Premise: But Slate 's Jack Shafer disparages widespread comparisons of Burn Rate to Michael Lewis' Liar's Poker and attacks what he deems Wolff's [B]y repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little shit he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility.
Hypothesis: They were touched by the honesty of the man's words.
Is the hypothesis entailed by the premise?
no