Patterico's Pontifications

2/9/2010

Eric Boehlert Owes Jim Treacher a Correction

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:18 am

Eric Boehlert owes Jim Treacher a correction.

In a screed — ironically enough, about NRO’s need to correct errors in their pieces — Boehlert wrote:

It’s true that a conservative blogger, who writes under name Jim Treacher, immediately claimed he’d been hit by a Secret Service SUV.

No, Eric Boehlert, that’s actually not true. It’s actually quite false.

Treacher today explains:

A quick clarification for Eric Boehlert and anybody else who’s confused: I did not claim Secret Service hit me. I said I was told Secret Service hit me by people who would know. Namely, the paramedics who took me from 22nd and M to Georgetown University Hospital. They said they didn’t know if I realized it, but I’d been hit by CIA or Secret Service. Probably the latter. So I passed along what I was told, and said I wanted answers if it was true.

A quick review of Treacher’s original piece reveals that he is correct. That piece stated: “One last thing: I’m told by multiple people that the SUV that hit me was Secret Service. If this is true, I want to know why that happened.”

So Boehlert took a true statement and changed it into one that was false — and then denounced the statement as false. Indeed, in an update, Boehlert doubled down — nay, tripled down. First Boehlert even more explicitly repeated his false allegation concerning Treacher’s original report:

UPDATED: And how about the Daily Caller itself, which allowed its blogger to publish the allegation on its site that he’d been hit by the Secret Service, which was not true. The Daily Caller then posted a long, detailed account of the accident, suggesting a government conspiracy to cover up the crime. Yet in that accusatory article, the Daily Caller left out the fact that its employee originally, and eroneously, accused the Secret Service of running him over, and did it on the Daily Caller site. That fact was conveniently flushed down the memory hole.

(The bold emphasis is mine; the italics and misspelling are all Boehlert’s. Two r’s in “erroneously,” Boehlert. You’re welcome. It’s a word you need to learn, as it has special application to your “work.”)

Wrong again, Boehlert. There is no issue of a memory hole here. If you read Treacher’s post, you will continue to see his original, non-“eroneous” quote about being told he had been hit by the Secret Service — along with an update clarifying as follows: “The Daily Caller has been told by federal law enforcement sources that the Secret Service was not involved, and is working to confirm that driver of the vehicle which struck Jim Treacher was a State Department security employee.”

Boehlert then goes on to describe Treacher’s original, accurate claim as one of two “lies” being told about the incident.

Boehlert is one to complain about accuracy. He is the guy who:

  • Distorted a quote from blogger See Dubya, taking See Dubya’s quote about one of two possible scenarios and turning it into a positive claim by See Dubya.
  • Falsely claimed that Jamil Hussein was “under arrest” — and then refused to correct the error . . . in a column about warbloggers’ failures to correct errors. (See? Today’s irony is not without precedent.)

To my knowledge, Boehlert has corrected none of these past errors. (Oh, hell, let’s call them “lies”; why should Boehlert receive the benefit of the doubt, when he is not willing to extend that courtesy to others?)

But correct me if I’m wrong. Unlike Boehlert, I care about the truth, and will cheerfully issue a correction when shown I’m wrong.

UPDATE: Boehlert claims to prove that I am wrong by referring to Treacher’s Twitter messages (which Boehlert takes out of context). Only problem is, Boehlert claimed Treacher published his allegedly false claims at the Daily Caller — something Boehlert “forgets” he said. Details in my follow-up here.

122 Responses to “Eric Boehlert Owes Jim Treacher a Correction”

  1. Disgraceful, and deliberate, distortion is Boehlert’s common rhetorical strategy. A nasty piece of work. An ethical employer would reign him in, but I guess they get something out of his bad habits.

    SarahW (af7312)

  2. Why when someone was RUN OVER and blogging WHILE IN INCREDIBLE PAIN someone attempt to discredit them?

    Instead of wishing them well and be outraged that a citizen of the United States was left for dead in the middle of the street by the feds?

    EricPWJohnson (6cb382)

  3. Went to Media Matters to ask about this and, surprise, surprise, comments are closed.

    Why am I not surprised…

    Steve (06ec5d)

  4. That is just horrible, and it’s hard to say which is worse — getting injured physically like that or having your reputation smeared by such as dishonest hack.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (9eb641)

  5. Well, Bradley, there are good drugs for both …

    ( Just kidding, I’m a fan of Jim Treacher )

    SPQR (26be8b)

  6. Eric is apparently already on the “good drugs”…..

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  7. redc1c4

    I am shocked and appalled that someone would not only run someone over, but then leave them in the middle of the street, and then allow the fiction of that ticket to inflame and enrage the situation even further

    Its a matter of basic human decency – its what sets us apart from the animals…

    EricPWJohnson (cff86d)

  8. Isn’t State Department security contracted out to Blackwater?

    nk (db4a41)

  9. I can’t speak for redc1c4 but they may have been referring to Eric Boehlert and not EricPWJohnson. It’s a possibility.

