Bill Maher Made Adam Schiff and Don Lemon Look Like Morons Last Night
The Nine Lives of Kristi Noem...and She Used Them All Very Quickly
Report: Russia Is Helping Iran Target US Forces
It Must Be Nice Being Married to a Democrat
U.S. Embassy in Norway Targeted by Explosive in New Wave of Attacks on...
Virginia Fraud Ring Allegedly Used Jail Inmates’ Identities to Steal Pandemic Benefits
Illegal Immigrant Arrested for Allegedly Voting in 2024 Pennsylvania Federal Election
Key Iranian Oil Infrastructure Targeted in Latest Operation Epic Fury Strikes
Six U.S. Soldiers Killed in Iran Strike Honored at Dover Air Force Base
FBI: Two Charged in Fraud Ring That Targeted Seniors Across Ohio, Michigan, and...
This New Report Destroys the Leftist Narrative on the Iranian Ship Sinking
Jury Convicts Two Women of Stalking ICE Officer After Livestreamed Pursuit
Southwest Flight Diverted Over Bomb Threat While Democrats Keep DHS Defunded
John Cornyn Announces Support for Ending Silent Filibuster to Pass SAVE America Act
Anti-Communist Protests Erupt in Havana As Trump Eyes Shake-Up in Cuban Leadership
Tipsheet

There's an Update on Kamala's Plagiarism Scandal

There's an Update on Kamala's Plagiarism Scandal
AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

On Monday journalist Christopher Rufo detailed how Democratic presidential candidate and Vice President Kamala Harris lifted major portions of her book, "Smart on Crime," from Wikipedia, press releases and other sources without citation.

Advertisement

But it turns out the very institutions tasked with holding officials accountable for plagiarism covered for Harris and are now admitting they were wrong. 

That plagiarism expert, New York Times’ consultant Jonathan Bailey, had more to say in Plagiarism Today

"At the time, I was unaware of a full dossier with additional allegations, which led some to accuse the New York Times of withholding that information from me. However, the article clearly stated that it was my ‘initial reaction’ to those allegations, not a complete analysis," Bailey wrote. "I reviewed the complete dossier prepared by Dr. Stefan Weber, whom I have covered before. I also performed a peer review of one of his papers in 2018. With this new information, while I believe the case is more serious than I commented to the New York Times, the overarching points remain. While there are problems with this work, the pattern points to sloppy writing habits, not a malicious intent to defraud."

Advertisement

Related:

2024 ELECTION

"Is it problematic? Yes. But it’s also not the wholesale fraud that many have claimed it to be. It sits somewhere between what the two sides want it to be," he continued. 

Days into the scandal the Harris-Walz campaign has failed to comment on the situation.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement