Analysis: The FBI Data Stating Hate Crimes Were Up 17% After Trump’s Election Are Not Even Remotely Reliable


In the wake of the Jussie Smollett alleged hate crime many people, particularly on the left, blindly believed him and attributed blame to a culture created by President Trump. After it was revealed to be completely fabricated the common refrain from these people was that blindly believing him was the right right thing to do. People like Ellen Page, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Corey Booker have cited FBI data from 2017 that says hate crimes are up 17%.

Until now I’ve never actually looked at this report, and neither has anyone who has cited it. It’s my theory that they’re simply citing this number in order to cover up for their own rush to judgment, which was motivated by their hatred for the President and their willingness to believe anything that makes him look bad.

To that end I decided to thoroughly analyze the data in the 2017 FBI report, which you can read by clicking here. Let’s review some of the things that stand out in this report, which clearly show that this “data” cannot be trusted by any reasonable person.

Let’s start with the fact that reported hate crimes are simply that – reports. Any time someone reports a crime the police keep a report on it. The data only reports on people who file police reports where they claim hatred or bigotry was the motivating factor. It doesn’t report on the number of hate crimes in which suspects are arrested or found guilty. In other words, the thousands of proven fake hate crimes are all included in this data.

Don't miss out!
Subscribe For TBDAILYNEWS Email Notifications
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address

There are a lot of things that stand out in the report, but I’ll highlight some of the more egregious statistics that stand out in the report.

  • 38% of reported hate crimes were committed by white people, while 14% were committed by black people. Yet white people make up 61% of the American population and black people make up 12%. Proportionally then white people commit significantly less hate crimes per capita.
  • By far the most common type of hate crime against persons (45%) was classified as “intimidation.” This includes hate notes, swastikas directed at people, etc. These almost never get solved, and it was also the initial kind of hate crime that Smollett reported to the Chicago police.
  • Intimidation hate crimes are disproportionately reported to have been committed by white people, while more violent hate crimes such as rape and murder are disproportionately reported to have been committed by people of color.
  • Forty-two hate crimes in 2017 were classified as arson. Of those 42 a total of 13 were reportedly committed by white people while only 1 was reported to have been committed by a black person. One of those 13 committed by a white person was a fire in Charlotte at an immigrant owned store, which was blamed on white racists due to a note praising Trump left behind at the scene. Later on it was revealed to be a black man with a long rap sheet who was doing it to create civil unrest. In fact this should’ve been classified as an arson hate crime committed by a black person, but was instead attributed to white people. This was just one I found with a simple search. How many others are out there? We don’t know because the FBI does not break down their data by individual crimes. Police departments, like the Charlotte-Mecklenburg PD, give them aggregate data from reports only.
  • Thirty-seven reported hate crimes were committed against heterosexual people, including such crimes as burglary, assault, and larceny. How does one commit an anti-heterosexual larceny hate crime? They hate straight people so much that they steal money from them? Larceny by definition cannot be a hate crime. It’s a crime motivated by money.
  • This table breaks down where hate crimes were committed in 2017, and what the bias was that motivated it (race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc). You’ll notice that one hate crime was reported at a military installation, and the motivation was race. That would be the fake hate crime that occurred at the Air Force Academy, in which “Go home n*****” was written on the dorm room door of a black cadet. It turned out he did it himself, yet it’s still qualified as a racially motivated hate crime. This is how you know the data is not taking into account reported hate crimes that have proven to be false. CNN said that this lie “didn’t change the overall picture of hate crimes,” once again citing data that suggested that hate crimes were up.

Tables 11, and 12, break down reported hate crime data by state. The data is completely unreliable and inconsistent. For instance, here are some statistical irregularities.

  • Massachusetts and Maryland have a very similar population (between 6-7 million), yet Massachusetts had nearly 10 times the amount of reported hate crimes (427 to 48). Florida has three times the population of Massachusetts but a third of the hate crimes. Does anyone honestly believe that Massachusetts is the most intolerant state in the country by such a wide margin?
  • Georgia has over 5 times the population of Idaho, and a much larger African-American population. Yet Idaho had nearly double the amount of reported hate crimes (53 to 27). That’s 10 more hate crimes per person in Idaho than in Georgia.
  • Nevada’s population is double that of Maine, yet Maine had more than 6 times the amount of reported hate crimes (32 to 5). Both of them have similar political demographics and went for Hillary in 2016.
  • Pennsylvania has nearly double the population of Arizona, yet Arizona had more than 3 times the amount of reported hate crimes (264 to 78). Both of them have similar political demographics and went for Trump in 2016. No reasonable person can draw the conclusion that Trump is inspiring more hate crimes in Arizona than he is in Pennsylvania.
  • Kentucky has a similar population to Louisiana, yet Kentucky outscored them in hate crimes 378-26. In terms of political orientation the two states are very similar.
  • Vermont had three times the amount of hate crimes as New Hampshire, despite having just half the population. Vermont is the whitest state in the country, politically far to the left, and a state that champions its tolerance and anti-racism.
  • Massachusetts and Washington had by far the highest amount of reported hate crimes per resident, and both of them are extremely liberal states. In general liberal states had significantly higher amount of reported hate crimes. Seattle had more reported hate crimes than any other city (120), outdistancing much larger Houston, which had only 2. This refutes the idea that the reported rise in hate crimes was inspired by Trump. In states where Trump won the number of reported hate crimes were much lower when compared to the population of those states.
  • In short, deviations occur when analyzing data, but not to this extent. No serious statistician would ever take any of this data as reliable.

