Continuing the narrative that he was dead on arrival.

"Red flag" suggests his candidacy was doomed from the beginning.

Same Senate Republicans that are included in most reports.

This adds to the narrative that Trump and Vance tried to use this appointment to test their political power in the senate.

The inclusion of these partial quotes suggest that senate Republicans are using this appointment similarly. Its convenient that Gaetz is not in congress anymore right?

Adding to the narrative that Gaetz used this appointment to skirt the release of this report.

This contrasts with other reports that said Trump may have coerced him.

Is this quote from the Justice Department itself or just an individual within the department. Can be very misleading.

Not much more from the Trump administration is included in these articles. Was there a press release or conference about this?

Another appearance of this quote.

Including more context than some other articles, detailing more of the allegations than the withdrawal.

Prominent figures, Trump seems constantly tied to Gaetz throughout this story.

NBC recieved a "lean left" rating from AllSides

Very damning subheading. Readers have already been exposed to the heavy allegations against Gaetz, frames the rest of the article under this.

Includes details about why he is withdrawing, can lead to conclusions before the actual investigation or reporting later in the article.

Collins was frequently quoted by other sources as the main Republican voice in this space.

Binary continues: either the ethics report should be released or it shouldn't.

Similar to binary that says: either Gaetz did everything he is accused of or he did nothing.

This article claims that even people on the Hill have no clue who could be the next nominee, yet other articles speculated more than 10 names.

Rounds was also quoted by other news outlets frequently.

Deadlocked is a metaphor that compares physical standstill to the activity of a group of people. In this case, the committee is "deadlocked" because it is tied at 5-5 on whether or not to release the report. This entails that the vote is preventing anything else from moving ahead.

Suggests that Gaetz nomination could have been a cover up for his resignation and blocking the release of this report.

This article focuses very heavily on the story of Gaetz' past and the conflict that comes from it.

This quote appears again, as it has in every other article.

This language is very bold and implies that Gaetz might have been selected by Trump because of his loyalty and"far-right" stance.

The first thing that is mentioned is his controversial history.

This is an image of the Vance-Gaetz meetings in which they asked for votes - a secondary narrative covered in other stories. Both men are smiling and walking confidently, signifying they feel confident in how the meetings went.

Timeliness.

Professional news outlet with professional writers. Moore is most notable for centering her coverage around young voters. NPR received a "lean-left" rating from AllSides.

Another balanced headline, using common language with all others and mentioning prominent figures.

Informed opinion, but informed by who?

Elon Musk is probably the most controversial figure in the country at this time, and really had nothing to do with this saga. Why is his quote included?

News value of conflict between Republicans and Democrats.

Narrative that Republicans are hiding something by not voting to release the records. Republicans conveniently say they cannot release records because he is not a congressman anymore.

Binary thinking. Gaetz says he did not do anything and they are lying, opponents say he did everything.

Even more context that was not even included in CNN article.

These details were not included in other stories. More damning context to explain why Gaetz was so controversial.

Who is this source? It seems like the anonymous sources have much juicier information.

First article to suggest that Trump would have pulled his name himself if he did not resign. Other sources seemed to think that Gaetz would just not get confirmed.

"Writing on the wall" is a biblical metaphor that suggests that there are clear signs that something will fail. Gaetz was doomed to fail from the start. Begs the question of why Trump chose him in the first place.

Save America is capitalized in this quote. Implies that America is in danger and needs to be saved, also implies that Donald Trump is the hero America needs.

This article includes the same image as a few others, showing Vance and Gaetz leaving the Capitol with positive looks on their faces but it does not detail exactly why like some other articles.

It is interesting that he is pictured exiting the Strom Thurmond room, famously right wing Senator whose career was marred by racism.

This is the same quote that shows up in almost every other news article. Gaetz's own words are included in every article because he is the one that the stories are about.

The words "potentially damning" paint a more serious picture than other articles. This suggests that Gaetz career could be over if the report is released.

This article is published in the New York Post which received a "leans-right" rating by AllSides. Josh Christenson is the New York Post's head Washington DC columnist.

This title adds upon the basic factual title and includes part of the reason why he withdrew. It leaves out some of the complexities of the situation and why this report is hanging over him.

Call to action is a telltale sign of an opinion article.

The only sources included in this article are Psaki's own opinions. This is not even disguised, she is labeling Trump's decisions as "poor."

This narrative says that Trump was trying to exercise, or at least test, the power he has over the new Republican Senate. It appeared in a couple other stories.

