Patterico's Pontifications

1/12/2017

New Analysis: Monica Crowley’s PhD Dissertation Plagiarized THOUSANDS of Words

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:30 am



Monica Crowley has been chosen by Donald Trump for a major communications role in national security. On January 7, we learned that Crowley’s 2012 book had plagiarized sections of other people’s work — including RedState. A couple of days ago, it was reported that her PhD dissertation also contained plagiarized material. Today, a new analysis shows just how substantial that plagiarism was, with dozens of examples amounting to thousands of words:

On Monday, Politico reported that it found more than a dozen examples of plagiarism in Crowley’s Ph.D. dissertation. CNN’s KFile has found nearly 40 lengthy instances of Crowley lifting paragraphs from numerous sources, including several scholarly texts, the Associated Press, and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

The revelation comes on the heels of another CNN KFile investigation, which found more than 50 instances of plagiarism in Crowley’s 2012 book, “What The (Bleep) Just Happened.” On Tuesday, the book’s publisher, HarperCollins, announced that it would stop selling the book until “the author has the opportunity to source and revise the material.”

Here is just one example from the new analysis:

crowley-phd-plagiarism

But one example really doesn’t cover it. You have to click through to the link and scroll down. And keep scrolling. And keep scrolling.

And, in case you missed it, here is an example of plagiarism from her book:

crowley-book-plagiarism

After her book plagiarism was reported, I assigned readers to minimize the allegations in a partisan manner, and that assignment has gained new urgency with the latest revelations. Here are my suggestions for how to go about this project:

Your job, should you wish to accept it, is to minimize Crowley’s plagiarism in the comments below, so as to serve Trump’s partisan interests. Suggested angles of attack include:

  • 1. There are more important things going on in the world. This one is good because there are always more important things than plagiarism going on in the world. It’s a classic line of attack for scandals where someone is caught red-handed.
  • 2. It’s not really plagiarism. This is a tough one, but channel Trump. He can lie bald-facedly about anything. You can too. Give it a try!
  • 3. It’s CNN. Ignore the facts in front of your nose and attack the source.
  • 4. What aboutism. I call this “You mean like?”ism but that’s not as catchy. Find examples from the other side of people doing the same or worse. Cite them without explaining why it matters.
  • 5. Attack the blog post. A variant of other maneuvers, in particular #1, this tactic distinguishes itself primarily by the addition of vitriol towards the author of the post that brought this to your attention. Bonus points for using the phrase “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (TDS will do), declaring that the site is no longer worth reading, or other similar cheap personal shots.
  • 6. It’s old news. Best used in conjunction with #3 and/or other techniques.

Me, I think she’ll fit right in with the new administration. Dishonesty and a lack of ethics are the hallmark of Donald Trump. Why should his communications people be any different?

[Cross-posted at RedState.]

93 Responses to “New Analysis: Monica Crowley’s PhD Dissertation Plagiarized THOUSANDS of Words”

  1. the PhD thing sounds like it’s just a handful of citation errors and the book thing is all the ghostwriter’s fault

    nothing to get excited about

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  2. You forgot

    7. Yeah, they said Hillary would win, too.
    Works best against polls, but this non-sequitur can be whipped out like garlic to banish any news item a resident of TrumpWorld doesn’t want to be true. (Obviously you ignore the fact that Clinton actually did win the popular vote by a sizable margin…)

    Dave (711345)

  3. What, no turnabout option for the media?

    7. You, all right!? I learned it by watching you!

    JP (f1742c)

  4. She’s toast. But she can be brought into a lowers level position at some point in the future. Not a big loss.

    Shipwreckedcrew (d10d9f)

  5. CNN’s KFile has found nearly 40 lengthy instances of Crowley lifting paragraphs from numerous sources, including several scholarly texts, the Associated Press, and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

    There goes the case out the window right there. That’s not plagiarism, that’s research.

    nk (dbc370)

