The Skyrocketing Epidemic Of Fake Hate Crimes

[Ubiquitous]

Monday marked the five-year anniversary of the Jussie Smollett hate crime
hoax. I say that with some hesitation, because I know that there’s not a
single living person who ever wants to hear the name Jussie Smollett ever
again. Every detail of that story has been covered, and every joke you can
possibly make about it has already been made.

But if there’s a silver lining in that whole episode, it’s that everyone on
the planet received a crash course in how easy it is to lie about “hate
crimes.” You can come up with the most ridiculous story imaginable, and
people will still buy it. That was the moment that hate crime hoaxes peaked.
So if you’re a rational person, you might think that, post-Smollett, the
number of reported “hate crimes” would go down at least a little bit. After
all, the gig is up. No one’s ever going to be as naive as they were back in
2019 ever again.

But that assumption, as logical as it might seem, would be very wrong.

In just the past year, there’s been a rash of cases just like Smollett’s,
complete with outlandish claims that don’t make any sense, which the media
buys without any hesitation whatsoever. There’s so many examples that it’s
hard to choose, but here’s one of the best ones.

Last summer there was the curious case of Scott Rowin, who told reporters in
Southern California that he was set on fire on the sidewalk, solely because
he’s gay.

Here’s how the gumshoes at the local ABC affiliate covered that story:

https://youtu.be/FZ_Qq2Dr9yo

You’ll notice there’s no effort whatsoever to verify this guy’s story. To
recap: We’re told there was a gay guy who was out for a “routine” walk in San
Diego, on his way to a restaurant, when he heard two people yell homophobic
slurs at him — because obviously, anyone could tell this guy was gay from a
mile away. And of course, there are a bunch of “anti-LGBTQ” assassins roaming
the streets of Southern California, on the hunt for anyone who looks gay, so
this makes perfect sense. Naturally, in response, this gay guy yelled back at
his assailants, and then to his horror he noticed he had been doused with
some kind of liquid and set on fire.

Literally the only innovation over the Jussie Smollett hoax in that whole
story is that bit at the end about getting set on fire. Everything else —
from the bit about going to a restaurant, to the number of assailants, to the
slurs — is pretty much identical. In fact, this claim is perhaps more similar
to the story of a biracial woman named Althea Bernstein in Madison,
Wisconsin. She claimed she was doused with lighter fluid and set on fire by a
gang of white racists who accosted her while she was waiting at an
intersection. Authorities opened a hate crime investigation into that alleged
attack, and then quietly dropped it, saying only that they couldn’t prove the
event ever occurred at all. Which is odd considering that it supposedly
happened at an intersection in the middle of a city with dozens of cameras
all around.

WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show

But to give Scott Rowin some credit, we do know that he was indeed actually
set on fire. There’s no denying that. So there is an ounce of believability
to at least one aspect of this story — especially if you don’t remotely look
into it in any of the other details, in any way whatsoever. And of course,
the news of this alleged hate crime went viral in Left-wing circles.

Unfortunately for the narrative, though, the truth eventually did come out,
precisely three days later. Watch as the same crack news crew that brought
you the original story pulls what may be the single biggest about-face in the
history of journalism:

https://youtu.be/LoVye5Q9ToY

Ah. Well, that’s a little different. So instead of two homophobic bigots
trolling the streets of San Diego, looking to torch some random gay guy, now
we learn that the gay guy was allegedly beating a pregnant woman, to the
point that she was bleeding and had to go to the hospital. And while she was
being attacked, she somehow set the gay guy on fire in self-defense.

Note that the news station isn’t ashamed about any of this. They don’t
apologize to their viewers for airing a completely false story, with no
vetting whatsoever. That’s because they don’t care. Their job — and the job
of corporate media in general — is to stoke as much division as possible. If
they get caught in a lie, they’ll just shrug and move on to the next one.

Fortunately for the news media, there have been plenty of other fake hate
crimes for them to talk about.

There was the case of the 20-year-old Ohio man who claimed in November to be
the victim of an anti-Palestinian hate crime. Here’s how the Council on
American-Islamic Relations, (CAIR), described the episode. They said the man,
“was walking home from eating lunch when a car slowed down and rolled down
the window. The driver of the car allegedly started yelling at him using
anti-Palestinian statements like ‘Kill all Palestinians,’ and ‘Long live
Israel,’ as he swerved his car to intimidate the victim. The driver then
allegedly turned around and hit the man while shouting ‘DIE!'” For good
measure, CAIR posted a picture of this guy in a neck brace in the hospital,
just to underscore how Islamophobic this country has become.

