Bailey Releases His ‘Full Analysis’ Over Allegations

0
2061

It looks like Vice President Kamala Harris has landed in yet another controversy, this time over alleged plagiarism in one of her books. And no, this isn’t some minor oversight or misunderstanding about how citation works.

According to plagiarism consultant Jonathan Bailey, this case is far more serious than initially thought, despite his early downplaying of the situation in the New York Times. Now, after a full review of the 27 examples flagged by Austrian professor Stefan Weber, Bailey admits that Harris’s writing issues are, indeed, “problematic.”

You’ve got to love how the narrative keeps shifting on this one. First, we were told it was no big deal, just a few sloppy writing habits—something everyone does, right? But now, with a closer look, it’s clear that Harris and her co-author cribbed large chunks of text, including two paragraphs directly lifted from, wait for it… Wikipedia. Seriously, folks? Wikipedia? That’s the first place high school teachers tell you not to use as a source. And yet, here we have the vice president of the United States, someone with a law degree, and her co-author copying from it like it’s some cutting-edge academic resource.

Bailey’s backpedaling here is almost comical. He went from saying it was all “an error” and accusing conservative activist Chris Rufo of making a mountain out of a molehill, to admitting that, yes, some of this is actual plagiarism. But don’t worry, it’s just “sloppy writing,” not malicious fraud! So, copying someone else’s words without attribution isn’t intentional deceit, it’s just, you know, laziness? In what world is that a defense? I’m pretty sure anyone else would get grilled for such an excuse, but somehow, Kamala gets a pass for not doing her homework.

Let’s not forget Chris Rufo, who’s been the real driver behind this story. Rufo pointed out that Harris’s book isn’t just guilty of borrowing a few phrases here and there—no, 24 fragments were lifted from other authors, and three examples were self-plagiarism. And while the New York Times was happy to let Bailey review only a handful of examples, Rufo had the whole dossier. His analysis shows a clear pattern of duplicating text almost verbatim, without quotation marks or proper citations. That’s not just an oopsie, it’s plagiarism 101.

The funniest part about all this? Bailey’s conclusion is that no one will be happy with his analysis. Well, no kidding. When you’re straddling the line between calling something plagiarism and defending it as sloppy writing, it’s bound to leave everyone frustrated. But the fact remains: this is plagiarism, plain and simple, and trying to sweep it under the rug as a mere “mistake” doesn’t cut it.

Harris and her team are left in an awkward spot. They can’t ignore the allegations, and they certainly can’t keep pretending it’s just a smear campaign from conservatives. The facts are there for everyone to see, and no amount of spin can change the fact that Kamala Harris has some explaining to do. Whether it’s border policy, presidential ambition, or plagiarism, dodging accountability is becoming a bit of a theme for the vice president. But this time, it might not be so easy to “turn the page.”