  6. == (Obviously you ignore the fact that Clinton actually did win the popular vote by a sizable margin…)==

    I know, isn’t it amazing that with all that voter support out there the Clinton campaign completely bollixed up their strategy and managed to lose what really counts–the electoral vote?
    That’s malpractice laid bare. As you point out, they should be very embarrassed.

    elissa (27bbc2)

  7. Besides, this is from CNN, the fake news network. I wouldn’t put it past them to use a preliminary draft from before Monica inserted the footnotes. Heck, I wouldn’t put it past them to white out the footnotes from the final draft.

    nk (dbc370)

  8. Moreover, are footnotes required, or even allowed, in a Ph.D. dissertation? Why couldn’t she have had a bibliography with references to pages in the dissertation which CNN “failed” to see?

    nk (dbc370)

  9. That’s a broad brush. Which other dishonorable figures in the new administration are you suggesting she’ll fit in with? Sessions? Pence? Mattis?

    ThOR (c9324e)

  10. Perfect example of what we can expect constantly for the next four years. Both the incessant lying and the desperate justifications.

    Moviemommy (06e612)

  11. Seems to me that a blogger recently wrote a post titled “Examples of Stories I Don’t Care About.”

    Insert that here.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  12. @nk

    Footnotes are absolutely required in a Ph.D. dissertation, and verbatim copy/pasting of other peoples’ work must be clearly indicated quotation marks.

    Dave (711345)

  13. Trivial minutiae, Dave. Ritualism cannot be allowed to prevail over substance. The important thing is that Hillary will not be sworn in as President on January 20.

    nk (dbc370)

  14. He was being sarcastic. So why did Columbia’s review committee not spot this.

    narciso (d1f714)

  15. OT:

    According to Mike Allen at Axios.com, Hillary Clinton’s team had very specific choices for Cabinet positions if she had been elected, with one quite interesting aspect: because of the paucity of blacks in the prospective Cabinet, the EPA and Education jobs were listed as “Likely an African American.”

    Here’s how Allen, who spoke with members of the Clinton campaign, delineated whom Clinton would have picked:

    Secretary of State: John Podesta, Bill Burns, Joe Biden
    Deputy Secretary of State: Kurt Campbell, Wendy Sherman
    Treasury Secretary: Sheryl Sanderg, Lael Brained
    Defense Secretary: Michèle Floury
    Attorney General: Loretta Lynch retained, Jennifer Granholm, Jamie Gorelick, Tom Perez
    Commerce Secretary: Gregory Meeks, Sheryl Sandberg, Terry McAuliffe
    Labor: Howard Schultz
    HHS: Neera Tanden
    Energy Secretary: Carol Browner
    Education Secretary: Jennifer Granholm, John Sexton
    EPA: Likely an African American (and/or at Education)
    Budget Director: Gene Sperling
    U.N Ambassador: Tom Nides, Wendy Sherman, Bill Burns
    Director of National Intelligence: Tom Donilon
    CIA Director: Tom Donilon, Mike Morell

    http://www.dailywire.com/news/12289/hillarys-list-cabinet-picks-revealed-including-hank-berrien

    Now, let’s go worry about plagiarism some more.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  16. Holy S! We dodged an RPG!

    Colonel Haiku (6c3d91)

  17. Damn, Patterico, why don’t you and CNN get a room!?!?

    Colonel Haiku (6c3d91)

  18. This was the same thing that the revered Martin Luther King did.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/11/us/boston-u-panel-finds-plagiarism-by-dr-king.html

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  19. Kevin M (25bbee) — 1/12/2017 @ 11:00 am
    “Better than the people Hillary would have selected” is a very low bar to clear.

    Kishnevi (7c7aed)

  20. Completely off topic, but fun for the musically inclined
    http://i.faketrumptweet.com/424wkjigfwg_tzsvwr.png

    Kishnevi (7c7aed)

  21. If accurate, dump her. Not worth the hassle.

    NJRob (371291)

  22. There’s an easy solution out of this for her. Lift the text from a great piece of writing penned by her mentor, Big Dick Nixon, in 1974.