Cutting corners is a metaphor that implies that the Trump nomination team did not do all of the work they needed to before nominating Gaetz. It also entails that there is a vetting process that is already laid out and should be followed.

Another connection to other nominations. This provides context of the larger operation of confirming Trump's cabinet. Gaetz is not the only nominee being investigated.

This is a conclusion. The writer does not know what information Trump had or did not have. Based on Trump's decision, the writer concludes that Trump might not have had the information.

Binary again, either they can be confirmed or they cannot. There is no in between.

This passage is replete with binaries. It suggests the process of nomination either does expose skeletons or it does not. If the investigation does not come up with something then there is nothing there. It also suggests our politicians are either immoral or moral, in this case Psaki is portraying Gaetz as wholly immoral.

The words "key lesson" imply that there is something that should be remembered and applied to the rest of politics. This headline stresses the importance of the lesson.

This is almost a blog by Jen Psaki as she releases something like this regularly and it is filled with her opinion. Psaki is the former Biden press secretary so she has an obviously left leaning perspective on the topic.

This is either good or bad. Binary thinking that attempts to categorize opinions of others into two sides.

Lindsay Graham and Susan Collins are the two predominant voices on the Republican side that have been included in most articles.

Interesting narrative that has not appeared in many other stories. The DOJ decided not to bring charges against him in Feb 2023.

The term deadlocked is always used to describe what happened in the Ethics Committee.

This is an informed opinion from someone close to Trump and who has been in the position before. Very credible and interesting that this same commentary was present in the CNN article but without attribution.

This image was used in other stories but without the provided context that it was taken at a Trump rally. Most images in this article are used to show the connection Gaetz had with Trump.

Loyalty is shown in the picture selection above.

This image shows Gaetz right next to Trump, emphasizing the relationship that the two have and how much support Gaetz has given to Trump.

This is more speculation based on some evidence. Interestingly, it is much different than the list of possible nominees from the BBC article.

Other outlets did not note the signifigance of the short turnaround.

Provides context of what Gaetz thinks about the investigation. He does not want to participate in it and wants to distance himself from it. Could be the reason for his early withdrawal.

This quote appears again as it has in almost every other written piece. The narrative that Gaetz is doing his part to help the Trump Administration. Can also be spun to be a narrative about Gaetz covering for himself.

This implies that Gaetz acknowledged the reason for his withdrawal having at least some part to do with the specifics of his allegations.

Published by Fox News which rates as right leaning by AllSides. This is another written news article but it includes more images and is much shorter.

Grouped under other stories about Trump's first few days in office, attached to more prominent figure.

Straightforward headline, similar to other professional news outlets.

Call to action disguised as news. This article appears on a website that looks news-like but it is very one-sided and has a goal other than reporting.

Key words apparent in every news story.

Binary thinking. Withdrawal is always good because the public knows what is best. When they do not like someone, that person is bad.

Now shifting to a narrative of institutional flaws. This could have been prevented if more people would have supported the same things that CLC supports.

This article continues to stress the power that Gaetz would have had if he was confirmed. This is a narrative of escaping or dodging possible terrible consequences.

Including these details next to each other hints at a possible causation but does not directly call for it.

Many news sources that cast this story in a more negative light include nods to the DoJ as the department that Gaetz "would have controlled." This implies that it is a good thing that he withdrew.

This paints a different narrative from other news sources. It claims that Gaetz withdrew due to public outcry rather than his own decision.

This is an image of Gaetz at CPAC. This implies that Gaetz is a big-time Republican as CPAC is the largest gathering of Republicans each year.

Roehrig has done a lot of work in the activism space.

The Campaign Legal Center is a left-leaning nonprofit that seeks to implement more restrictive campaign finance laws.

This article claims that Gaetz' withdrawal is a "win." Big signifier of an opinion article.

The article ends by discrediting the speculation it just made.

Again incorrect and most of these names are just big names that would get people talking. There is an informed opinion from a law professor but he is still very far removed from the situation.

Looking back in hindsight, none of these names became the next AG, shows how misleading speculation can be.

Speculation of one path he could take.

Like the CNN article this one has a section of opinion masked as prediction.

Conclusion. This could be the reason but nobody has said that they are avoiding publication.

Another secondary story. Provides context for his controversial character.

Guest is a Republican.

This closed-door effort to get votes is a secondary story that has been touched on by multiple outlets. This story says it was him and Trump while CNN said it was him and Vance.

