Of course! Darn, everyone should have thought of this years ago.

Kamala Harris has become famous, in part, for her unique rhetorical style. She switches freely between various accents and peppers her speeches with catchphrases: pondering falling "out of a coconut tree," discussing "the significance of the passage of time," and moving the nation toward "what can be, unburdened by what has been."

To her supporters, the vice president's rhetorical flourishes represent the values of compassion and optimism. To her detractors, her reliance on platitudes and tautologies demonstrates her unfitness for the presidency.

But, as we have discovered in this exclusive report, another element appears to exist within Kamala Harris's rhetorical universe: plagiarism.

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.)

....

There's more. In another section of the book, Harris, without proper attribution, reproduced extensive sections from a John Jay College of Criminal Justice press release. She and her co-author passed off the language as their own, copying multiple paragraphs virtually verbatim....

In a section about a New York court program, Harris stole long passages directly from Wikipedia--long considered an unreliable source. She not only assumes the online encyclopedia's accuracy, but copies its language nearly verbatim, without citing the source.

She copies her homework off Wikipedia! She's an eighth-grade THOT!

The New York Times gonna New York Times: Conservatives are "seizing" upon this but Kamala did nothing wrong.

But her publisher seems to grasp that this is a major case of plagiarism:

Robert Spencer:

Did Kamala Harris plagiarize sections of her 2009 book? It sure looks like it. Christopher Rufo has uncovered significant evidence of Harris taking the work of others word for word and passing it off as her own, and it's damning. Nowadays, when many Americans take for granted that politicians lie, this may not seem like a big deal, but it is. The plagiarism calls into question Harris' honesty, her integrity, her trustworthiness, and even her most celebrated area of alleged expertise, as the plagiarism took place in a book that was designed to establish her credibility as a prosecutor.
Advertisement

JD Vance knows it's a big deal. "I saw today, actually," Vance said Monday, "a story that Kamala Harris apparently copied some significant chunks of her book from Wikipedia. So if you want a president with their own ideas, vote for Donald Trump. If you want a president who copies her own ideas from Wikipedia, vote for Kamala Harris."

The New York Times knows it's a big deal as well, which is why it published an 1100-word piece on Monday trying to explain away Harris' plagiarism and portray the whole matter as an unfortunate example of just how low the foes of the sainted Harris will go. In the Times' version, "conservative [a four-alarm word for the Times and its hapless readers] activist Christopher Rufo" is making a mountain out of a molehill. He "had taken relatively minor citation mistakes in a large amount of text and tried to 'make a big deal of it.'"

That was the assessment of one Jonathan Bailey, whom the Times identifies as "a plagiarism consultant," without explaining what exactly a "plagiarism consultant" is or how one attains such a lofty position. Bailey, the Times informs us magisterially, "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."

Chris Rufo fired back at the Times' cover-up cover story. Twitchy has those tweets.

For that rancid spin I'm awarding the New York Times the citation of Jive Turkey of the Day.