    ME (7ef833)

  10. Personally I think the Left is collectively huffing paint fumes.

    That many dead brain cells are hard to account for otherwise.

    NavyspyII (df615d)

  11. Bo is now claiming that he was writing about Treacher’s little tweety messages and not what he wrote about on Daily Caller.

    Dave (in MA) (037445)

  12. The “Senior Fellow” has challenged your post, Patterico.

    http://tiny.cc/4nl6T

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  13. To paraphrase from Alice in Wonderland, to the Left “the truth means just what we say it is.”

    Hit & run is a crime. That driver needs to be found, fired and brought up on criminal charges.

    Of course, Sarah Palin writing 5 words on her hand is a much more important story than a criminal act by a federal employee.

    rbj (65c648)

  14. Bo is now claiming that he was writing about Treacher’s little tweety messages and not what he wrote about on Daily Caller.

    Yup. In other words, Mr. “Senior Fellow” ignored what was clearly written in English at the Daily Caller. And everything Patterico cited from the Daily Caller. And the details surrounding the incident documented at the Daily Caller.

    Because THOSE facts don’t matter.

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  15. Media Matters will never let the facts get in the way of a good lie. No surprise there.

    GeneralMalaise (55c598)

  16. Umm… here are all of Treacher’s multiple Tweets saying flat-out that the Secret Service hit him.

    In other words, Boehlert is right and you’re completely wrong. Maybe you should apologize now.

    August J. Pollak (c74f45)

  17. But correct me if I’m wrong.

    Sure. You’re wrong.

    Guess what? I just got hit by a car while crossing the street. At a crosswalk. With the right of way. By the Secret Service. Not joking.
    -Jim Treacher, 2/4

    August J. Pollak (c74f45)

  18. Because THOSE facts don’t matter.

    Yeah, unlike the fact that, in his Twitter feed, Jim Treacher said the Secret Service hit him. Which is what Boehlert said that Treacher said. Which is true.

    I’m honestly baffled by this. This isn’t even some kind of policy or political disagreement. You’re just insisting that Treacher didn’t say something that he clearly did… for reasons I can’t really fathom. What’s your objective in this?

    August J. Pollak (c74f45)

  19. Here is one tweet:
    “Guess what? I just got hit by a car while crossing the street. At a crosswalk. With the right of way. By the Secret Service. Not joking”

    Sounds like you are a liar…big fucking surprise!!! Right wing christian conservatives lie all the time. Thanks!

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    JB (9a59ea)

  20. Yeah, unlike the fact that, in his Twitter feed,

    You didn’t read the articles at Daily Caller, did you?

    Do you know why he was saying that? HE WAS TOLD THAT.

    It’s explained in the Daily Caller piece you’re refusing to read.

    Facts. Context. Details. Media Matters doesn’t haz dem.

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  21. Treacher’s tweet only relays what he was initially told. His subsequent writings make it clear that he was only repeating information told to him in good faith. To use his initial tweet as proof that he was lying is intellectually dishonest.

    He doesn’t need to issue a correction. He already issued it, only hours later.

    East Coast Chris (ded5f2)

  22. The Daily Caller has been told by federal law enforcement sources that the Secret Service was not involved

    Given the track record of The Daily Caller, federal law enforcement and the Secret Service, I don’t find that claim to be very persuasive.

    Let’s see what the courts find when this goes to trial.

    Subotai (1c05f1)

  23. To use his initial tweet as proof that he was lying is intellectually dishonest.

    Intellectually dishonest?

    Media Matters?

    The DEUCE you say!

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  24. It’s explained in the Daily Caller piece you’re refusing to read.

    What he “later explained” isn’t what Treacher “immediately said.” That Treacher updated his statements isn’t just irrelevant to the accuracy of Boehlert, it’s sort of the point of his original post. This is truly nonsensical on your part.

    August J. Pollak (c74f45)

  25. If I was George Soros, I’d start to wonder what I’m getting for my money.

    Subotai (1c05f1)

  26. August J. Pollak : The cause of your bafflement is that you do not read in context. One of the reasons why some people have reading comprehension problems is that they either ignore or do not grasp context.

    A Twitter feed was not the subject of this posting.

    Patterico is commenting about a story by Eric Bochlert. In that story, Bochlert claims that Jim Treacher made false statements about the incident in the Daily Caller. Patterico points out that Bochlert’s claims about the Daily Caller story are, to put it mildly, not true.

    You cannot use Treacher’s statements on Twitter to “prove” that the story on the Daily Caller contained false information. To prove the Daily Caller story false, you must be able to point to false or misleading informantion in that story.

    The Twitter comments, by the very nature of Twitter, are not complete within themselves and are often incomplete. To correctly read a Twitter comment, you must begin at the start of the Twitter conversation and read everything in context.

    “Pearl diving” for quotes that may indicate a mistatement of fact or an outright falsehood if viewed “out of context” is not the sign of wisdom but, merely, the expression of ignorance.

