Kamala Harris’s Plagiarism Problem At the beginning of Harris’s political career, in the run-up to her campaign to serve as California’s attorney general, she and co-author Joan O’C Hamilton published a small volume, entitled Smart on Crime: A Career Prosecutor’s Plan to Make Us Safer. The book helped to establish her credibility on criminal-justice issues. However, according to Stefan Weber, a famed Austrian “plagiarism hunter” who has taken down politicians in the German-speaking world, Harris’s book contains more than a dozen “vicious plagiarism fragments.” Some of the passages he highlighted appear to contain minor transgressions—reproducing small sections of text; insufficient paraphrasing—but others seem to reflect more serious infractions, similar in severity to those found in Harvard president Claudine Gay’s doctoral thesis. (Harris did not respond to a request for comment.)
Is it plagarism if the writer couldn't really understand what she was saying when she had a man's dick in her mouth?
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.
You can copy public domain information without crediting it providing it does not contain original expression. Books don't need to waste paper with minor references. It is not a student paper. If you boys went to university this century you might know that.
This is coming from professionals with deep cympathies to Kamala. The conclusion is like a "soft pagiarism", which is telling. Quote, "The most serious allegation concerns Wikipedia. Harris’ 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." One could find more stuff there. https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2024/10/15/the-kamala-harris-plagiarism-scandal/
Look, we all have English issues some days but you spelled sympathies with a c and they are not close enough for that to be a thick finger. It brings your capacity to assess this into question. Wikipedia is a reliable source for a lot of stuff as the editors insist on references. Plagiarism is dependent on the type of information copied. Citations depend on the nature of the book. Frankly, the proofreaders and editor are to blame for whatever minimal transgression. On the bright side, at least this shows Harris wrote the book herself, unlike Trump, whose books are ghostwritten.
Understandable, understandable Yes, it's perfectly understandable Comprehensible, comprehensible Not a bit reprehensible, it's so defensible