Drudge report, conservative blogger, manipulate story -- dupe volinbham

#2
#2
"I called it a closet, because it was stuffed with shelves, boxes, baskets and other items in storage, and it felt like a closet. The vice president’s office called it a room used for storage. It had a light, a window somewhere in the back behind the shelves full of boxes, and a few square feet of open space in the front. They set up a small table and a chair for me. They offered me food, which I declined, and brought me a bottle of water. They closed the door. I sat to wait, mistakenly thinking it would be only a few minutes. The door wasn’t locked, though every time I opened it and stepped out to see what was going on a staffer told me I couldn’t come out yet. He’d let me know.

It was more than an hour, and when I was finally led out, Ginsburg, Nelson and Biden were just getting ready to talk. I listened, recorded the speeches and took notes, then was led back to the little room to wait until they left, about 15 more minutes, before they led me to my car."

so regardless he was told to get in the closet and he couldn't come out.
 
#4
#4
it was not a closet but a small room separated by a door and used for storage
 
#6
#6
MG1968 said:
this required a separate thread?
Click to expand...


I think that it is important when a post is established to be so far from the truth, so blatantly manipulated to fit an agenda, that yes, the post/thread needs to be called out on it.
 
#7
#7
Vol Mania 21 said:
sounds basically like a big closet
Click to expand...


You just refuse to read or at least acknowledge the facts, don't you?

Unbelievable. I mean, its not as bad as what Breitbart did, but its basically on par. These conservative bloggers and reporters, and Durdge in particular, haveno shame in taking facts and twisting them to the point they are not recognizable in order to drum up some false outrage.

Pathetic.
 
#8
#8
lawgator1 said:
The story of the reporter locked in a closet and posted by volinbham?

Uh....

How my wait in a closet almost brought down the White House – Central Florida Political Pulse – Orlando Sentinel
Click to expand...

Clearly you missed the point of my post - his coverage and access was highly constrained by "the most open and transparent administration in history".

The story I posted clearly states he was not "locked" in or held against his will.

When I arrived I was told I would not be able to speak with any of the people at the party, and that I was to wait in a room until Biden and Nelson arrived. I went in willingly, with the understanding that I was free to leave — but if I left I’d probably have to leave the house entirely, and not get to cover the speeches.
Click to expand...
 
#9
#9
volinbham said:
Clearly you missed the point of my post - his coverage and access was highly constrained by "the most open and transparent administration in history".

The story I posted clearly states he was not "locked" in or held against his will.
Click to expand...


Your thread title ends with "poster locked in closet."

Hey, don't be mad at me, Be mad at the blogger and Drudge for tricking you (and millions of others) with their bitter lies.
 
#10
#10
lawgator1 said:
You just refuse to read or at least acknowledge the facts, don't you?

Unbelievable. I mean, its not as bad as what Breitbart did, but its basically on par. These conservative bloggers and reporters, and Durdge in particular, haveno shame in taking facts and twisting them to the point they are not recognizable in order to drum up some false outrage.

Pathetic.
Click to expand...

actually i read the entire thing. fact is he was told to get in the closet/storage room and actually couldn't come out for an hour. both viewpoints acknowledge that fact. not sure what you aren't getting
 
#11
#11
lawgator1 said:
I think that it is important when a post is established to be so far from the truth, so blatantly manipulated to fit an agenda, that yes, the post/thread needs to be called out on it.
Click to expand...

what part SPECIFICALLY was far from the truth?
 
#12
#12
lawgator1 said:
Your thread title ends with "poster locked in closet."

Hey, don't be mad at me, Be mad at the blogger and Drudge for tricking you (and millions of others) with their bitter lies.
Click to expand...

just curious to what the diff is in being locked in, and being told you couldn't come out
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
Your thread title ends with "poster locked in closet."

Hey, don't be mad at me, Be mad at the blogger and Drudge for tricking you (and millions of others) with their bitter lies.
Click to expand...

I put that in the title because it was the title in the article.

If you read my post you see I was clearly talking about the restriction of access being the issue and never suggest he was held against his will.

