Harvard University President Accused of Plagiarizing PhD Thesis

29 allegations over a span covering 1993 through 2017, including her DOCTORAL/PhD THESIS/DISSERTATION, and multiple sources.

All Rufo did, was be the first to break the story nationally.

It was already a story locally, with a whole lot of smoke.

Question: why did Harvard Corporation hire a top gun law firm to process these allegations?

I mean...if it's such a non-issue, surely there would be no need for such a step...

Oh, and btw--Harvard hired that law firm months BEFORE Rufo's story broke.

Huh....I wonder how that happened? you suppose someone leaked to Harvard that this Rufo guy was fix'n to do a hit piece on her, months before???

Ya suppose some one tipped them off that there'd be a congressional hearing where she'd face plant on the national stage, that would require this emergency mode PR cover?

LOL @ Harvard Community College!

 

Rufo has come out and said he’ll lie to make his point. He’s transparent in that regard

 

Be that as it may, it doesn't mean he manufactured 24 years of smoke, prompted Harvard to pay substantially for an in depth investigation (and for results? Lol!), nor caused authors whose work was allegedly poached by the good *doctor*, to chime in and voice their displeasure.

But hey, what's integrity to an institution like Harvard, but just another commodity to be bartered and negotiated like any other?

The important thing, is that she protected Palestinian terrorist sympathizers' fundamental right to harass Jews, by dodging the pesky parameters of the definition of *harris-ment*.

 

And yet, every allegation you specifically bring up, falls very flat in its face. That seems to be why you prefer to keep things very vague in terms of specifics despite the voluminous posting.

If there is a stronger case to be had here, somebody should try to make it with specifics. The case as presented is laughably weak.

 

I don’t have much to say on the merits of the allegations, but this isn’t that unusual. Corporations and other public facing entities frequently bring in specialists to investigate at the first sign of any kind of bad PR. And Harvard Corp. can certainly afford the best. In fact, they have long-running relationships with many of the best. You said yourself that various allegations have been out there for a while, and the Harvard folks are plenty smart enough to foresee when said allegations are likely to become a problem. So I wouldn’t draw too many conclusions from their getting a high quality firm to look at them.

 

Harvard received accusations against Gay in October and had a lawyer look into them. Tuesday, it announced that she had not violated the school's standards and would keep her position.

 

I'm aware. All that was in the article I linked--hence the suggestion that Harvard may have paid for results?

Look, I conceded very early on, it's not the most egregious case of plagiarism. But 29 instances? That's a lot of smoke. And I understand some of the authors she allegedly poached from, have voiced their displeasure (although I've only seen the quotes from Swain). In any event, however else you want to spin it, I can guarun-damn-tee you, there have been hundreds of former Harvard students over the years--by which I mean, the same period of time covered by Dr. Gay's allegetiosn--1997-2017--who earned the 'former' in their title, for equal or lesser deviations from the stated policy.

Pardon mua, if I should dare hold the PRESIDENT of Harvard, to a higher standard--especially in her damn PhD dissertation--than some anonymous, miscellaneous, less fortunate, less connected, less clouted former students.

And yet again, I reiterate--any good will here, IMHO, went up in smoke when she took up for the poor, warm n fuzzy well meaning Palestinian terrorist sympathizers' fundamental right to harass Harvard's Jews, by calling for their genocide (by invoking some mythical, phantom, non-existent *context* that might excuse such, and take it out of the realm of *harris-ment*).

 

No, there really haven't been. Again, no academic body would consider what has been shown plagiarism.

 

If you know all that, why’d you ask why Harvard asked for the investigation?
And, yes, I’m sure Harvard paid the lawyer who investigated.

 

It's called a "rhetorical question."

(Was that a serious question?)

 

Yeah sure. Not a damn thing to see here.

I'm sure universities across the fruited plain regularly pay power law firms to scrub their president's reputation clean. It's baked into their annual budgets, then declared a dividend like a windfall refund, in those rare years where its not needed.



(LMAO! @ your irrational emotional investment in this poor university presidents plight for heroically going to bat for virulent terrorist sympathizers' right to harass Harvard's snowflake Jews who dared complain about how uncomfortable it was to have mobs parading on campus calling for their, and their peoples', extermination...).

 

Actually, yes, Universities, especially wealthy and high profile ones, often pay law firms to do external investigations. It has been explained to you multiple times on this thread already.

And, as I said earlier, I have no strong position on her current role or whether Harvard should fire her from that position over the bad PR from her answers. However, academic integrity is important and utilizing it as some sort of ends justify the means method to pursue somebody who hasn't actually shown to violate a tenant of academic integrity is not proper.

 

/rabbit hole

 

She’s a cheater and liar.

Only the best.

 

By this logic, you must be irate that Ben Sasse is the president of the University of Florida.

 

That's a good one. Just a little FYI, they didn't wait to fire on enemy aircraft until they were over the target lmao.