    His resignation letter.

    NOW.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  23. You’re really not supposed to do this with a Ph.D. thesis.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  24. NJRob is correct, unless Crowley has evidence to the contrary. CNN is sure on the case though, after sitting on their asses and going through the motions for the last 8 years. Do they actually think people don’t notice?

    Perhaps Zakariah should be given closer scrutiny?

    Colonel Haiku (6c3d91)

  25. So, you’re saying she should be a shoo-in for Senator in Massachusetts?

    jim2 (599d89)

  26. @nk:Moreover, are footnotes required, or even allowed, in a Ph.D. dissertation? Why couldn’t she have had a bibliography with references to pages in the dissertation which CNN “failed” to see?

    @Sammy:You’re really not supposed to do this with a Ph.D. thesis.

    Having written a Ph. D. thesis, I can tell you that what is required for bibliography varies by discipline and institution. That said:

    nk’s point: a bibliography with references is the way things are usually done. There should be superscript labels on the text cited and it should be clearly set off as a quote.

    So, for example if I wrote

    ” Dishonesty and a lack of ethics are the hallmark of Donald Trump. “[1] and the [1] refers to a link to this web page, this is not plagiarism.

    But if I wrote

    Dishonesty and a lack of ethics are the hallmark of Donald Trump.[1]

    that would not be sufficient to insulate from the charge. If I don’t set off the quote it needs to be my words. A paraphrase labeled and linked to a citation is fine.

    Sammy’s point: Ph. D. theses are not supposed to be plagiarized. You are exactly right. As far as her thesis goes, it is plagiarized. Yes, it will have a bibliography, but you are not allowed to copy other people’s words without clearly setting off the quote.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  27. I should add too if you blame a ghostwriter for the plagiarism in your thesis, you are confessing to a much, much worse level of academic dishonesty than plagiarism.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  28. This level of dishonesty used to be disqualifying for TS/SCI access which is presumably required for her NSC job. Too bad for her.

    crazy (d3b449)

  29. http://spaf.cerias.purdue.edu/StudentInfo/spaf.html

    What is a Ph.D. Dissertation?

    W

    papertiger (c8116c)

  30. So I’m looking at these examples of “stolen” work.

    They all start out like ~ Harry Truman said, ” [yellow highlighted quotation of historic figures here] ” to which Mao Ze Dong replied, ” [blabity blah blah highlighted in yellow historical quote that if it would have been changed from the original article Monica would be putting words in the mouth of China’s leading Communist genocidial dictator, so consequently her dissertation and all others coming later will have this great big block of yellow around the Chairman Mao quotes.] ”

    Russians might be hunkered down over Putins assasssins but China poisons my dogfood. Shelves stocked with Alpo at the FoodMax.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  31. CNN can blow me

    papertiger (c8116c)

  32. CNN is the Paul Reiser in Aliens of network news.

    OPEN the pod DOOR, BURKE! You’re making the android LOOK GOOD by comparison.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  33. It’s an embarrassment, and she may have to be dumped. That said, a job in the government with “communications” in the title is one where you are supposed to be parroting a higher-up’s opinions all day. “Plagiarism” isn’t really a thing there, because it’s the essence of the job.

    David Pittelli (0a4463)

  34. What I said here:

    https://patterico.com/2017/01/11/even-if-the-buzzfeed-story-is-junk-cnns-story-on-trump-the-ic-and-the-russians-is-a-responsible-story/#comment-1966147

    I’m not interested in minimizing anything,
    but there was a time when one could come here and see, in detail, how the press had edited something by Palin or Zimmerman to make them look bad,
    rather than a pile on with the MSM and ask for someone else to prove it wrong.
    I guess because Trump.

    I think that once upon a time we would have had a post here pointing out how the narrative of someone mocking a reporter’s disability was demonstrably misleading, if not false.

