The controversy over Kamala Harris plagiarising several sections of her book on crime, deepens, as it has been revealed that the level of cheating is far greater than the original article in the New York Times exposing this, documented. Dozens of sections of the book were copied from various sources, some of which must have violated copyright and intellectual property rights. If Harris was an academic, even in the present woke university, her career would grind to a halt. But the present revelations have not generated much interest outside of academics.
However, it does show something about Harris' character, that she is prepared to cut corners and cheat. That along with everything else, is what is so alarming about her almost certainty to become president by election stealing. It is just what her team does well; cheating and fraud, from book writing, and up.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2024/10/17/kamala-harris-plagiarism-allegations-more-serious/
"Kamala Harris is accused of plagiarising several sections of her book on crime
Kamala Harris's plagiarism is "more serious" than it first seemed, a New York Times expert has admitted after he initially downplayed more than a dozen examples of copied paragraphs in her book.
Ms Harris was on Monday accused of plagiarising several sections of her book on crime, including a story once told by Martin Luther King Jr.
More than a dozen sections of the book were apparently copied from various sources, including Wikipedia.
But The New York Times downplayed the story, focussing on the conservative academic Christopher Rufo, who brought it to light.
The newspaper's headline, "Conservative activist seizes on passages from Harris book", was criticised by Republicans for failing to scrutinise the allegations.
The story quoted Jonathan Bailey, a "plagiarism expert", who said the extracts were "an error and not an intent to defraud", and the Harris campaign, which accused Mr Rufo of launching an attack on the vice-president for political reasons.
'Bailey did not have chance for full review'
The Harris campaign said the allegations were a result of Right-wing "operatives" becoming desperate in the face of the vice-president's support. James Singer, a spokesman, said: "This is a book that's been out for 15 years, and the vice-president clearly cited sources and statistics in footnotes and endnotes throughout."
However, writing on his blog Plagiarism Today on Thursday, Mr Bailey said that he had only been given five examples of the alleged plagiarism by the New York Times, and that he had not had a chance to review the full report accusing her of stealing passages from other sources.
In a blog post, he said the plagiarism was "more serious" than he first realised, and reversed his comments. He wrote: "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."
: 5 sec
He said that two passages which are alleged to have been copied from Wikipedia were, in his mind, plagiarised, writing: "Harris's book contained roughly two paragraphs copied from Wikipedia without citation. To be clear, that is plagiarism. It's compounded by the fact that Wikipedia is typically not seen as a reliable source, and, according to Weber, there was an error in the information."