Up until this point, all quotes have come from Gaetz' or Trump's social media. This, from a Democrat, is directly a response to a question.

This has been a key phrase throughout the Trump campaign. Showing up again and suggesting that what Gaetz is doing is part of saving America.

Mention again of the possible power Gaetz could have had.

Quote that has shown up often. Trying to diffuse seriousness of report.

This suggests binary of whether to release or not to release. If it was released he would look guilty and not get votes but if it was not then he would keep skeletons hidden. Obviously there is much more than this and we do not know the contents of the report.

Written the day of his withdrawal. As a written digital article it is accessible to all but still lengthy so many will stop reading before the end.

This image shows Gaetz with his mouth open and pointing. This signifies him yelling at something - more intimidating than an image of him sitting at a desk.

Caption notes that this guy pictured would have been in charge of US law enforcement - almost asking readers if this yelling guy is who they would want to run their law enforcement.

BBC is a professional British news outlet. Debusmann was born in Mexico and educated in England but based in New York City.

Another straightforward headline. Notes prominent figures involved in story.

Again why no name?

This is speculation based on the evidence they have collected so far.

These are informed opinions by people close to the situation but do not know everything.

Speculation section.

Big subheading captures general feeling but not all senators agree with this. CNN easily could have asked only Republicans who feel this way on purpose, or they were the only ones who would answer CNN.

Binary between controversial and uncontroversial. Everyone can disagree on things - when does it become controversial?

This message was crafted by PR for the Trump Whitehouse. CNN did not get this message exclusively but included it because it was important.

More "insider" info. Will other stories say the same stuff with a confirmed source?

Key point throughout the story. What was actually in there? This story weaves it to suggest that there was something bad.

How do we know the veracity of these sources? Narrative seems to suggest that there is something in the 2017 story that prevents people from voting for him. Also that he was scared that deeper investigation could reveal something worse.

Again?

Recurring narrative. Bringing up Gaetz' past controversy. Also provides context for many hesitant politicians.

"Securing" votes is a metaphor that suggests that people's minds were made up before the vote. Entails that they would not change. Also entails that the other votes are "unsecure" and can be secured.

Another unnamed source, CNN is a professional outlet so this source can be taken seriously but it is interesting that they were not named.

Inside and credible information.

Republican who does not support the Republican nomination was included, but not a Republican who does.

Controversy and conflict is another news value. Every political story seems like Ds vs Rs.

Coming from Gaetz himself. Probably is not exactly what he believes but what he thought would be best to say to preserve his reputation and keep doors open.

This source is not named but said to have had "direct knowledge" of the call.

Prominent people: Gaetz has been in the news before for other controversial reasons (prostitution and illegal drugs).

Digitally published article, makes it accessible to many people but because it is written, most people might not read past the headline.

This is a written news article, evidenced by the timeliness of the story and a lack of much opinion. It is telling the reader what events happened and in what order. Some opinion is mixed in with the "why."

Team of professional journalists. Bradner led coverage of 2018 midterms and 2020 democratic primaries. CNN "leans left" per an AllSides independent review.

His nomination was not actually voted on, Trump was only projecting that he would not.

Accurate and straightforward headline.

It is interesting that the poll drew a difference between influencers and regular citizens. Do they believe (or answer) the same as they say on social media?

Both sample sizes are large enough to yield representative answers.

This poll being a random sample is a positive sign. It is much easier to do random polls using voter records because they can easily be contacted and the pool is exactly (for the most part) the same as the pool of people who have the ability to vote in the gubernatorial election.

This poll has a margin of error of +/- 5% which is not a great number and the results should definitely be taken with a grain of salt.

This is a relatively new development so people are still forming their opinions. Results of this poll will most likely not reflect what we see in the actual race if she does decide to run.

The term "target" is a hunting metaphor. It is an active metaphor that is used to compare the actions of Donald Trump to a hunter taking aim at his target before killing it. It entails that Trump seeks to eliminate these entities just as a hunter eliminates his target.

The choice to include the word "allegedly" modifies the words of Trump who said with certainty that the deportees included gang members. This is an example of word choice bias.

This is a metaphor for politics as a sport. A playbook contains the strategies for accomplishing something, usually the defeat of an opponent.

The playbook metaphor is a conventional metaphor as it structures our way of seeing the world. Most people watch sports more than they watch politics so this metaphor gives them a better image of what is happening.