    You are in danger of just adding to the background noise and not improving the signal:noise ratio. This has been one of the few places I could count on to do just that in the past. It would be sad to lose it.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  35. Greetings:

    If you will allow an additional personal enumeration, I’d like to go with one (or #7 to be more exacting) from the Bronx of my youth wherein I learned that “with them Eye-talians, what isn’t an opera is a vendetta”.

    11B40 (6abb5c)

  36. 28 — I think that is correct crazy.

    Its quite likely that someone in the NatSec process trying to clear her either was told of this, and leaked it to CNN, or discovered it and leaked it to CNN.

    But this is a “dishonesty” “character” issue that could very well preclude her from getting the clearance she needs for the position she’s been appointed to.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  37. Not to condone any wrongdoing, if indeed examination of the original documents confirm what is alleged,
    but isn’t it odd that this would keep someone from a security clearance,
    but using your own home-brew server wouldn’t?

    A last comment on this, I am not one who is a specialist in the humanities to know these things,
    and I don’t particularly care if Crowley gets canned or not,
    but looking at the above it looks like someone did not bother to rearrange the words of something quite bland and informative, rather than something that was claimed to be a distillation of information and original thinking.
    I mean, if other news agencies said essentially the same things at the time of the given selections above, would people be arguing over who plagiarized who,
    or would they say, “Yeah, the facts are the facts, it doesn’t matter exactly what words string them together”?

    Now I am going to go follow my advice and pray that
    the proud are humbled,
    the righteous lifted up,
    and that there remain some sources of news commentary that have an adequately high signal:noise ratio to keep them valuable.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  38. A doctoral dissertation is supposed to be largely if not exclusively original research. A unique and original contributions to a field of study. That’s what I’ve always thought.

    But hey, the Trump supporters are consistent: they didn’t believe in ethical standards – so elitist! – before he ran; why worry about such things afterwards?

    SteveMG (ea62d2)

  39. @36 shipwreckedcrew if this was discovered and leaked during the clearance process that’s even worse for whatever WH or NatSec numbskull blabbed about an applicant’s red flag, isn’t it? I hope this was just the work of a curious reporter with the time and motivation to dig this deep.

    crazy (d3b449)

  40. Lying is cool now, so long as it furthers your tribe’s goals. Such a great time to be alive.

    Sean (32acf9)

  41. This is interesting. Ned Price NSC spokesperson.

    The guy has no internet presence at all. Like O pulled the limo over and picked him off the sidewalk.

    Muslim mall shooters have more paper trail than this guy. Which makes me wonder why the NSC can’t catch those guys before hand.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  42. It will be important for the flailing media/Dems to get a scalp out of the new admin appointments. If the depth of this plagiarism charge in her PHD dissertation and book is true then Monica will be that scalp and no one should feel too bad about it even though her role and talent lies in brilliant thinking on her feet repartee and strategic communication.

    If the accusation is a lie then Monica will prove that it is. If it is not a lie she will withdraw from the assignment and work on reconstituting her reputation.

    In the meantime further discussion and speculation about this seems kinda silly. Any insinuation that Trump is responsible for, or covering for, or complicit in her writing is as nutty as squirrel poop.

    elissa (27bbc2)

  43. I am just saying that what is shown above is pretty bland information and doesn’t qualify as original research anyway, just a reiteration of public information.

    I assume what got her thesis approved is additional information that is truly new, or synthesizing the above info with other to come up with new conclusions.
    For example, I imagine there are all kinds of statements in all kinds of places repeating the information that Pelosi stated that she was only briefed once about enhanced interrogation. That is not the kind of information I would expect to be claimed original.

    But like I said, I have no idea what is considered within bounds for the humanities.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  44. Steve you are mistaking a thesis with a dissertation.