    Longwalker (996c34)

  27. 1. Man 1 hit by car
    2. Paramedic P told Man 1 “Person A was driving car”
    3. Man 1 tweets “person A hit me”
    4. Man 1 blogs “person A hit me”
    5. Governmentman G tells Man 1 “Person A did not hit you, Person B hit you”
    6. Man 1 blogs correction
    7. Man 2 blogs “Man 1 is a liar. He claimed Person A hit him – but it was really Person B”
    8. Man 3 (August) finally understands

    Corwin (ea9428)

  28. What he “later explained” isn’t what Treacher “immediately said.”

    So Treacher wasn’t claiming that. HE WAS TOLD THAT.

    Again. Treacher was relaying WHAT HE WAS TOLD.

    So, what is Boehlert’s “point?” Other than, you know, the fact that he doesn’t have one? That Treacher’s source was incorrect?

    OMG CONSERVATIVES REPEATING WHAT A BYSTANDER SAID! WINGNUT MEDIA PWND!@!

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  29. Mr. Pollak: There are none so blind as those who will not see.

    Old Coot (ddf8be)

  30. Corwin – Not a chance that this media matters fanboy will understand that.

    JD (45c904)

  31. What he “later explained” isn’t what Treacher “immediately said.”

    Why don’t you take time out from drawing crappy cartoons long enough to tell us what you think Treacher should have said?

    You get run down by an SUV. You’re taken to the hospital. There, the docters tell you that the perps were “State Dept or Secret Service”.

    From your hospital bed, you tweet that “I was run down by the Secret Service”.

    And the George Soros Empire decides to attack you for saying this and calls you a liar who’s careless with the truth?

    Subotai (1c05f1)

  32. What the hell is it with trolls that come here to twist simple declarative english sentences like Pollak ?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  33. Boehlert’s got some wiggle room based on the Tweets, but his reference was to the Daily Caller and Patterico was right to call him on it. Ordinarily, Boehlert might be entitled to a bit more consideration if his record of convenient distortions and Democrat boot-licking wasn’t so well established.

    However, tap dance and double talk aside, the issue here for me is why the cops came to Treacher’s hospital room and charged him with jaywalking. That’s adding insult to injury.

    ropelight (257a63)

  34. There is no “wiggle room” on tweets. Its a short form, with a character limit, to attack a tweet for not being long-winded enough to show utter ignorance of the form.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  35. agree, no wiggle room; even if you try to argue that tweet form misled, you fail, since Treacher’s tweets pointed to longer form Caller story with expanded detail.

    SarahW (453a4d)

  36. FWIW the ticket issued is SOP insurance/liability prevention tactic. Insurance cousel or govt counsel would have suggested immediate attempt to get ticket issued based on observation of driver.

    The hospital delivery on purpose too – for both intimidation and softening up injured person claim/demands (minor) and chance to observe or even interview injured person before they get counsel – see what’s going on, etc. because the insurer can’t contact injured person once counsel takes over.

    SarahW (453a4d)

  37. “. Man 1 hit by car
    2. Paramedic P told Man 1 “Person A was driving car”
    3. Man 1 tweets “person A hit me”
    4. Man 1 blogs “person A hit me”
    5. Governmentman G tells Man 1 “Person A did not hit you, Person B hit you”
    6. Man 1 blogs correction
    7. Man 2 blogs “Man 1 is a liar. He claimed Person A hit him – but it was really Person B”
    8. Man 3 (August) finally understands”

    Comment by Corwin — 2/9/2010 @ 10:51 am

    Wow. You are stupid.

    Here’s what really happened.

    1. Man 1 hit by car
    2. Someone told Man 1 “Person A was driving car”
    3. Man 1 tweets “person A hit me”
    4. Man 1 blogs “person A hit me”
    5. Governmentman G tells Man 1 “Person A did not hit you, Person B hit you”
    5.b. Someone points this out
    6. Man 1 claimed he never said, “person A hit me”
    7. Tweets and Blog post prove him wrong.
    8. YOU still don’t get this.

    C.S.Strowbridge (f8947f)

  38. Boehlert’s got some wiggle room based on the Tweets, but his reference was to the Daily Caller and Patterico was right to call him on it.

    Well, then, Mr. Senior Fellow had it WRONG.

    If this sloppy hackery is MM’s most pressing ‘issue’ this week, I guess the right-o-sphere can rest easy.

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  39. “What the hell is it with trolls that come here to twist simple declarative english sentences like Pollak ?”

    They have their marching orders and have accepted their assignments? Just a guess on my part.

    GeneralMalaise (55c598)

  40. 7. Tweets and Blog post prove him wrong.

    Which blog posts?

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  41. Strowbridge, how can he “get” it when you are wrong?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  42. Tweets can be dangerous, it provides a convenient way to disseminate false information. If we had Twitter on 9/11, I shudder to think what the “inside job” mob would do with them, since I was in the building and can testify to all sorts of crazy rumors being shared amongst the people there as the event began to unfold. It was a gas explosion. It was a traffic helicopter. It was a missile. Remember, almost no one actually SAW the plane hit the first tower. Most reacted to a boom and then saw nothing but a fireball. In fact, I did not get the full story until I got home, a good 4 hours after the fact.