As you may have guessed, none of it was true.

Police later obtained video evidence that the man’s injuries resulted from a
fight with his brother earlier in the day. Confronted with the fact that they
were completely wrong about this supposed “hate crime,” CAIR did not admit
their mistake. They didn’t offer any explanation for their decision to
amplify a clearly fraudulent narrative. Instead, they said this:”Our
understanding is that the brothers have secured their own legal counsel. We
do not yet know anything more about the nature of the charges.” That was
their actual statement. Not, “We’re horrified we misled the public about a
brutal hate crime that didn’t happen.” Just, “He’s got a lawyer so we’re not
talking about this anymore.”

Again, there’s never any remorse from these liars, probably because they
can’t even tell how ridiculous they look. They are so far gone that they
don’t see it. Remorse requires shame and self-awareness, and these people
have neither. That could explain the recent stunt by California congresswoman
Barbara Lee, who as I’ve mentioned before, launched into a bizarre story on
CNN recently about a supposed racist incident that occurred at the Capitol.
Watch:

Rep. Barbara Lee: “I was walking … to the Capitol and a white guy stopped me,
and told me I could not get into the members’ elevator … He told me … it was
for members only. I said, ‘Sir, I’m a member of Congress’ and showed him my
pin. And he said, ‘Whose pin did you steal?’” pic.twitter.com/hop81xQHpU

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) January 19, 2024

Once again, right away, nothing about the story makes sense. And you can tell
she’s lying because she leaves out the kind of details you would need to
verify the story. She doesn’t tell you when this incident happened, which
would allow Capitol Police to pull up the surveillance tapes in about ten
seconds. And conveniently, she doesn’t offer any description of the “white
guy.” Is he a police officer? A random vigilante patrolling the elevators to
make sure no black congresswomen get inside? We have no idea, and she didn’t
mention it, because this is all made up. Like all of these other recent hate
hoaxes, it just makes no sense.

I could go on and on, listing dozens of fake hate crimes that have been
reported over the past year, but the data tells the story. We are indeed
witnessing an epidemic of fake hate crimes reports in the post-Smollett,
post-BLM era. As many news organizations reported this week, the FBI has
determined that from 2018 to 2022, hate crimes in the United States have
increased by a staggering 60%. And if that sounds bad, rest assured, we’re
told that it gets even worse. The problem is especially acute among students,
the bureau tells us. In that same period — from 2018 to 2022, — according to
the FBI, reported hate crimes in schools and colleges have nearly doubled.
Elementary and secondary schools are the hot-spots, we’re told.

Supposedly, the most common hate crime in schools is anti-black, followed by
anti-Jewish, followed by anti-gay. Anti-white hate crimes don’t make the top
three, despite the fact that white kids are the victims in nearly every video
of an assault at a school by one race against another that we’ve seen in the
last 10 years.

For example, watch this footage of a recent beating at a school in Florida,
which again comes to us from a local ABC affiliate. Notice what’s not
mentioned in this report:

https://youtu.be/rT60vBXoXRc?si=rSaw9kgbtyKph-EB

So there was a “brutal” beating of a teenager in a parking lot at a school.
The victim suffered a skull fracture, and he had to be hospitalized. The
motive, we’re told, is unknown. There’s just no way to explain why this might
have happened.

What’s not mentioned in the report, conspicuously enough, is that the teens
who beat the student were black, and their victim was white. And, just in
case you think this was another innocent mistake by the local news crew, rest
assured that the national media did precisely the same thing. Fox News
reported on the incident as another example of “juvenile violence that’s
rocking the nation.” But the cause of the brawl, we’re told, is “unknown.” So
it’s clear that, when black people beat up white people at school, then the
identities of the attackers isn’t something you’re supposed to talk about.
The national news media doesn’t think it could possibly be related to motive,
even though we all know what they’d do if the races were reversed.

Given all this, there are obviously a lot of reasons to doubt the FBI’s
latest hate crimes data. No one wants to talk about anti-white hate crimes,
even when they’re occurring on camera. So we should expect some
underreporting in that area.