    The dissertation is the compost of others (evidence, research) that supports your (original) thesis.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  45. @papertiger:They all start out like ~ Harry Truman said, ” [yellow highlighted quotation of historic figures here] ” to which Mao Ze Dong replied, ” [blabity blah blah highlighted in yellow historical quote that if it would have been changed from the original article Monica would be putting words in the mouth of China’s leading Communist genocidial dictator, so consequently her dissertation and all others coming later will have this great big block of yellow around the Chairman Mao quotes.] ”

    No they don’t. Many of the stolen words are not offset in quotes and are not given citation labels.

    The page 168 highlighted above is an example. There are quotes used, but identical quotes, in the same order, and linked together with word-for-word identical commentary.

    The pee-party story and the associated intelligence officer lawbreaking is a smear job, but this isn’t. Crowley did it to herself.

    Gabriel Hanna (26d43f)

  46. @papertiger:The dissertation is the compost of others (evidence, research) that supports your (original) thesis.

    Don’t dig this hole any deeper, okay?

    It does not matter what you call it–people use both “thesis” and “dissertation” for the same thing–and your original ideas and work have to be expressed in your own words, and if you use someone else’s words you have to clearly mark it off and cite it. Or else you are plagiarizing, like Crowley.

    By making these excuses you reduce your ability to defend Trump from smears–if you care to do that sort of thing.

    Gabriel Hanna (26d43f)

  47. “Better than the people Hillary would have selected” is a very low bar to clear.

    OK, let’s just apply the MSM’s Geithner Rule.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  48. “Crowley did it to herself.”

    Yep.

    ThOR (c9324e)

  49. Inside my know who Monica Crowley is and I don’t give be a fuck. If this is as bad as it gets, and you have to be so fucking hysterical Patterico, then you just need to slit your wrists. Now. I mean if this is a thing, get rid of her, but it all starts next week. Let’s see what happens. How’s about stopping the garment rendering man.

    Donald (0b2c7d)

  50. Umthat should read I don’t know who Monica Crowley is…sorry.

    Donald (0b2c7d)

  51. Um that. Crimies.

    Donald (0b2c7d)

  52. The real victim in this story is Monica Crowley.

    She’s the one whose name’s being dragged through the mud.

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  53. The page 168 highlighted above is an example. There are quotes used, but identical quotes,

    You mean the one example Pat highlighted there, Gabriel, Eric Larson; Causalities and Consensus:?

    Glad you mentioned it. See right after the highlight yellow where it says 51? That is a reference to where Larson is citing someone else’s work. which means that bit which Monica Crawley is supposed to have lifted from Larson, he lifted that from someone else.

    A dissertation includes a Measurements/data section. http://spaf.cerias.purdue.edu/StudentInfo/spaf.html Like I’m doing here. > This would be a presentation of various data collected from real use, from simulations, or from other sources. The presentation would include analysis to show support for the underlying thesis. It’s not written for the general audience. It relies upon the reader’s previous experience with the subject of the thesis.

    So you can’t just snip tid bits from her dissertation’s measurements/data section, excising them from her analysis, then call it plagiarism.

    By attributing Larson in the footnotes, covered she is.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  54. So, people that are married to money phone it in, and cheat.
    Welcome to Biff’s Car Wash to the stars.

    This is my shocked face, kissing the windshield.

    neal (04f91e)

  55. I would pull her doctoral degree just because she used the verb “said” in every damn paragraph. Didn’t anyone ever introduce her to the words “claimed,” “related,” “reported,” “announced,” etc.? Were there no thesauruses at her university?

    JVW (dadb0c)

  56. A doctoral dissertation is supposed to be largely if not exclusively original research. A unique and original contributions to a field of study. That’s what I’ve always thought.

    A dissertation for a PhD — Doctor of Philosophy — should be mostly original research. A dissertation for an EdD — Doctor of Education — can be your interpretation of others’ research. I think elissa’s point that we should see the totality of her dissertation before deciding upon the charges here is valid. At the very least, it appears she was quite sloppy in attribution, and 40 separate instances seems like quite a lot. Columbia University should be the primary people who analyze her possible sins, they awarded her the degree.