    It’s clear here that Boehlert is knowingly furthering a bogus theory….that Treacher accused the Secret Service of running him over. He knows it. Pollack knows it. But when you are paid millions by Soros, you have to provide product for the customers. This piece just proves that there isn’t enough legitimate criticisms of the right to fill a blog, keep people reading it and please the boss.

    East Coast Chris (ded5f2)

  43. I did not get the full story until I got home, a good 4 hours after the fact.

    Boehlert, et al. aren’t interested in the “full story.”

    They’re interested in their distortions, smears, ignorance of fact, ignorance of context and propaganda dissemination.

    That much should be evident by now and in the repeated and failed attempts to smear James O’Keefe.

    Good Lt. (51111a)

  44. It’s always good to see August J. Pollak and marvel at his ability to type with amphibian digits.

    Jim Treacher (0d073e)

  45. “It’s always good to see August J. Pollak and marvel at his ability to type with amphibian digits.”

    I would’ve guessed wide hands and short, stubby, sausage-like fingers.

    GeneralMalaise (55c598)

  46. “Tweets and Blog post prove him wrong.”

    C.S.Strowbridge – Treacher’s initial blog post on the incident do not prove him wrong. You still don’t get this. Funny.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  47. “How is that possibly a “hit-and-run” when someone in the car stops at the accident scene to make sure the victim’s friends are notified?”

    Another Boehlert distortion. It’s a hit and run if the driver does not stay until authorities arrive on the scene or the driver surrenders to authorities according to the law I was taught. Did the driver leave his own identification? What does getting phone numbers from injured victim have to do with leaving the scene of an accident?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  48. Its a matter of basic human decency – its what sets us apart from the animals…

    that, and the really good drugs….

    (yes, i meant Eric B. %-)

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  49. Jim, pay no attention to the trolls. Heal, damnit, heal!

    SPQR (26be8b)

  50. “How is that possibly a “hit-and-run” when someone in the car stops at the accident scene to make sure the victim’s friends are notified?”

    Reading Jim Treacher’s two articles, I didn’t see where he said the SUV stopped and then left again. I also didn’t see where he said the SUV never stopped. So the premise of the question seems to assume facts not in evidence.

    John Hitchcock (9859e6)

  51. When the Dog Trainer finally folds, Patterico will have a target-rich environment from which to choose his next subject.
    That subject will have the choice of heeding the constructive criticism they will receive, or continue down the “primrose path” that their predecessor trode – to oblivion.

    AD - RtR/OS! (ca88dc)

  52. Where does this detail about the SUV stopping come from? I don’t recall reading it in either article, and I don’t see it in the Tweets, either.

    Dianna (5f6ad4)

  53. Where does this detail about the SUV stopping come from? I don’t recall reading it in either article, and I don’t see it in the Tweets, either. Note: I’m not on Twitter, so if it was mentioned in another Tweet, not linked above, I wouldn’t know about it.

    Dianna (5f6ad4)

  54. [...] a conspiracy theory about Obama or something. It was honestly bizarre. Fortunately Patterico is on the case, taking Media Matters honcho Eric Boehlert down a notch for being a.) incompetent, and b.) a dick. [...]

    Conventional Folly » Media Matters is run by clods (b8bc32)

  55. Where does this detail about the SUV stopping come from? I don’t recall reading it in either article, and I don’t see it in the Tweets, either.

    Treach wrote that someone offered to call someone for him and he told them to call the DC. He later found out the person making the call was the driver. So he had to have stopped.

    We don’t know if the driver waited around for the police, or if he contacted them later. But he did not identify himself to JT, nor did he leave his personal info with him or anybody else. That is why this fits the official defintion of hit-and-run.

    TomB (67ef7f)

  56. Wasn’t there a recent big happening with tweet reportings that turned out to be bogus? I can’t remember what it was but there was a big flap over the erroneous tweets being posted that were shown to be wrong. It even had MSM reporters involved as I recall.

    I got the impression Treacher initially did not realize the guy had stopped, and assumed the driver was a bystander since he apparently did not identify himself as the driver at the time.

    jeff (d629fd)

  57. Thanks, TomB. I missed that detail.

    I guess I was too busy thinking how bad the knee must have felt. I still shudder about it.

    Dianna (5f6ad4)

  58. I took too long to post and TomB aced me.

    jeff (d629fd)

  59. I would like to add one small aside on the topic of the looney left. Media Matters is kind of far out but even less radical leftist writers are doing some odd stuff. I have posted some excerpts.

    For example from Slate:

    that list neglects what may be the biggest culprit in our current predicament: the childishness, ignorance, and growing incoherence of the public at large.

