New evidence has revealed that Kamala Harris stole large swaths of copy from her 2009 book, Smart on Crime, yet the media is completely ignoring this story.
Only three weeks out from the 2024 election, the news that Harris simply stole the copy for her book and then pretended that she wrote it ll herself should be on the lips of every broadcaster, in every paper, and on every b broadcast.
Christopher F. Rufo has been combing through Harris’ book and found that she even stole pages from Wikipedia without bothering to note her citations.
EXCLUSIVE: Kamala Harris plagiarized at least a dozen sections of her criminal-justice book, Smart on Crime, according to a new investigation. The current vice president even lifted material from Wikipedia.
We have the receipts. 🧵
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) October 14, 2024
But even has he continues to find page after page of direct theft of other people’s work that she claimed as her own words, the media has been either ignoring the story, or waving it off as unimportant.
The New York Times, for instance, admitted that Harris is a plagiarist, but declared that it isn’t all that important.
BREAKING: CNN confirms my reporting that Kamala Harris plagiarized her book, Smart on Crime.
This is exactly how it worked with Claudine Gay: the NYT tried to obfuscate; CNN told the truth; other publications followed. Eventually, even the NYT admitted that it was plagiarism. pic.twitter.com/msa1PpwZaY
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) October 15, 2024
Per the paper:
The passages called into question by Mr. Rufo on his Substack platform involve about 500 words in the approximately 65,000-word, 200-page book. Ms. Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, wrote the book with another author when she was the district attorney in San Francisco.
In a review of the book, The New York Times found that none of the passages in question took the ideas or thoughts of another writer, which is considered the most serious form of plagiarism. Instead, the sentences copy descriptions of programs or statistical information that appear elsewhere.
…
Jonathan Bailey, a plagiarism consultant in New Orleans and the publisher of Plagiarism Today, said on Monday that his initial reaction to Mr. Rufo’s claims was that the errors were not serious, given the size of the document.
It’s all just more proof that the left will excuse any outrage from their candidates s long as they win.
Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston, or Truth Social @WarnerToddHuston