But for just a moment, let’s take this FBI reporting at face value, and
assume that indeed, there’s been a dramatic rise in the number of hate crimes
in schools. If that’s the case, then it would seem to suggest that our
schools are an even bigger disaster than we thought. Test scores and student
productivity are going down while hate crimes are going up. Considering that
schools have never focused more on preaching tolerance and diversity, this
would mean that their efforts to bring about “racial justice” have been a
catastrophic failure and are doing more harm than good.

You’d think that realization might prompt some self-reflection from the
activists who have been lecturing us for years about the importance of DEI,
and “racial reckoning.” It turns out, none of it’s working. Just like
affirmative action, this grand social experiment hasn’t solved any of the
problems that it was supposed to solve. That’s the implication of this F.B.I.
report, if we assume it’s accurate.

But the truth is that the FBI report isn’t accurate, just like all the
reports of hate crimes from 2016 weren’t accurate (back when we were told
that Donald Trump was “emboldening” white supremacists or whatever). The
moment you dive into the specifics on hate-crime stats, you realize what a
fraud it is.

All of this data is based on “reported hate crimes.” In other words, if
someone tells a teacher that they were called a mean name because of their
skin color, then that could count as a reported hate crime. It doesn’t matter
if there’s no conviction or even an arrest. All it takes is for someone in a
police department somewhere to code an incident as potentially related to
hatred. That’s it.

And by the way, the police are incentivized to do this by the Biden DOJ. The
DOJ awards millions of dollars to local police departments that report hate
crimes. So there’s a massive gap between “reported hate crimes” and hate
crimes that actually result in a conviction.

What’s funny is that you never hear anyone talk about what exactly this
difference is. None of the media reports this week even mention it. If you go
on the FBI’s website, you won’t find the information either, at least not
prominently. But I went looking for it on the website of the California
Department of Justice. I thought this would be a good state to check, since
it’s one of the most Left-wing states in the entire country, if not the most
Left-wing. So we can assume that they’re going to vigorously prosecute as
many alleged hate crimes as possible.

Here are the most recent numbers we have. In 2022, the state of California
reported a whopping 2,589 hate crimes. Depending on your perspective, in a
state of 40 million people, that might not seem like many. But let’s pretend
it’s an alarmingly high figure for a second. Guess how many of those reported
hate crimes resulted in hate crimes convictions, according to the California
DOJ? Out of 2,589 supposed hate crimes, how many of them were actually proven
in court? The answer is: A grand total of 53.

That’s roughly two percent of them. And again, this is in the jurisdiction
where the prosecutors are presumably the most aggressive on charges like
this, and where juries are extremely predisposed to convicting.

You can reproduce numbers like this in any state in the country. There’s a
massive gulf between reports and charges and even greater one between reports
and convictions. Obviously that’s because most of these reports are nonsense.
What we actually have is a massive epidemic of false hate crime reports that
are eating up who knows how much law enforcement time and resources.

Now, it’s tempting to dismiss all of these reports as hoaxes. It’s easy to
say that all of these reports are from mentally imbalanced, cynical people
looking for attention or sympathy or something like that. And undoubtedly
that’s a big part of it. But it’s not the whole explanation.

A lot of the people claiming that they’re victims genuinely believe that they
are. We’ve raised a generation to see hate crimes everywhere. Everyone from
law enforcement to academia to the corporate press have participated in that
indoctrination. The truth is that this epidemic of false reports is as much a
product of hoaxes as it is of brainwashing.

That’s why we shouldn’t be surprised the numbers are going up. And it’s why
we shouldn’t be remotely shocked to learn that ground-zero for these reports
are schools and universities. Indoctrination is their job. Five years after
Jussie Smollett, it’s safe to say that they’ve gotten very good at it.

--
Let's go Brandon!