    And from James Fallows at The Atlantic:

    We could hope for an enlightened military coup, or some other deus ex machina by the right kind of tyrants. (In his 700-page new “meliorist” novel, Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us, Ralph Nader proposes a kind of plutocrats’ coup, in which Warren Buffett, Bill Gates Sr., Ted Turner, et al. collaborate to create a more egalitarian America.) The periodic longing for a “man on horseback” is a reflection of disappointment with what normal politics can bring. George Washington and Dwight Eisenhower were the right men on horseback.

    Even Tom Freidman is extolling the virtues of China’s dictatorship.

    What has me a bit worried is this longing for the ability to make us do what they want, regardless of inconveniences like the First Amendment or the secret ballot. I fear that, when the political left sees that it is really going to lose the election and in a big way, they may just go completely apeshit.

    I am not a conspiracy theorist but Media Matters and its lying, and even its glee at a conservative blogger being run over, makes me wonder what they are capable of when they see electoral armageddon staring them in the face.

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    Mike K (2cf494)

  60. “Yet in that accusatory article, the Daily Caller left out the fact that its employee originally, and eroneously, accused the Secret Service of running him over, and did it on the Daily Caller site. ” Pollak, Strowbridge, et al: does that Boehlert quote say “on Twitter”, or “on the Daily Caller site”? Which one of these? Hmm?

    Wads. The lot of you.

    Phil Smith (1cf25d)

  61. Mike K., lends quite a bit of support to Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  62. @59: i wouldn’t worry about all that too much, because you’re forgetting the one part of the economy Ear Leader has managed to stimulate: the ongoing run on guns, ammo, reloading components, and the like, in part fueled by a reasonable suspicion that some sort of restrictions would be forthcoming.

    even if they could count on 100% support from the LEO and military community, which they can’t, the usual suspects lack the forces necessary to suppress the general population, should push come to shove.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  63. Hi Patrick, would be curious as to your response to Boehlert’s updated post quoting from Jim’s twitter feed. I’m usually on your side on these issues, but in this case, unless I’ve missed something, I think Boehlert is correct.
    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002090019

    Mike (e12733)

  64. So Mike, to actually make his attack on Jim’s allegedly incorrect post all Boehlert had to do was what? Correct his own erroneous post.

    Isn’t that pretty obviously a confirmation of what Patterico wrote?

    Why do you trolls show up with this nonsense?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  65. Mike, you benighted simian, Boehlert explicitly claimed that Treacher made those statements on the Daily Caller website. Now bugger off.

    Phil Smith (4e586c)

  66. I think it is now clear that Patterico owes Boehlert an apology. Boehlert reported on Treacher’s tweets, and those tweets clearly accuse the Secret Service for striking him down.

    Even worse for Patterico, Boehlert’s original point wasn’t a criticism of Treacher – it was a criticism of National Review.

    So there’s only one thing to say at a time like this:
    neener, neener!

    jjw (2fe316)

  67. Is Mike a concerned Christian conservative?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  68. I fear that, when the political left sees that it is really going to lose the election and in a big way, they may just go completely apeshit.

    I’m not too worried about what they may or may not do, since they’ll find themselves in the extreme minority if they attempt widespread electoral fraud or violence of some sort. Whose side do you think the local and national constabularly will be on in the end of things? Most libs talk real tough but wet their collective panties at the sight of a bunch of middle – aged people carrying banners. Look at the unhinged hate that a tiny woman like Malkin generates. They’re petrified of Palin as well, because she knows how to shoot a rifle. Pantywaists.

    I’m usually on your side on these issues,

    Sure you are, sweetheart. Worst cloaking attempt of a Concern Troll we’ve seen so far.

    [note: released from moderation. --Stashiu]

    Dmac (799abd)

  69. From Boehlert’s post:

    “And how about the Daily Caller itself, which allowed its blogger to publish the allegation on its site that he’d been hit by the Secret Service, which was not true.”

    “Yet in that accusatory article, the Daily Caller left out the fact that its employee originally, and eroneously, accused the Secret Service of running him over, and did it on the Daily Caller site. That fact was conveniently flushed down the memory hole.”

    Boehlert is not focused on the tweets, as the trolls allege, he is accusing the Daily Caller of a stealth edit, for which he presents no evidence.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  70. I really have to wonder if any of these imbeciles have the wit to understand that Twitter limits each tweet to 140 characters.

    Phil Smith (4e586c)

  71. Is Mike a concerned Christian conservative?
    Comment by daleyrocks — 2/9/2010 @ 4:05 pm

    Looks like most of them are first-time drive-bys. I’m sure Mike could point out where he’s frequently supported Patterico in the past though, because he’s such a reasonable fellow. Right, Mike? Should be easy to give a half-dozen links or so. Thanks.

    These folks are so desperate. They keep throwing stuff at the wall and nothing sticks anymore because they’re no longer credible. November has them scared spitless.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  72. Mike and jjw – Please go back to Boehlert’s original article and quote the section where he refers to the “tweets”. I will save you the trouble. He was referencing the Daily Caller site, not the tweets. The tweets would have made his point better than his original, though they lacked the backstory. Either way, you mediamatterz fanboys should stick to sharing twinkies with o-dub.