Table 13 lets you look at each state individually to see which municipalities reported the most hate crimes. Considering Massachusetts had such a disproportionate amount of hate crimes I decided to look into those to see where they were occurring. Here are some things that stand out about in Massachusetts.

  • Boston had 79 hate crimes, while New York, which is over 10 times the size of Boston, had 88. Does anyone actually believe that there was a hate crime in Boston once every 4-5 days?
  • Acton, home of radical leftist State Senator Jamie Eldridge, is one of the whitest and wealthiest towns in Massachusetts. They had the same amount of reported racially motivated hate crimes (5) as Worcester, despite Worcester having 8 times the population.
  • Arlington had more religiously motivated hate crimes than any other town or city (7). According to the national data Jews were easily the most targeted group for religiously motivated hate crimes. Yet Sharon, which has a significantly higher Jewish population than any other municipality, had zero religiously motivated hate crimes.
  • Northfield has a population of under 3,000, yet they had 4 religiously motivated hate crimes, and 4 sexual orientation motivated hate crimes. Much larger cities such as Worcester, Haverhill, and Medford had zero reported sexual orientation reported hate crimes, and just one reported religiously motivated hate crime. There is no conceivable way that data can be taken seriously.
  • After Boston it was Salem that had the most reported hate crimes (13), despite not being one of the 20 largest cities for population.

Forty-nine of the 427 reported hate crimes in Massachusetts took place on college campuses.

  • Westfield State had double the amount of racially motivated hate crimes than the entire cities of Worcester and Springfield. We profiled WSU a lot in 2017 after the same girl reported being the victim of three separate hate crimes, which seemed odd. The “hate crimes” of course were racist messages written on a blackboard in similar handwriting, all of which this same girl found.

  • Westfield State had an incident in which an unnamed student of color claimed that 3 racist white men violently attacked her. They shut down the entire campus for the day and encouraged racial profiling, leading to an innocent white student walking through campus being falsely identified as an assailant. They still haven’t found who committed this imaginary hate crime, but it still counts in the data.
  • Framingham State had a slew of similar unbelievable “intimidation” hate crimes against people of color in 2017. They also had more reported hate crimes than any city besides Boston.
  • Hampshire College, which has less than 2,000 students, had three times the amount of racially motivated hate crimes than the entire city of Brockton (population 96,000), despite being in session for half the calendar year. Hampshire is notorious for far left activism, and is the creator of Trigglypuff. The idea that it would be a hotbed for racially motivated hate crimes is laughable.


The FBI hate crime data is completely unreliable, and those citing it as evidence that hate crimes have gone up during the Trump presidency are doing so in bad faith for the following reasons.

  1. The data only takes into account reported hate crimes and doesn’t update when the hate crimes are unsolved or proven to be fake.
  2. Hate crimes disproportionately occur in liberal areas where Trump supporters barely exist, contradicting the theory that Trump is inspiring his supporters to commit hate crimes.
  3. Intimidation is the most common yet extremely vague form of a hate crime, and ultimately amounts to nothing more than words written by a person who the victim assumes the racial identity of without proof.
  4. Data skews so much from state to state that no statistician could look at the data and draw a reasonable conclusion from it.
  5. Even with the large amount of fake hate crimes reported, white people allegedly commit them at a rate that is much lower than their percentage of the overall population.

In short, the FBI data is fake, and anyone citing it for political gain should be challenged openly.


Follow us on Youtube, SoundCloud, Twitter, and Facebook.

If you like free speech and want to support what we’re doing, feel free to donate to the Turtle fund:

Hello Turtle Riders. As you know if you follow Turtleboy we are constantly getting censored and banned by Facebook for what are clearly not violations of their terms of service. Twitter has done the same, and trolls mass reported our blog to Google AdSense thousands of times, leading to demonitization. We can get by and survive, but we could really use your help. Please consider donating by hitting the PayPal button above if you’d like support free speech and what we do in the face of Silicon Valley censorship. Or just buy our award winning book about the dangers of censorship and rise of Turtleboy: 


Related Articles

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Support the news you love. Please disable the ad blocker or purchase our ad free subscription