[BTR1701]

In article <updgfk$1h3q5$1...@dont-email.me>,

Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:

> Monday marked the five-year anniversary of the Jussie Smollett hate crime
> hoax. I say that with some hesitation, because I know that there's not a
> single living person who ever wants to hear the name Jussie Smollett ever
> again. Every detail of that story has been covered, and every joke you can
> possibly make about it has already been made.
>
> But if there's a silver lining in that whole episode, it's that everyone on
> the planet received a crash course in how easy it is to lie about "hate

> crimes". You can come up with the most ridiculous story imaginable and

> people will still buy it. That was the moment that hate crime hoaxes peaked.
> So if you’re a rational person, you might think that, post-Smollett, the
> number of reported hate crimes would go down at least a little bit. After
> all, the gig is up. No one's ever going to be as naive as they were back in
> 2019 ever again.
>
> But that assumption, as logical as it might seem, would be very wrong.
>
> In just the past year, there's been a rash of cases just like Smollett's,
> complete with outlandish claims that don't make any sense, which the media
> buys without any hesitation whatsoever.

Even when the hoaxes are exposed, the media and the politicians are
unapologetic. They say things like, "It may not have actually happened
but it still has the ring of truth in today's America and that's what's
important" or "Even if it didn't happen, it easily could have in
systemically racist America so our outrage is justified".

That's exactly the sort of thing Juicy's supporters said when they
couldn't deny reality any longer.

> There's so many examples that it's hard to choose, but here's one of the
> best ones.

> Last summer there was the curious case of Scott Rowin, who told reporters in
> Southern California that he was set on fire on the sidewalk, solely because
> he's gay.
>
> Here's how the gumshoes at the local ABC affiliate covered that story:
>
> https://youtu.be/FZ_Qq2Dr9yo
>
> You'll notice there's no effort whatsoever to verify this guy's story. To
> recap: We're told there was a gay guy who was out for a "routine" walk in San
> Diego, on his way to a restaurant, when he heard two people yell homophobic

> slurs at him-- because obviously, anyone could tell this guy was gay from a

> mile away. And of course, there are a bunch of "anti-LGBTQ assassins" roaming
> the streets of Southern California, on the hunt for anyone who looks gay, so
> this makes perfect sense. Naturally, in response, this gay guy yelled back at
> his assailants, and then to his horror he noticed he had been doused with
> some kind of liquid and set on fire.
>
> Literally the only innovation over the Jussie Smollett hoax in that whole

> story is that bit at the end about getting set on fire. Everything else--

> from the bit about going to a restaurant, to the number of assailants, to the

> slurs-- is pretty much identical. In fact, this claim is perhaps more similar

> to the story of a biracial woman named Althea Bernstein in Madison,
> Wisconsin. She claimed she was doused with lighter fluid and set on fire by a
> gang of white racists who accosted her while she was waiting at an
> intersection. Authorities opened a hate crime investigation into that alleged
> attack, and then quietly dropped it, saying only that they couldn't prove the
> event ever occurred at all. Which is odd considering that it supposedly
> happened at an intersection in the middle of a city with dozens of cameras
> all around.

And you would think that if she'd been set on fire, she'd have, you
know, burns. Or would at least have some burned clothes to offer up. But
she didn't have either.

> But to give Scott Rowin some credit, we do know that he was indeed actually
> set on fire. There's no denying that. So there is an ounce of believability

> to at least one aspect of this story-- especially if you don't remotely look
> into it in any of the other details in any way whatsoever. And of course,

> the news of this alleged hate crime went viral in Left-wing circles.
>
> Unfortunately for the narrative, though, the truth eventually did come out,
> precisely three days later. Watch as the same crack news crew that brought
> you the original story pulls what may be the single biggest about-face in the
> history of journalism:
>
> https://youtu.be/LoVye5Q9ToY
>
> Ah. Well, that's a little different. So instead of two homophobic bigots
> trolling the streets of San Diego, looking to torch some random gay guy, now
> we learn that the gay guy was allegedly beating a pregnant woman, to the
> point that she was bleeding and had to go to the hospital. And while she was
> being attacked, she somehow set the gay guy on fire in self-defense.
>
> Note that the news station isn't ashamed about any of this. They don't
> apologize to their viewers for airing a completely false story, with no

> vetting whatsoever. That's because they don't care. Their job-- and the job
> of corporate media in general-- is to stoke as much division as possible. If

> they get caught in a lie, they'll just shrug and move on to the next one.

I'm surprised they even bothered with the followup story at all. Most
media outlets when faced with this situation would just ignore the
followup altogether.