    JD (fdd4e9)

  73. Mike and jjw – Please go back to Boehlert’s original article and quote the section where he refers to the “tweets”. I will save you the trouble. He was referencing the Daily Caller site, not the tweets. The tweets would have made his point better than his original, though they lacked the backstory. Either way, you mediamatterz fanboys should stick to sharing twinkies with o-dub.

    JD (fdd4e9)

  74. Mike and jjw show only that they can’t read simple english sentences.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  75. It’s yet another dishonest Boehlert piece with holes you could drive trucks through and in his update he’s attempting to get his fanbois to avoid looking where he doesn’t want them to look. Many of them seem stupid enough to do it and appear here without having read either Treacher’s original piece or Boehlert’s.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  76. Stop it! Please stop with the racism. It’s getting out of hand. Please stop the hatred. Stop… (oops! Wrong blog..) teehee.. :)

    The Emperor (ab0f7f)

  77. Boehlert wrote:

    It’s true that a conservative blogger, who writes under name Jim Treacher, immediately claimed he’d been hit by a Secret Service SUV.

    What part of that statement is false? Treacher did immediately claim that he was hit by the Secret Service. That claim is in Treacher’s tweets. They were posted much earlier that

    But this is all beside the point. It’s obvious that the story was unclear, and yet the National Review still refuses to correct the mistake that they made.

    Actually, in the end, I don’t really care one way or another. I was just teasing Patterico. You people all need to chill out.

    I sincerely hope Mr. Treacher recovers quickly from his injuries.

    jjw (2fe316)

  78. jjw, selective quotation I see. Why is it that you can’t read english? Read the post you are criticizing or just show yourself for a fool.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  79. If Mike McGuinn, the guy who hit me, had identified himself, I wouldn’t have had to rely on what little information I had.

    Oh: and I had just been hit by a car.

    Jim Treacher (e65ee4)

  80. If Mike McGuinn, the guy who hit me, had identified himself, I wouldn’t have had to rely on what little information I had.

    Oh: and I had just been hit by a car.

    Jim Treacher (e65ee4)

  81. I can read. For instance, I can read the part of this post in which Patterico quotes Boehlert as saying:” It’s true that a conservative blogger, who writes under name Jim Treacher, immediately claimed he’d been hit by a Secret Service SUV.”

    and then Patterico comments:
    No, Eric Boehlert, that’s actually not true. It’s actually quite false.

    Now, I guess you can nitpick and say that Boehlert should have specified that he was talking about the Twitter feed in his original post. But if you’re going to take that tack, you’d have to argue that Patterico makes just as engregious omission when he states it’s “quite false” that Jim “immediately claimed he’d been hit by a Secret Service SUV”, since he *did* make that immefiate claim on his twitter feed.

    I mean, this is pretty nitpicky stuff all around, but if you’re going to nitpick about semantic stuff like this, nitpick both sides of the argument.

    Mike (e12733)

  82. Jjw – could you show us where Boehlert references tweets in his original article? Kthxby

    JD (fdd4e9)

  83. Mike is a concerned christian conservative and long time Patterico-reader. I promise ;-)

    JD (e19c2d)

  84. Mike, but you don’t want to “nitpick” both sides, you only want to nitpick against Treacher and Patterico, and for Boehlert. That’s pretty obvious.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  85. Jim Treacher – Did you flush something down the memory hole as Boehlert claims?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  86. I can read.
    Comment by Mike — 2/9/2010 @ 5:04 pm

    Did you read the request for a half-dozen links to your support of Patterico in the past? Since you’re “usually” on his side, that should be easy. Sure, they will have to come from somewhere other than here, but we wouldn’t want anyone to think you were a concern troll who falsely claimed something to establish bona fides. Thanks.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  87. Oh, get over yourself SPQR.

    “…just show yourself for a fool.”

    Seriously?
    Man, you really put me in my place. I’ll just slink off into the corner with my tail between my legs and prostrate myself before your magnificence.

    jjw (2fe316)

  88. “Man, you really put me in my place. I’ll just slink off into the corner with my tail between my legs and prostrate myself before your magnificence.”

    Contemporary liberal “doggie submission” posture signaling defeat will work.

    GeneralMalaise (55c598)

  89. Jim Treacher – Did you flush something down the memory hole as Boehlert claims?

    I forget.

    Jim Treacher (e65ee4)

  90. I forget.
    Comment by Jim Treacher — 2/9/2010 @ 6:11 pm

    Well-played Sir. :)

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  91. I mean, this is pretty nitpicky stuff all around,

    So of course it stands to reason that both sides are wrong here – how convenient to rephrase your earlier objection in order not to beclown yourself any further.

    I’ll just slink off into the corner with my tail between my legs and prostrate myself before your magnificence.

    That’s not necessary, since you already shat yourself all over the floor.

