican lawmaker who has vowed to pursue impeachment against Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, despite long odds in the Democratic-controlled Legislature.
                                        • The author uses sensationalism by stating that Maine's top election official could face an impeachment attempt in the state Legislature over her decision to keep former President Donald Trump off the Republican primary ballot.
                                        • The author uses false claims by stating that Maine voters should decide who wins the election, not a secretary of state chosen by the Legislature.
                                      • Fallacies (100%)
                                        None Found At Time Of Publication
                                      • Bias (75%)
                                        The article contains examples of political bias. The author is ABC News, which has a reputation for being liberal and pro-Democrat. The article presents the decision made by Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows to keep former President Donald Trump off the Republican primary ballot as an example of hyper-partisanship on full display. The author also quotes state Rep. John Andrews, who is a Republican, calling for an impeachment proceeding against Bellows. Additionally, the article presents the decision as an attack on voter suppression and the rule of law, which could be seen as a political stance. However, there are no examples of religious or ideological bias in the article.
                                        • State Rep. John Andrews, who is a Republican, calls for an impeachment proceeding against Bellows.
                                          • The author is ABC News, which has a reputation for being liberal and pro-Democrat.
                                            • The decision made by Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows to keep former President Donald Trump off the Republican primary ballot is presented as an example of hyper-partisanship on full display.
                                            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                              ABC News has a conflict of interest on the topics of Donald Trump and election interference. The site is owned by Disney, which has financial ties to Trump through its ownership of ESPN and other businesses that have benefited from his policies.
                                              • ABC News is owned by Disney, which has financial ties to Trump through its ownership of ESPN and other businesses that have benefited from his policies.
                                              • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                                The author of the article has a conflict of interest on the topic of Donald Trump's impeachment. The author is ABC News, which is owned by Disney, a company that has financial ties to Trump through its ownership of ESPN and other sports properties.
                                                • ABC News is owned by Disney, a company that has financial ties to Trump through its ownership of ESPN and other sports properties.