> Fortunately for the news media, there have been plenty of other fake hate
> crimes for them to talk about.
>
> There was the case of the 20-year-old Ohio man who claimed in November to be
> the victim of an anti-Palestinian hate crime. Here's how the Council on
> American-Islamic Relations, (CAIR), described the episode. They said the man,
> "was walking home from eating lunch when a car slowed down and rolled down
> the window. The driver of the car allegedly started yelling at him using

> anti-Palestinian statements like 'Kill all Palestinians'’ and 'Long live
> Israel'’ as he swerved his car to intimidate the victim. The driver then

> allegedly turned around and hit the man while shouting 'DIE!'" For good
> measure, CAIR posted a picture of this guy in a neck brace in the hospital,
> just to underscore how Islamophobic this country has become.
>
> As you may have guessed, none of it was true.
>
> Police later obtained video evidence that the man's injuries resulted from a
> fight with his brother earlier in the day. Confronted with the fact that they

> were completely wrong about this supposed "hate crime", CAIR did not admit

> their mistake. They didn't offer any explanation for their decision to
> amplify a clearly fraudulent narrative. Instead, they said this: "Our
> understanding is that the brothers have secured their own legal counsel. We
> do not yet know anything more about the nature of the charges." That was

> their actual statement. Not "We're horrified we misled the public about a

> brutal hate crime that didn't happen." Just, "He's got a lawyer so we're not
> talking about this anymore."

That's because Islam teaches that it's completely fine and moral to lie
to the dhimmis in furtherance of Islam and jihad. If making up a hate
crime hoax will further the cause, then it's perfectly acceptable to do
so. This sort of lying-for-the-cause even has its own name. It's called
taqiyya.

> Again, there's never any remorse from these liars, probably because they
> can't even tell how ridiculous they look. They are so far gone that they
> don't see it. Remorse requires shame and self-awareness, and these people
> have neither. That could explain the recent stunt by California congresswoman
> Barbara Lee, who as I've mentioned before, launched into a bizarre story on
> CNN recently about a supposed racist incident that occurred at the Capitol.

> Rep. Barbara Lee:"I was walking to the Capitol and a white guy stopped me

> and told me I could not get into the members' elevator. He told me it was

> for members only. I said, 'Sir, I'm a member of Congress and showed him my

> pin. And he said, 'Whose pin did you steal?'"

> Once again, right away, nothing about the story makes sense. And you can tell
> she's lying because she leaves out the kind of details you would need to
> verify the story. She doesn't tell you when this incident happened, which
> would allow Capitol Police to pull up the surveillance tapes in about ten
> seconds. And conveniently, she doesn't offer any description of the "white

> guy". Is he a police officer? A random vigilante patrolling the elevators to
> make sure no black congresswomen get inside? We have no idea and she didn't

> mention it, because this is all made up. Like all of these other recent hate
> hoaxes, it just makes no sense.
>

> As many news organizations reported this week, the FBI has determined that
> from 2018 to 2022, hate crimes in the United States have increased by a
> staggering 60%.
>

> Supposedly, the most common hate crime in schools is anti-black, followed by
> anti-Jewish, followed by anti-gay. Anti-white hate crimes don't make the top
> three, despite the fact that white kids are the victims in nearly every video
> of an assault at a school by one race against another that we've seen in the
> last 10 years.
>
> For example, watch this footage of a recent beating at a school in Florida,
> which again comes to us from a local ABC affiliate. Notice what's not
> mentioned in this report:
>
> https://youtu.be/rT60vBXoXRc?si=rSaw9kgbtyKph-EB
>
> So there was a "brutal" beating of a teenager in a parking lot at a school.

> The victim suffered a skull fracture and he had to be hospitalized. The

> motive, we're told, is unknown. There's just no way to explain why this might
> have happened.
>
> What's not mentioned in the report, conspicuously enough, is that the teens

> who beat the student were black and their victim was white. And, just in

> case you think this was another innocent mistake by the local news crew, rest
> assured that the national media did precisely the same thing. Fox News
> reported on the incident as another example of "juvenile violence that's

> rocking the nation". But the cause of the brawl, we're told, is "unknown". So

> it's clear that, when black people beat up white people at school, then the

> identities of the attackers aren't something you're supposed to talk about.

> The national news media doesn't think it could possibly be related to motive,
> even though we all know what they'd do if the races were reversed.

