Still waiting for National Review's "hit-and-run" correction
Here is what NR's Greg Pollowitz wrote Thursday , following the news that a conservative blogger had been hit by a car in Washington, D.C. [emphasis added]:
Jim Treacher, a very funny blogger for Tucker Carlson's new Daily Caller website, was involved in a hit-and-run car accident yesterday — involving the Secret Service.
But it turns out the Secret Service had nothing to do with accident, and there's no evidence it was a "hit-and-run." But other than that, Pollowitz nailed it.
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?
But back to NRO. When is Pollowitz going to post a correction after he falsely claimed the Secret Service had been involved in a "hit-and-run" accident?
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.
UPDATED: Trust me, I'm not trying to pick on a pedestrian who got hit by an SUV and broke his knee, and I'm certainly not defending the driver. Plus, I'm not trying to make it a partisan thing. But it was the conservative blogger, and his online supporters, like Glenn Reynolds , who immediately claimed that the Secret Service had run the blogger over, and/or it was a "hit-and-run" accident. I have no special insight into the unfortunate incident, but neither did conservatives who aired  the incendiary, and false, claim against the Secret Service. But I don't see anyone on the right bothering to apologize for trafficking those claims.
Though sadly, the lack of right-wing accountability does not surprise me.
UPDATED: Treacher's pal Matt Welch at Reason unloads  on the handling of the accident. But interestingly, Welch ignores the fact that the original claim -- that the Secret Service had clipped Treacher in a "hit-and-run"-- turned out to be completely false. Welch bemoans the (government) "lies" being told about the accident, but he ignores perhaps the biggest two of all.