Written by Nathaniel Greene.
Vice President Kamala Harris is facing fresh allegations of plagiarism regarding her 2009 book, Smart on Crime: A Career Prosecutor’s Plan to Make Us Safer. Co-authored with Joan Hamilton, the book was once seen as a cornerstone of her political rise. However, investigative journalist Christopher Rufo has claimed that several sections were copied nearly word for word from other sources without proper citation.
Rufo’s report, which cites the work of media researcher Stefan Weber, uncovered multiple instances where Harris and her co-author allegedly duplicated passages without proper attribution. While some examples are considered minor—such as insufficient paraphrasing—others are more severe, raising serious questions about the integrity of the text. According to Rufo, this behavior aligns with the textbook definition of plagiarism and undermines the credibility of the vice president’s work.
The Harris campaign has yet to respond to these allegations, leaving many wondering how this will affect her political standing. Meanwhile, the accusations seem to mirror previous controversies involving Harris, including claims that she appropriated a famous childhood anecdote from Martin Luther King Jr.
JD Vance’s Swift Reaction to the Scandal
Republican candidate JD Vance wasted no time responding to the plagiarism claims, taking to social media to mock Harris. Vance, a well-known author himself, seized the moment to cast doubt on her credibility. “Hi, I’m JD Vance. I wrote my own book, unlike Kamala Harris, who copied hers from Wikipedia,” Vance tweeted, pointing a finger at Harris for intellectual dishonesty.
Vance’s comment alludes to one of the sources identified by Rufo, which indicated that parts of Harris’s book were lifted from Wikipedia entries. While Harris’s defenders may try to dismiss the accusations as an overblown attack, the claim certainly adds fuel to the long-standing criticism she’s faced. Vance’s taunts underscore a broader frustration many conservatives feel about what they perceive as the mainstream media’s unwillingness to hold Democratic politicians accountable.
This isn’t the first time Harris has been accused of embellishing her life story. Critics often recall the tale she told about falling out of a stroller during a civil rights protest, which suspiciously mirrors an anecdote Martin Luther King Jr. once shared. Together with these latest allegations, a pattern seems to emerge of Harris appropriating the work of others without due credit.
Mainstream Media’s Expected Response: A Glimpse into Vance’s Perspective
As JD Vance anticipated, the mainstream media might attempt to downplay the seriousness of the accusations. Sarcastically mocking what he expected would be the media’s spin, Vance tweeted, “Cue the corporate media ‘fact checkers.’ Vance’s tweet is missing important context. Kamala Harris only copied some of her book from Wikipedia.” Vance’s preemptive strike hints at the broader conservative frustration with the media’s handling of Democratic missteps.
The issue here isn’t just the potential plagiarism—it’s also how it reflects on Harris’s broader credibility. Whether these new claims will gain traction or be swept under the rug remains to be seen, but Vance’s public response has already made waves among his supporters and beyond.
In addition to Harris, other Democratic politicians have faced similar accusations. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, her running mate, has been accused of embellishing his own background. The pair’s repeated controversies over their personal narratives raise questions about their honesty and trustworthiness in public office.
Our Take
The allegations of plagiarism surrounding Kamala Harris are concerning not only because they reflect poorly on her integrity but also because they reveal a troubling pattern among certain public figures who seem to believe the rules don’t apply to them. Harris’s ability to appropriate other people’s work while presenting it as her own suggests a disregard for intellectual honesty and transparency. If a politician cannot be trusted to write their own book, can they be trusted to govern effectively? This issue is bad for the public because it erodes the standards of accountability we should expect from our leaders, and it sets a dangerous precedent for future generations of politicians.
