Surprise: Liberals Push Bogus Last-Minute 'Plagiarism' Smear Against Gorsuch

They're desperate. They've lost consecutive national elections. Their own tactics are finally being turned against them. They're pursuing a very stupid political strategy to mollify an unthinkingly livid base. They've got no good arguments against Neil Gorsuch. And now  Mitch McConnell says he's got the votes to push the 'nuclear' button on judicial filibusters under the Reid Rule just as soon as Democrats hold hands and jump off this unprecedented cliff together:

McConnell: We have votes for nuclear option on Neil Gorsuch https://t.co/Fn4JLKoYf0 via @DCExaminer

— Susan Crabtree (@susancrabtree) April 4, 2017

With the clock ticking down toward Gorsuch's seemingly inevitable confirmation, opponents are pulling out all the stops to sully his name and further controversialize his non-controversial nomination. Sen. Jeff Merkeley, a strong proponent of Reid's power grab to eliminate judicial filibusters when Democrats controlled the Senate, spent all night on the floor railing against Trump's qualified and mainstream pick, and whining about Merrick Garland's "stolen" seat. The Garland histrionics in particular have even become too much for one famously left-wing entertainer to stomach; her tweet was shared by Republican Orrin Hatch last evening, who wryly added, "when you've lost Cher..."

DEMS,The“Merrick Garland”SHIP HAS SAILED??
Let It Go…OR….Do You Want Some ?? To Go With Your WHINE??
This Tantrum Wreaks Of Desperation

— Cher (@cher) April 4, 2017

But as a Senator, Berkeley was fully entitled to launch an all-night gab fest objecting to something he's mad about. It's the hypocrisy that makes the spectacle worthy of mockery. It would be somewhat akin to Ted Cruz holding the floor for hours to argue against repealing Obamacare, or for Rand Paul to do the same in favor of increased drone strikes on US citizens. Merkeley was on the exact opposite side of this debate when the parties involved were in opposite positions.  This is known as "preening hackery."  The more insidious eleventh-hour attack is the allegation that Gorsuch plagiarized a short portion of his book on euthanasia. Buzzfeed and Politico ran with the story, which was quickly and comprehensively dismantled. National Review's Ed Whelan slaps down the story, quoting the supposed "victim" of the plagiarism, who says ...it's not plagiarism:

Recommended

This Post on the 'Progressive' Pro-Hamas Mob Absolutely Nails It Guy Benson

Advertisement

I have reviewed both passages and do not see an issue here, even though the language is similar. These passages are factual, not analytical in nature, framing both the technical legal and medical circumstances of the “Baby/Infant Doe” case that occurred in 1982. Given that these passages both describe the basic facts of the case, it would have been awkward and difficult for Judge Gorsuch to have used different language.

CNN's Andrew Kaczynski, whose research has turned up damaging examples of actual plagiarism over the years, calls this accusation "sort of weak," with attorney and conservative writer Ben Shapiro dismissing the charge as rooted in ignorance:

You have to be entirely ignorant of legal writing to call Gorsuch's writing plagiarism.

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) April 5, 2017

Schumer: We lost one [Garland] they lost one [Gorsuch] We should now get in a room and come up with a compromise to avoid the nuclear option

— Tessa Berenson (@tcberenson) April 4, 2017

Schumer: We must compromise!

Ok. Don't block DJT's first *two* SCOTUS noms (the WJC & BHO standard), then we'll talk.

If not, pound sand.

— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) April 4, 2017

They've got nothing & are really embarrassing themselves at this point:https://t.co/B1uJfsSQ5p

— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) April 5, 2017