What you've posted was clearly stated in the article I posted. At no point did I believe he was held against his will or even locked in the closet.
 
#14
#14
Directly from Drudge and in the article I posted

Powers told The Drudge Report: ‘When I'd stick my head out, they'd say, “Not yet. We'll let you know when you can come out.”’
Click to expand...
Clearly he wasn't held against his will and that is not the point of the post.
 
#15
#15
lawgator1 said:
Your thread title ends with "poster locked in closet."

Hey, don't be mad at me, Be mad at the blogger and Drudge for tricking you (and millions of others) with their bitter lies.
Click to expand...

you are arguing semantics and then saying someting is a "bitter lie." exagerate much?
 
#17
#17
apparently you need an actual lock to be used to be locked in a closet. oh and the closet can't be very big, because then it's not a closet.
 
#20
#20
Prison Mike says "Tanks LG, for clearin dat up"

tumblr_lchd8uUlAl1qbbpaoo1_500.png
 
#21
#21
Really? I am SHOCKED at how much you are willing to defend the way this appeared on Drudge.

1) The title of the article you posted is that the reporter was "locked in a closet." The truth: he says he could come out whenever he wanted to but he wasn't allowed to mingle and so would have to leave.

2) The text of the article says he was "locked" and "held" in a closet. The truth: He was told he couldn't just walk out among the guests, he was going to be given an interview and of course be in the main room for the speeches. He wasn't "locked" or "held" anywhere.

3) The article says he was "locked away." B.S. Utter B.S. That is an intentionally phony characterization by the author of the article you posted.

4) The article slightly recharacterizes it to be that he was told "you can't come out yet." That's another intentional mischaracterization. He wasn't told he couldn't come out -- just that if he did he had to leave because otherwise he's mingling.

5) The author of the article you posted calls it a "prison." Give me a freakin break.

6) The reporter you posted then selects certain emails from others, discussing "caged animals." Yet another effort to portray this falsely.

The bottom line is that the author of the article you posted has taken this WAY out of context and to the point that its simply a lie. And that was intentional.

Again, you should be mad at the author of the article you posted, not me.
 
#22
#22
Really, though, the Breitbart episode should teach you that anything you get from Drudge you might want to wait a few days for the truth to come out.
 
#23
#23
so he wasn't held in there? i'll be damned i thought that he tried to come out and they told him to basically get back in the closet.
 
#24
#24
lawgator1 said:
Really? I am SHOCKED at how much you are willing to defend the way this appeared on Drudge.

1) The title of the article you posted is that the reporter was "locked in a closet." The truth: he says he could come out whenever he wanted to but he wasn't allowed to mingle and so would have to leave.

2) The text of the article says he was "locked" and "held" in a closet. The truth: He was told he couldn't just walk out among the guests, he was going to be given an interview and of course be in the main room for the speeches. He wasn't "locked" or "held" anywhere.

3) The article says he was "locked away." B.S. Utter B.S. That is an intentionally phony characterization by the author of the article you posted.

4) The article slightly recharacterizes it to be that he was told "you can't come out yet." That's another intentional mischaracterization. He wasn't told he couldn't come out -- just that if he did he had to leave because otherwise he's mingling.

5) The author of the article you posted calls it a "prison." Give me a freakin break.

6) The reporter you posted then selects certain emails from others, discussing "caged animals." Yet another effort to portray this falsely.

The bottom line is that the author of the article you posted has taken this WAY out of context and to the point that its simply a lie. And that was intentional.

Again, you should be mad at the author of the article you posted, not me.
Click to expand...


1. I didn't read the Drudge article - I read the one posted.

2. I'm smart enough to read the article I posted and realize he wasn't held against his will; particularly since the article says that.

3. My point remains wholly intact - this administration bars access and tightly controls the press. This is one more glaring example.

4. You are condoning the actions

5. I'm not mad at anyone - just clearly up the giant leap you've made.
 
#25
#25
the reporters own words:

They closed the door. I sat to wait, mistakenly thinking it would be only a few minutes. The door wasn’t locked, though every time I opened it and stepped out to see what was going on a staffer told me I couldn’t come out yet

Almost word for word what the first article said.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top