"Katie's killer was not our neighbor, Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor, this guy in the Bronx was not our…
"Katie's killer was not our neighbor, Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor, this guy in the Bronx was not our neighbor." @angeldadjoe on the sanctuary politicians who put criminal illegal aliens before innocent Americans.
Posted on X 2026-10-16 by @DHSgov · View on X →
The video says (transcribed automatically):
Katie's killer was not our neighbor. Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor. This guy in the Bronx was not our neighbor. So I don't know why they can't even distinguish between the difference. So let's break it down. The bottom line is it's the policies and what they've done upstream. And we have to suffer now the rest of our lives because of that. And they can't see it in their heart to even have only one -sided empathy is what they have. And that's toward the criminal and the illegal behavior. The victims are And that's toward the criminal and the illegal behavior. The victims are, it's an inverted morality. It's ridiculous.
What the model flagged
Analyzed 2026-10-16 15:40 UTC.
Findings may include language that is quoted rather than the speaker's own, and the model over-reads ceremonial language (tributes, anniversaries) as persuasion. Check each finding against the original.
Loaded Language 80%
Emotionally charged labels like 'criminal illegal aliens' and 'innocent Americans' frame the issue to provoke outrage rather than inform.
“criminal illegal aliens”
“innocent Americans”
Appeal to Prejudice 65%
Defines immigrants by status as criminals and sets them against 'innocent Americans', generalising from killers to an immigrant-status group.
“criminal illegal aliens before innocent Americans”
Appeal to Fear 60%
Invokes named murder cases to stir fear of danger from migrants and imply policy must change.
“Katie's killer was not our neighbor, Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor”
Repetition 60%
The phrase 'was not our neighbor' is repeated three times to drive the point home through familiarity.
“was not our neighbor, Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor, this guy in the Bronx was not our neighbor”
Name Calling 50%
Labels officials as 'sanctuary politicians' who side with criminals over citizens to discredit them rather than address policy.
“sanctuary politicians who put criminal illegal aliens before innocent Americans”
Scapegoating 50%
Blames an unspecified 'they' and their upstream policies as the cause of broad suffering, without specifics.
“it's the policies and what they've done upstream”
Exaggeration/Hyperbole 65%
Claims everyone must suffer for the rest of their lives, an extreme overstatement.
“we have to suffer now the rest of our lives”
Full analysis, paragraph by paragraph
The complete text as analyzed. Highlighted paragraphs are where the model found a technique.
"Katie's killer was not our neighbor, Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor, this guy in the Bronx was not our neighbor." @angeldadjoe on the sanctuary politicians who put criminal illegal aliens before innocent Americans.
Loaded Language Emotionally charged labels like 'criminal illegal aliens' and 'innocent Americans' frame the issue to provoke outrage rather than inform.
Appeal to Prejudice Defines immigrants by status as criminals and sets them against 'innocent Americans', generalising from killers to an immigrant-status group.
Appeal to Fear Invokes named murder cases to stir fear of danger from migrants and imply policy must change. Flagged: “Katie's killer was not our neighbor, Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor”.
Repetition The phrase 'was not our neighbor' is repeated three times to drive the point home through familiarity.
Name Calling Labels officials as 'sanctuary politicians' who side with criminals over citizens to discredit them rather than address policy.
Katie's killer was not our neighbor. Sheridan Gorman's killer was not our neighbor. This guy in the Bronx was not our neighbor. So I don't know why they can't even distinguish between the difference. So let's break it down. The bottom line is it's the policies and what they've done upstream. And we have to suffer now the rest of our lives because of that. And they can't see it in their heart to even have only one -sided empathy is what they have. And that's toward the criminal and the illegal behavior. The victims are And that's toward the criminal and the illegal behavior. The victims are, it's an inverted morality. It's ridiculous.
Repetition The phrase 'was not our neighbor' is repeated across consecutive sentences to make the point feel true through familiarity.
Scapegoating Blames an unspecified 'they' and their upstream policies as the cause of broad suffering, without specifics.
Exaggeration/Hyperbole Claims everyone must suffer for the rest of their lives, an extreme overstatement. Flagged: “we have to suffer now the rest of our lives”.
Appeal to Fear Evokes a lasting threat to the audience's lives from the opponents' policies. Flagged: “we have to suffer now the rest of our lives”.
Name Calling Discredits opponents as heartless and lacking empathy rather than addressing arguments. Flagged: “they can't see it in their heart to even have only one -sided empathy”.
Loaded Language Frames opponents' empathy as being for 'the criminal and the illegal behavior', an emotionally charged characterization. Flagged: “toward the criminal and the illegal behavior”.
Analyzed automatically with Semblen's fine-tuned model. These are rhetorical techniques, not political tilt — finding one is not a claim that the statement is false. How items are chosen →