Staff Reports
Kamala Harris has managed to demonstrate an impressive lack of originality in her literary efforts, as a new investigation reveals she may have plagiarized significant portions of her 2009 book, “Smart on Crime.” The accusations have come from conservative activist Christopher Rufo, who claims that Harris lifted material from sources as undignified as Wikipedia. It’s one thing to steal from academic texts, but Wikipedia? That’s entering a whole new realm of questionable research practices.
Rufo’s findings suggest that Harris borrowed from more than a dozen sections of her book without proper citation, and he takes issue with her resorting to the online encyclopedia as a reliable source. Rather than doing the hard work of original thought and comprehensive research, Harris appears to have leaned on the shortcut of verbatim text from Wikipedia, making one wonder how “smart” she really is when it comes to crime—and, more importantly, to writing.
🔥BOOM: JD Vance just called out Kamala Harris for plagiarizing her book.
Everyone knows Kamala isn’t smart enough to write a book. pic.twitter.com/vBfDQ6k80G
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) October 14, 2024
Senator J.D. Vance was quick to call out Harris, emphasizing his own literary authenticity in stark contrast to her apparent intellectual thievery. He pointedly noted his ability to write his own book while Harris opted to copy and paste passages as if she were cramming for a high school essay. Regrettably for her, it seems that this is not a one-time occurrence. Rufo’s scrutiny even drew parallels between Harris’s plagiarism and the scandal that derailed former Harvard president Claudine Gay’s academic career, suggesting that Harris is no stranger to inappropriate academic behavior.
The specifics of Harris’s plagiarism include taking extensive portions from various reports, press releases, and yes, that darling of the academic world—Wikipedia. Not only did she copy language almost verbatim, showing her spectacular confidence (or naïveté) in that source’s credibility, but she also failed to relay any critical information. Perhaps if she had been “smart on research,” she wouldn’t have found herself in such a precarious position.
It’s worth noting that Harris co-authored the book with Joan O’C Hamilton, which brings to mind the classic excuse of blame-shifting. Rufo mentions that, while it’s possible Harris relied on a ghostwriter, that doesn’t absolve her of responsibility; her name is on the cover after all, and authorship comes with accountability. After all, there’s a big difference between being “Smart on Crime” and being “Smart on Crime Literature.”
The tone-deafness of Harris’s plagiarism echoes the kind of scandals that have plagued politicians since time immemorial—remember when a young Joe Biden had to drop out of the 1988 presidential race for his own plagiarism scandal? Current Vice President Harris may want to take a page from Biden’s history and review the consequences of such academic dishonesty before she finds herself metaphorically kicked to the curb. If Harris has any semblance of integrity left, it might be time for her to admit to this literary crime and set the record straight. In this age of accountability, falling short of literary integrity is simply not acceptable.