    JVW (dadb0c)

  57. I hear Monica Crowley PHD* drugged Bill O’Reilly and violated him with a loofa.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  58. @papertiger: which means that bit which Monica Crawley is supposed to have lifted from Larson, he lifted that from someone else.

    You’re not at bottom yet. If Larson cited it, he didn’t “lift” it. That’s what “cite” means. Crowley lifted it. Because she didn’t cite Larson or Larson’s source.

    A dissertation includes a Measurements/data section.

    Because you have read every dissertation ever in every field, right, and you know for a fact that every single one follow that format? As opposed to finding one source from Google, which is clearly aimed at computer science/computer engineering–which is what you did. What if it’s in philosophy or English literature, what would they measure, what data would they collect.

    You have just made one of the least informed comments I have ever seen.

    I’ve written a Ph. D. dissertation. You’ve heard of them and used Google. Good Lord.

    Gabriel Hanna (61adec)

  59. @JVW:I would pull her doctoral degree just because she used the verb “said” in every damn paragraph. Didn’t anyone ever introduce her to the words “claimed,” “related,” “reported,” “announced,” etc.?

    “Said” is perfectly appropriate and to endlessly ring changes on synonyms is a device of poor writers. “Said” is like punctuation. And this is formal factual writing, not dialogue, so she has no basis to qualify the speech in that way.

    Neil Gaiman on “said”:

    Said’s are invisible. They vanish onto the page. The eye barely sees them—they become one with the inverted commas that indicate that something is being said. … Lots of authors, when they start out, remember from school that you shouldn’t repeat words too much, and are careful to replace each said with growled, uttered, yelped, hissed, exclaimed, asseverated, muttered, affirmed and so on, and cannot work out why people dismiss the writing as amateurish. Use them, but use them sparingly. It’s like salt in a dish. Too much and it’s all you taste.

    Gabriel Hanna (61adec)

  60. Did Eric Larson properly attribute his tid bit that Patterico highlighted above?

    Maybe not.

    Politico reports more of these “plagiarism’s” as “heavily paraphrased”
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/monica-crowley-plagiarism-phd-dissertation-columbia-214612
    which is defined by Oxford as express the meaning of (the writer or speaker or something written or spoken) using different words, especially to achieve greater clarity:

    The truth is the further you scroll in that Politico article the more paraphrasy Monica Crowley’s work becomes until at the end there Politico is reduced to highlighting individual words.
    They’re stringing them together like Indian corn at the bottom.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  61. @papertiger: The ones already quoted are damning enough in themselves. It’s already academic dishonesty.

    Gabriel Hanna (61adec)

  62. I’ve written a Ph. D. dissertation.

    Yeah, I know. Which is why I wonder at your pendantic credulity on this.

    You know enough to know that the example CNN, Politico, and Patterico present is very likely to be their best.

    The quality falls off quick as you scroll those “dozen examples”, besides which their best is a subterfuge.

    Why aren’t you catching on?

    papertiger (c8116c)

  63. Are they using Amazon Turk to comb through dissertations? I’d rather wrangle shopping carts at Wal Mart.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  64. @papertiger:You know enough to know that the example CNN, Politico, and Patterico present is very likely to be their best.

    And on its own, was MORE than enough. Just that ONE example is plenty, it so blatant. Just like OJ only had to kill two people to be a murderer, Crowley’s dissertation had to plagiarize only once to be plagiarized.

    You are not helping any of the people you think you are helping. You are making things worse.

    Gabriel Hanna (61adec)

  65. I’d rather wrangle shopping carts at Wal Mart.

    You and me both, Penandpuller.

    Oh Gabriel, btw Instapudit highlights more FDR “Godwinning”, this time attacking Calvin Coolidge Republicans of all people.