    Dmac (799abd)

  92. Big Patterico supporter Mike says:

    “Now, I guess you can nitpick and say that Boehlert should have specified that he was talking about the Twitter feed in his original post.”

    How could he have? He specifically said he was talking about the Daily Caller.

    See, Big Patterico Supporter Mike, you and jjw are focusing on only one aspect of my post: the part where I deny that Treacher claimed he had been hit by a Secret Service vehicle.

    Now, as I say in the update and the post linked there, Boehlert can argue that I got that wrong — except that you have to take Treacher’s tweets out of context to make that argument. But fine. Let’s go with his out-of-context tweets.

    Now let’s YOU GUYS focus on the part that you and Boehlert keep evading:

    And how about the Daily Caller itself, which allowed its blogger to publish the allegation on its site that he’d been hit by the Secret Service, which was not true. The Daily Caller then posted a long, detailed account of the accident, suggesting a government conspiracy to cover up the crime. Yet in that accusatory article, the Daily Caller left out the fact that its employee originally, and eroneously, accused the Secret Service of running him over, and did it on the Daily Caller site. That fact was conveniently flushed down the memory hole.

    That’s Boehlert’s quotes, and he ain’t talking about tweets.

    Admit he got that wrong, or show yourselves to be hacks.

    Your choice.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  93. Can’t they be both?

    Dmac (799abd)

  94. Can’t they do both?

    Dmac (799abd)

  95. I vote for both, and HALLIBURTON!!!!11ty!!!!!!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  96. Every gunman, when he feels like he’s finally quick enough and sharp enough and mean enough, eventually calls out Kid Patterico. Which ensures the flies stay fed.

    Jim Treacher (e65ee4)

  97. Treach – Hope you are recovering well.

    I think Boehlert and mediamatterz owe not only Treach, but journalism in general, and specifically honesty, an apology.

    JD (b1f7fc)

  98. “Which ensures the flies stay fed.”

    Treacher – Coffin maker jobs saved or created!!!!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  99. Let me see if I’ve got this right-

    Person gets run over and the driver does not stop and remain until authorities arrive.

    Person is told by others that it was a fed agency, not sure if CIA or Secret Service (or some other group of people who dress in black, wear sunglasses, and has a curly-cord behind his ear).

    Washington police officer shows up to give hit and run victim a jaywalking ticket, with one of the “men in black” in the background.

    Turns out it appears it was not the Secret Service, but a State Department security employee who did the deed.

    And the Media Matters folk are twisting the details of how the event was communicated by the victim, who was either in significant pain or under the influence of significant narcotic, or both.

    Is this what is going on here?

    Sounds about as important as whether Ted Kennedy had been drinking Scotch or Vodka when he had that car accident years ago. The Media is not focusing on the story that Matters.

    MD in Philly (d4668b)

  100. Yes, jjw, I put you in your place. A place you made for yourself. Because you make a false statement, get called on it, and double down.

    You didn’t use to have a different nick here did you?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  101. Treacher’s FIRST comments were his tweets, and in his tweets, he has NO qualifiers about the Secret Service hitting him. He says, without any doubt, that he was hit by the Secret Service, and that they drove away after they hit him. They didn’t drive away – they called the person he asked them to call! It wasn’t a hit-and-run, and he wasn’t hit by the Secret Service, but he said he was and they did. He was the one who got stuff wrong here, not Eric Boehlert.

    Dolly Madison (27edca)

  102. Dolly Madison is a sock puppet of Oliver Willis.

    JD (6ed683)

  103. Dolly has a reading comprehension problem, don’t mind her.

    John Hitchcock (9859e6)

  104. Not a sock, just another drive-by with the same old attempts at misdirection. Ignore without consequence, already been addressed. ;)

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  105. Stashiu – that was more a play on Oliver Willis from mediamatterz and his affinity fior tasty snack cakes ;-)

    JD (6ed683)

  106. Here’s what Boehlert’s original post said.

    It’s true that a conservative blogger, who writes under name Jim Treacher, immediately claimed he’d been hit by a Secret Service SUV. (Which, of course, lit a fire under the conspiratorial, right-wing blogosphere.) But in fact, he was not hit by a Secret Service vehicle. The claim, according to “federal law enforcement officials,” was baseless. (The driver reportedly worked for the State Dept.)

    As for the “hit-and-run,” the Daily Caller reported that after the accident, an agent in the SUV phoned the Daily Caller office to inform them that an employee had been injured. How is that possibly a “hit-and-run” when someone in the car stops at the accident scene to make sure the victim’s friends are notified?

    And why did the Daily Caller publish this early on the 4th, the day after he got struck?

    “The Daily Caller has been told by federal law enforcement sources that the Secret Service was not involved, and is working to confirm that driver of the vehicle which struck Jim Treacher was a State Department security employee.”

    Why? Because, as Boehlert said, they allowed Treacher to say that it WAS the Secret Service that hit him. He said it in his tweets, and he said it on their site, and LATER ON, they corrected those errors, but Eric Boehlert was complaining about those errors being allowed to go out IN THE FIRST place without being vetted!

