New Republic Calls Out Right's 'Mostly Bogus Plagiarism Charges' Against Claudine Gay

Paul Waldman writes for the New Republic that the Right's real target is Harvard President Claudine Gay. That's why they're leveling all of those plagiarism charges against her. Those charges are "mostly bogus" and being used as a blunt weapon by the Right.

Why Gay?

But Gay’s is the scalp the right’s newly self-appointed protectors of America’s Jews would really love to get. In part that’s because Gay is Black and can therefore be tagged as an unqualified affirmative action hire, but mostly because it’s Harvard, America’s oldest, richest, and most prestigious university. If you want to thrust a dagger into the heart of the academy, Cambridge is where you aim.

But what about the plagiarism charges? About half of her total academic output has been found to include plagiarized passages. It wasn't intellectual theft — it was just sloppiness.

There’s no question that the accusations against Gay are being offered in utter bad faith, and the charges are inseparable from the political context in which they’re being made. Nevertheless, the right-wing critics could have a case regardless of their motives. A fair reading of the passages they’ve presented suggests that while some of their claims are bogus, others do show problematic issues in a few of Gay’s writings. But they amount to academic misdemeanors—real, but evidence of occasional sloppiness rather than malicious theft.

Wait, the subheading said they were "mostly bogus," but now it's just suggested that "some of their claims are bogus." But those "problematic" passages can be excused as "occasional sloppiness."

Waldman singles out Christopher Rufo in his piece, of whom he's definitely not a fan.

The new "mostly peaceful protest" has arrived. pic.twitter.com/zrCvhOLN75
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) December 15, 2023

If I thought the people writing or reading this were capable of rational thought, I'd ask: what about the subset of plagiarism charges that even you're conceding by implication aren't "mostly bogus"? Is this like being 'a little bit pregnant'? A little bit plagiarist?
— Erich M. Schwarz (@ErichMSchwarz) December 15, 2023

I swear it seems like there is a lab behind how they phrase things

Just subtle enough to be persuasive to people asleep at the wheel
— Ed Goode – e/acc (@edsgoode) December 15, 2023

At this point we understand there won’t be anything done and the wagons are circling left to protect her. The narrative and agenda are greater than any adherence to their own morals.
— John Hyde (@The_DrJ3ckyll) December 15, 2023

Higher education has been telling kids for the better part of a decade they have interalized racism and socialism under the guise of communism is a good thing and "the right" is poisoning kids minds saying plagiarism is bad pic.twitter.com/HeNYlW3cMW
— Blackest Night (@BrotherReverend) December 16, 2023

They are SO good at twisting language…

“mostly bogus”

so… partly true plagiarism? What are you saying? The president of Harvard was shown to be an intellectual fraud as well as morally bankrupt
— Nico the Free 🕯️🔥 (@nicothefree) December 15, 2023

So it’s “mostly bogus” to point out that her thesis would get a zero if she was held to the same standard that my work would be held to because of my demographics. Got it.
— Clifton J. (@cliftonjmusic) December 15, 2023

From "mostly bogus" to "problematic." Why is the New Republic defending this woman when she's so obviously guilty? Because Harvard must be protected from "the Right."

We already think Harvard is a cesspool because Harvard's done the damage to its own reputation. It is a poisoner of young people's minds.

***

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!