    Giving history the rewrite early, back when the general population couldn’t google.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  66. Martha Crowley

    What went on in your head?

    Oh Martha Crowley

    Did you steal what they said?

    Your PhD to me seems so padded

    Oh the fail of it all

    You fooled Fox News with your CV

    You waited on Donald’s call

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  67. @64 papertiger

    It takes a whole lot of hate or a whole lot of money to make me do something unpleasant.

    Maybe Seth Rich wasn’t reading quickly enough.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  68. ooh yeah let’s all pile on Monica Crowley for doing plagiarize

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  69. You’re really not supposed to do this with a Ph.D. thesis.

    You’re not supposed to do this in a junior high school term paper.

    Jack Klompus (23faee)

  70. I’m not making fun now.

    I would still hire her notwithstanding this “scandal”. I don’t think it has anything to do with her qualifications for the job Trump wants her for. Although this would be a career killer in academia, in the career path she’s chosen her dissertation is at about the same level as a hobby — she might as well have taken up art and used paint-by-number canvasses. It’s a personal embarrassment to her –bye-bye bragging rights — and nothing more.

    The book is a little more troubling — it was a job and she cheated at it — but I’d give her the benefit of the doubt. She is not cut out, or not ready yet, to be a serious writer but she could still be a good spokesperson.

    nk (dbc370)

  71. Monica may see the rewards of plagiarism in years to come. It could lead to the Medal of Freedom.

    “Say it ain’t so, Joe! Say it ain’t so!” – ‘Eight Men Out’ 1988

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  72. Monica Crowley Experience

    Dissertation

    feat. James Rosen

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  73. UK Spy ‘Gathered’ Trump Intel Without Going To Russia

    ”\Well, you may not know it, but this man’s a spy;
    he’s a undercover agent for the FBI
    And he’s been sent down here to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan.”

    He was still bent over holdin’ on to his knee,
    but everybody else was lookin’ and listenin’ to me
    And I laid it on thicker and heavier as I went

    I said, “would you believe this man has gone as far
    as tearin’ Wallace stickers off the bumpers of cars
    And he voted for George McGovern for President.”

    “He’s a friend of them long-haired, hippie-type, pinko fags
    I betcha he’s even got a commie flag tacked up on the wall inside of his garage
    He’s a snake in the grass, I’ll tell ya, guys,
    he may look dumb but that’s just a disguise
    He’s a mastermind in the ways of espionage.”

    ====plagiarized from the Charlie Daniels Band (which I love)

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/12/uk-spy-gathered-trump-intel-without-going-to-russia/#ixzz4VbBqpaVK

    papertiger (c8116c)

  74. I haven’t been this shocked since I learned that Gallagher’s brother tours the country doing everything in his act but the watermelon smash, which is the only thing people actually remember.

    Pinandpuller (16b0b5)

  75. How about what the creative Rhodes was up to in cuba, apparently

    narciso (d1f714)

  76. If I were a core Trump supporter, I would say that we should never have had the one dry foot policy. Ain’t we got enough Mexicans?

    Since I am not a core Trump supporter, I think this is a despicable midnight action on the part of TFG, planting another land mine in the path of the next administration in our relationship with Cuba. What a miserable SCOAMF!

    nk (dbc370)

  77. Yeah that’s me pivot.

    You have me out manned, flanked, and gunned.

    So this is me flipping you mongol hordes the bird and moving on.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  78. Inside my know who Monica Crowley is and I don’t give be a fuck. If this is as bad as it gets, and you have to be so fucking hysterical Patterico, then you just need to slit your wrists. Now. I mean if this is a thing, get rid of her, but it all starts next week. Let’s see what happens. How’s about stopping the garment rendering man.

    Thank you for that Authentic Frontier Gibberish.

    Now who can argue with that?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  79. Beware of geeks bearing grifts…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  80. Once again, I love how the phony defenses look like real ones.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  81. It’s now a week until Mr Donald evicts those nasty Barack people from the people’s house.
    The #NeverTrumpers will hold a requiem, but America will party like it’s 2017!