LOL! Can you imagine? Dozens of white kids surround a black and beat him
so badly he ends up in the hospital and no one in the media comments on
the racial angle? You'd feel like you were in the Twilight Zone it'd be
so out of character. But dozens of blacks send a white kid to the
hospital and it's just 'juvenile violence with an unknown motive' with
no mention of race whatsoever.

And that's if the media even bothers to cover the story at all. There
are plenty of instances of white kids being beaten by gangs of blacks
that the media hasn't felt the need to report on. (And when people on
Twitter and Facebook do that reporting themselves by posting video of
the incidents, they're suspending for 'racism'.)

> Given all this, there are obviously a lot of reasons to doubt the FBI's
> latest hate crimes data. No one wants to talk about anti-white hate crimes,
> even when they're occurring on camera. So we should expect some
> underreporting in that area.
>
> But for just a moment, let's take this FBI reporting at face value, and
> assume that indeed, there's been a dramatic rise in the number of hate crimes
> in schools. If that's the case, then it would seem to suggest that our
> schools are an even bigger disaster than we thought. Test scores and student
> productivity are going down while hate crimes are going up. Considering that
> schools have never focused more on preaching tolerance and diversity, this
> would mean that their efforts to bring about "racial justice" have been a
> catastrophic failure and are doing more harm than good.
>
> You'd think that realization might prompt some self-reflection from the
> activists who have been lecturing us for years about the importance of DEI,

> and "racial reckoning". It turns out, none of it's working. Just like

> affirmative action, this grand social experiment hasn't solved any of the

> problems that it was supposed to solve. That's the implication of this FBI

> report, if we assume it's accurate.
>
> But the truth is that the FBI report isn't accurate, just like all the
> reports of hate crimes from 2016 weren't accurate (back when we were told
> that Donald Trump was "emboldening" white supremacists or whatever). The
> moment you dive into the specifics on hate-crime stats, you realize what a
> fraud it is.
>

> All of this data is based on "reported hate crimes". In other words, if

> someone tells a teacher that they were called a mean name because of their
> skin color, then that could count as a reported hate crime. It doesn't matter
> if there's no conviction or even an arrest. All it takes is for someone in a
> police department somewhere to code an incident as potentially related to
> hatred. That's it.
>
> And by the way, the police are incentivized to do this by the Biden DOJ. The
> DOJ awards millions of dollars to local police departments that report hate
> crimes. So there's a massive gap between "reported hate crimes" and hate
> crimes that actually result in a conviction.

More accurately, there's a massive gap between "reported hate crimes"
and hate crimes that actually happened at all.

> What's funny is that you never hear anyone talk about what exactly this
> difference is. None of the media reports this week even mention it. If you go
> on the FBI's website, you won't find the information either, at least not
> prominently. But I went looking for it on the website of the California
> Department of Justice. I thought this would be a good state to check, since
> it's one of the most Left-wing states in the entire country, if not the most
> Left-wing. So we can assume that they're going to vigorously prosecute as
> many alleged hate crimes as possible.
>
> Here are the most recent numbers we have. In 2022, the state of California
> reported a whopping 2,589 hate crimes. Depending on your perspective, in a
> state of 40 million people, that might not seem like many. But let's pretend
> it's an alarmingly high figure for a second. Guess how many of those reported
> hate crimes resulted in hate crimes convictions, according to the California
> DOJ? Out of 2,589 supposed hate crimes, how many of them were actually proven
> in court? The answer is: A grand total of 53.
>

> That's roughly 2% of them. And again, this is in the jurisdiction where

[Adam H. Kerman]

This is Adam Kerman. The following article, quoted in full, was reposted
by Ubi the shithead under a new Message-ID. The original article that
Ubi the shithead copied was not crossposted. Generally, I do not
crosspost. The forged article was injected through Giganews. I am not a
Giganews user. I did not crosspost the original article.

Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:

>Hey! Nobody in Chicago believed his story. It was just too stupid. His
>fellow Empire castmates and producers supported him long after anyone
>else was still supporting him, and they never blamed him for all the
>work they lost. It wasn't his antics that destroyed the show but that
>they didn't immediately try to save the show instead of him. The show
>got renewed with a much shorter episode order and then got canceled. I'm
>pretty sure if he hadn't pulled that stunt -- somehow he thought he
>could force them to give him a pay rise which made no sense -- the show
>would have gotten two full season orders and not lost its audience.

>Why wasn't she arrested for the false police report?
>
>>>. . .
>