Major West Coast airports brace for utter chaos as new DHS chief reveals massive shake up plans ⁠66%

By Ross O'Keefe⁠0%

5/27/2026, 2:49:56 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Slippery Slope, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 30.4% saturation with 98 hits. Analysis detected 830 faulty-reasoning hits from 322 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 59.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠66% (7,527 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 65.60% of the article peer group.

The United States' head immigration official is leaning toward pausing international air traffic to several West Coast airports in a controversial and chaotic move. 
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, fresh off his stint in the Senate before taking over from Kristi Noem, said he is "drawing up plans" to end customs processing in sanctuary city airports. 
Such a move would impact major international flight centers on the West Coast, including LAX, Denver, Seattle-Tacoma International, and San Francisco. 
All four of those cities are known as sanctuary cities, meaning they do not fully cooperate with federal immigration enforcement, and have left-leaning politics. 
He floated the idea last week but received pushback from Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy. 
"We have people from around the world and around the country that need to be able to fly into all different kinds of places," Duffy said. 
"We shouldn't shut down air travel in a state that doesn't agree with our politics." 
In an April 6 Fox interview, Mullin had openly questioned whether sanctuary cities with international airports should "be processing customs." 
"Seriously, if they're a sanctuary city, and they're receiving international flights, and we're asking them to partner with us at the airport but once [immigrants] walk out of the airport they're not going to enforce immigration policy, maybe we need to have a really hard look at that because we need to focus on cities that want to work with us," he told Fox News chief political anchor and "Special Report" host Bret Baier. 
Asked whether cities would lose customs enforcement for international travelers, the DHS secretary responded: "We're gonna have to start prioritizing things at some point." 
"Right now, remember, the Democrats are wanting to defund Customs and Border Patrol," Mullin added. 
Airports impacted could also include those in New York City, Newark, Philadelphia, and Chicago. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 27.6%Ross O'Keefe: 3.7%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias27.6%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.5%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 3.4%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.5%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 22.0%Ross O'Keefe: 11.8%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect22.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.5%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.8%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 12.7%Ross O'Keefe: 0.7%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias12.7%This article: 12.7%Ross O'Keefe: 15.0%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias12.7%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 2.3%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 2.0%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%Ross O'Keefe: 2.4%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias7.5%This article: 7.5%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 4.3%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.3%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.6%Ross O'Keefe: 1.4%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias10.6%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.5%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 5.2%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 4.7%Ross O'Keefe: 1.6%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma4.7%This article: 23.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope23.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 4.3%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 4.7%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring4.7%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 13.4%Ross O'Keefe: 10.4%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion13.4%This article: 7.5%Ross O'Keefe: 1.1%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question7.5%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 3.1%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.5%Ross O'Keefe: 1.1%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof7.5%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 7.5%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division7.5%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 2.8%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 30.4%Ross O'Keefe: 3.4%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)30.4%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.2%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 15.5%Ross O'Keefe: 4.6%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote15.5%This article: 23.0%Ross O'Keefe: 2.4%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection23.0%This article: 12.7%Ross O'Keefe: 11.0%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice12.7%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.6%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 7.5%Ross O'Keefe: 0.2%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.9%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.4%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

322 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers58%attributed speech134writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageSean Duffy • 26 words • 100.0% coverageSean Duffy • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 74 words • 100.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 24 words • 100.0% coverageMarkwayne Mullin • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Markwayne Mullin

77%flagged-word coverage
147 attributed words78% of attributed speech74% writer coverage
0%27.5%55.0%Quote-first Misdirection+50.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Markwayne Mullin: 50.3%50.3%Biased Writer Voice-30.6 ptsWriter: 30.6%Markwayne Mullin: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-17.9 ptsWriter: 17.9%Markwayne Mullin: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+16.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Markwayne Mullin: 16.3%16.3%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.