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  82. Crowley should remove herself from contention and approach CNN about co-hosting a show with Fareed Zakaria. They could call it “Crossplagiarize”!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  83. You are in danger of just adding to the background noise and not improving the signal:noise ratio. This has been one of the few places I could count on to do just that in the past. It would be sad to lose it.

    Did you read my post on the Kasparov book? More just adding to the background noise?

    Is the real problem that you want to see more defenses of Trump and fewer criticisms?

    Because I thought the signal to noise ratio of the Kasparov post was pretty damned high, and I spent an awful lot of time on it.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  84. Next up, an exposé of how a soon-to-depart president has done his damnedest to salt the earth, plant policy mines and pat himself on the back as he lets the door smack his narrow ass out the door.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  85. The Kasparov post was informative, but I already know Putin is evil and a cold blooded throwback to USSR days.

    As I have said about ten bazillion times and one, I don’t care if you never defend Trump,
    and I certainly don’t want you to make stuff up to defend him.

    The background noise:signal ratio was a carry over from the previous thread, specifically referring to speculation, counter-speculation, and counter-counter speculation, ad infinitum as to what intel was real, what was disinformation, and who was being gamed, and who was being served. we bused to come here to see the result of all of that after the dust settled, not to partake in the blow by blow account.

    I once invested the time in the blow by blow account of Plame, and the blow by blow account on a European blog about “Blue helmet guy” with dead children in Lebanon,
    what I learned, as I said previously, is that you can’t trust any of them. they are all out to foment chaos and anarchy, and I don’t need to get sucked into it.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  86. The background noise:signal ratio was a carry over from the previous thread, specifically referring to speculation, counter-speculation, and counter-counter speculation, ad infinitum as to what intel was real, what was disinformation, and who was being gamed, and who was being served. we bused to come here to see the result of all of that after the dust settled, not to partake in the blow by blow account.

    If you are criticizing me and not the commentariat, I would again ask for a quote so I can see, specifically, what you mean. So that we have something concrete to refer to. Because in another thread you just accused me of jumping on every anti-Trump “rumor” out there and I think that is a totally unfair characterization (to wit: I did not tout the BuzzFeed rumor, to take the most recent and glaring example). So rather than dealing in characterizations, I’d like to see actual quotes of mine.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  87. Just out of curiosity. are we ever going to get Obama’s thesis or his wife’s that disappeared?

    Figure it matters since it’s clearly disqualifying now, but not 8 years ago.

    And to repeat, “if accurate, dump her. Not worth the hassle.”

    NJRob (43d957)

  88. Just out of curiosity. are we ever going to get Obama’s thesis or his wife’s that disappeared?

    Nope. Nor will we get his grades. Or Trump’s. Or Trump’s taxes.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  89. Nope. Nor will we get his grades. Or Trump’s. Or Trump’s taxes.

    Patterico (115b1f) — 1/12/2017 @ 7:59 pm

    Agreed.

    NJRob (43d957)

  90. Neil Gaiman on “said”:

    Hogwash, Gabriel Hanna. You are trying to defend the fact that academic writing is so dry and dull. It doesn’t have to be, no matter what people like Neil Galman say.

    JVW (6e49ce)

  91. I don’t excuse it, but I will say that I know after my career in higher ed that plagiarism is a continuing common problem. There was one famous case where the engineering department of a university would direct their students to the library where the old dissertations were so that they could find something they liked to copy. I did my best to stop it, and lots of other people did too, but unfortunately it’s a real problem.

    And yes, footnotes or end notes are absolutely required.

    So I guess “everybody does it” can be added to your list of excuses. I do think it is enough to disqualify her from the job, though.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  92. MSNBC reports this morning a Washington Times story that Crowley has resigned from her Trump gig.

    DCSCA (797bc0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1223 secs.