The most obvious news value when discussing Donald Trump: prominence. Who is more newsworthy than the President?

The playbook metaphor entails that there is a team working to accomplish this goal and implement the playbook. A playbook coordinates all members of the team toward one goal.

The metaphor also entails that there is an opposing team that also has a playbook of their own.

This is the journalist's own speculation. He is taking what Powell said and his own analysis to make a prediction about the future.

It is a fact that the United States has not met the first definition, however the second definition is up to more interpretation. How exactly is weakness measured?

An informed opinion from a different source, hopefully allowing readers to come to their own conclusions based on the conclusions of multiple experts.

The trillion dollar question.

Speculation. There is no way to know that these specific tariffs will see this happen. Powell likely sad this to provide the public with a rational way to calm themselves.

So far, the journalist is not adding his own opinion but presenting Powell's informed opinion in a more authoritative light that sounds closer to fact.

What does this mean to the uninformed reader? Should provide some more context to this number.

More informed opinion. His assessment of the growth data should be taken with authority as the Chair of the Federal Reserve but it should still be looked at critically.

Powell did do this, this is a fact. However, his interpretation of the data cannot be taken as a fact.

The most informed of all opinions. He cannot say anything with certainty, in fact the most important part of his job is to not say anything with certainty.

The article begins with a question that does not have a clear cut answer - lots of room for speculation.

Mike Patton is a senior contributor for Forbes and holds a certification as a Certified Financial Planner. He is familiar with these topics as he has covered them since 2009.

More grandiose comments. Almost anything Trump does or says can be considered news under the news value of prominence.

Follow the money - every story is about where money is going. The bigger the amounts the more likely it is to be covered in the news.

These quotes give a good sense of each side's views but can never portray every member's opinions. More grandiose speech makes for a better read so some other statements won't make the story.

The Heritage Foundation is a right-wing think tank, this is not mentioned by the journalists but hopefully known by the readers.

The article covers both sides and includes statements from each side. These statements were most likely given in press conferences crafted by Secretary McMahon's PR team.

These link to other AP articles with bold headlines. How likely are people to actually click these or read beyond the headline?

Such a short quote can be interpreted in many ways. Trump is also known for being a victim of "sanewashing" due to the occasionally incoherent nature of his speech.

Are these the only responsibilities preserved or were others left out for sake of brevity?

Are executive orders usually written like this? Do they normally detail how work will be carried out? This would be valuable information for a reader to know.

This is not an assertive fact but a subjective assessment of the outlook of dismantling the department. It is based in fact but cannot be taken as such.

Collin Binkley almost exclusively covers news related to the United States Department of Education and K-12 education policy while Chris Megerian covers White House matters. While they may not be experts in these policies, they have substantial experience covering these topics.

All opinions in this piece can be understood as informed opinions as Alexander J. Motyl specializes in this field.

Another prediction made based on historical truths. This makes it very difficult to determine what is fact and what is opinion. Hopefully an educated audience would be able to understand that nothing in the future can be stated as a fact with 100% certainty.

Facts are used to make a prediction about the future.

This is a fact but when it is applied to the current situation with Russia it becomes an informed opinion or speculation as there is no way to know that the same thing will certainly happen.

This is presented as a fact but cannot be proven through research and data. The root cause of any issue is almost impossible to pinpoint in any situation.

The designation of Russia's war as a genocide is another example of conclusion. The atrocities committed by Russia are terrible but the International Court of Justice declined to rule on whether or not it meets the bar of genocide. The word is not used as a factual statement but an emphasis on the horrific nature of the war.

This conclusion is based on observation of human nature (we tend to lose physical and mental performance as we age). The author did not set a specific date for when this will happen but still presented this as a fact although it is speculating something that may or may not happen in the future.

More speculation combined with informed opinion. Kara-Murza could be considered an expert in this issue as he experienced being a political prisoner but he is still giving only his opinion.

This is speculation, there is no way to prove that the elimination of Putin will lead to peace in Europe.

This is a fact and has been verified by other sources as something that Putin did say, however this article does not directly quote him. According to an article in the BBC Putin said that a ceasefire should lead to "an enduring peace and remove the root causes of this crisis".

Is this the root cause? What data supports this fact? This is how a Russian political prisoner sees Vladimir Putin but it is not how other people may see him.

Very powerful way to start the piece. What entity determines what is right or wrong? It appears that Putin is only right because the author of this article agrees with at least one thing that he did.