    This is not rocket science. Boehlert is owed an apology. Period.

    Dolly Madison (27edca)

  107. Dolly does not read well. She should stick to tasty snack cakes.

    JD (6ed683)

  108. it may not be “rocket science” Dolly, but its obviously still beyond your limited grasp.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  109. And no, the points I listed have NOT been “addressed”. That’s a lie. Boehlert WAS talking about the tweets. And he WAS talking about what was on the Daily Caller site, from Treacher himself, early on the 4th, that said that it was the Secret Service. Boehlert said that in the tweets, Treacher said it was the Secret Service.

    After Treacher said “One last thing: I’m told by multiple people that the SUV that hit me was Secret Service”, they found out that it really wasn’t! “The Daily Caller has been told by federal law enforcement sources that the Secret Service was not involved, and is working to confirm that driver of the vehicle which struck Jim Treacher was a State Department security employee?” LATER on, they realized the error, that it wasn’t the Secret Service, but early on, they passed on that false story. And the problem here is NOT that Treacher was wrong. It was that the media passed on his accusation without questioning it first. Boehlert said “And how about the Daily Caller itself, which allowed its blogger to publish the allegation on its site that he’d been hit by the Secret Service, which was not true.” Treacher saying “One last thing: I’m told by multiple people that the SUV that hit me was Secret Service” IS an allegation. It doesn’t stop being an allegation just because he says that he was TOLD that it was an allegation.

    Dolly Madison (27edca)

  110. Yeah, so typical. When confronted with undeniable facts, rightwingers make baseless personal attacks. Thanks for yet again showing the world how disrespectful you are towards the facts.

    Dolly Madison (27edca)

  111. Dolly, get your fat ass back in the kitchen where it belongs!

    James Madison (718861)

  112. Dolly, honey, its an “undeniable fact” that you’re dumber than a snack cake and stuck on stupid.

    denying the validity of an essential truth doesn’t make it any less so, which means you can make all the unfounded claims and deliberate misinterpretations of the publicly available facts you wish, but that won’t change those facts nor will it stop us from mocking you when attempt to do so.

    but thanks for playing anyway!

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  113. If Eric Boehlert can prove anything was “flushed down the memory hole,” I invite him to do so. Adding a correction is not “flushing it down the memory hole.” The only memory hole here is the one Boehlert uses whenever his lies are exposed.

    Jim Treacher (e65ee4)

  114. Dolly: So you agree that it was a hit-and-run. Because otherwise, why would there be any confusion?

    Jim Treacher (e65ee4)

  115. I just thank God Dolly wasnt driving

    EricPWJohnson (99fa89)

  116. Nice work. You are a great attorney/detective/blogger/citizen. And catching that single spelling error–brilliant! Boehlert (is that pronounced “Bay-lert”?) never had a chance. Jeez–quoting people’s own words–how stupid is that? Have you ever thought of running for president?

    Erich (0665ed)

  117. All bow before the awesomeness that is Erich.

    JD (1d90a6)

  118. ‘As for the “hit-and-run,” the Daily Caller reported that after the accident, an agent in the SUV phoned the Daily Caller office to inform them that an employee had been injured.’ – Dolly

    Ok dolly, so when I hit someone I can choose not to exchange information, not to wait for the police, and just call someone they know later… that’s allowed now?

    Can you explain that to the police; because they tend to arrest people who try that under charges they call “hit and run” oddly enough.

    Surprisingly they think you’re supposed to both exchange information (with the other party) and/or wait for the police to arrive at the scene of the accident.

    Not, you know, give a call to the place where the guy you ran over works later; whenever you feel like it, no biggie.

    But hey, go ahead and rewrite the laws so this isn’t a hit & run. Might be harder than rewriting a blog post though.

    Gekkobear (25ea0f)

  119. Have you ever thought of running for president?

    Who knows, but I wonder if you’ve ever thought of reading the book “English comprehension for Dummies,” because so far you display the remedial skills of a 2nd grader.

    Dmac (799abd)

  120. At #33 I wrote that based on the Tweets (3 at the time) Boehlert had “wiggle room.” However, now it’s revealed there were 5 Tweets and Treacher’s assertions on Twitter were consistent with his Daily Caller post.

    Boehlert has no wiggle room. He falsified his report in an underhanded effort to kick Treacher while he was down.

    ropelight (5f2652)

  121. Damn, think I’ll get me a black SUV, dress up like men-in-black, run over a few fookin libturds, and see how many facts they get wrong. And then criticize the hell outa them, while they are lying in a hospital bed, because they confused me with Will Smith. Sounds like an exciting new game to me.

    peedoffamerican (44a207)

  122. From Merriam Webster:

    “remedial, adj.: concerned with the correction of faulty study habits and the raising of a pupil’s general competence”

    I don’t think this word means what you think it means. Oh, and there’s no such book as “English Comprehension for Dummies”, which probably explains everything.

    Erich (0665ed)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3946 secs.