QAnon Conspiracy Theorists Have Taken Over a Prison ⁠92%

By Will Sommer⁠83%

7/20/2026, 11:36:29 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Emotion, and Pessimism Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 64.1% saturation with 198 hits. Analysis detected 1,026 faulty-reasoning hits from 309 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 85.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠92% (1,951 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 91.10% of the article peer group.

PROMOTERS OF QANON and other lurid pro-Trump conspiracy theories will head to California next month to visit a women’s prison. 
But unlike other QAnon believers who have been incarcerated for crimes like murder , kidnapping , and storming the U.S. 
Capitol , these conspiracy theorists won’t be inmates—they’ll be in charge! 
Thanks to $1.6 million in donations so far, the Leo Chesney Correctional Facility—a decommissioned minimum security prison in the town of Live Oak, north of Sacramento—is set to become “Peace of Heaven,” a sanctuary for children rescued from supposed child sex-trafficking operations. 
“We could transform that from a women’s prison to a children’s paradise!” 
Pastor David Bryan, the far-right mastermind behind the prison takeover, said about the prison in a June 2025 interview. 
From August 28 to August 30, conspiracy theorists like former CBS News reporter Lara Logan , QAnon promoter Ann Vandersteel , and recently freed Colorado election clerk Tina Peters will appear at the “Rev17 2.0” conference at Bryan’s church, located near the prison in Live Oak, California, to raise money for the prison overhaul. 
While Rev17 2.0 might sound like the kind of alphanumeric string you might use in a password, it actually signals the apocalyptic vision of the organizers: The name is an allusion to chapter 17 in the Book of Revelation —the one about the Whore of Babylon and the Beast. 
(The 2.0, meanwhile, is a bit more pedestrian: It just means it’s the second annual conference of this kind.) 
The proceeds from tickets, which range from $99 for general admission to $299 for VIPs, will go to funding the reno. 
VIP tickets include a tour of the prison, which became inactive in 2011 after state budget cuts. 
But the Peace of Heaven children’s sanctuary faces long odds before it can come to fruition, including 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.6%Will Sommer: 7.6%The Bulwark: 5.8%Confirmation Bias13.6%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 22.3%Will Sommer: 6.4%The Bulwark: 2.9%Availability Heuristic22.3%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Will Sommer: 11.4%The Bulwark: 6.8%Framing Effect6.1%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.5%Will Sommer: 0.6%The Bulwark: 0.4%Status Quo Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.9%Will Sommer: 1.3%The Bulwark: 1.5%Optimism Bias3.9%This article: 25.2%Will Sommer: 4.2%The Bulwark: 2.2%Pessimism Bias25.2%This article: 64.1%Will Sommer: 21.1%The Bulwark: 11.2%Negativity Bias64.1%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Will Sommer: 1.4%The Bulwark: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error6.1%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Will Sommer: 4.2%The Bulwark: 3.0%In-Group Bias6.5%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 6.7%The Bulwark: 1.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Will Sommer: 0.7%The Bulwark: 1.1%Halo Effect6.1%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 1.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.8%The Bulwark: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 17.5%Will Sommer: 2.3%The Bulwark: 1.5%Recency Bias17.5%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Will Sommer: 4.3%The Bulwark: 3.3%Ad Hominem6.1%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 3.0%The Bulwark: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 3.4%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 3.6%Will Sommer: 3.6%The Bulwark: 2.2%False Dilemma3.6%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.5%Will Sommer: 11.5%The Bulwark: 8.2%Hasty Generalization6.5%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 2.2%The Bulwark: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 25.9%Will Sommer: 8.4%The Bulwark: 5.8%Appeal to Emotion25.9%This article: 13.6%Will Sommer: 6.0%The Bulwark: 1.4%Begging the Question13.6%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.3%The Bulwark: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 2.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 21.4%Will Sommer: 2.5%The Bulwark: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)21.4%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 2.3%The Bulwark: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 0.4%The Bulwark: 2.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 3.6%Will Sommer: 1.2%The Bulwark: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection3.6%This article: 44.7%Will Sommer: 30.1%The Bulwark: 15.3%Biased Writer Voice44.7%This article: 6.1%Will Sommer: 1.4%The Bulwark: 2.8%Indoctrination6.1%This article: 0.0%Will Sommer: 7.2%The Bulwark: 5.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Will Sommer: 1.6%The Bulwark: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias6.1%This article: 17.5%Will Sommer: 8.2%The Bulwark: 4.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…17.5%

309 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker3.9%attributed speech297writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coveragePastor David Bryan • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 54 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Pastor David Bryan

100%flagged-word coverage
12 attributed words100% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Biased Writer Voice-46.5 ptsWriter: 46.5%Pastor David Bryan: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -18.2 ptsWriter: 18.2%Pastor David Bryan: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-6.4 ptsWriter: 6.4%Pastor David Bryan: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -6.4 ptsWriter: 6.4%Pastor David Bryan: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.7 ptsWriter: 3.7%Pastor David Bryan: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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