Harris lifted language from Republican attorney in her 2007 congressional testimony
CNN
Kamala Harris lifted language from a Republican attorney when she testified in front of Congress in 2007, a CNN review of her testimony finds.
Kamala Harris lifted language from a Republican attorney when she testified in front of Congress in 2007, a CNN review of her testimony finds. Experts CNN spoke with said that the instance, first reported by conservative news outlet the Washington Free Beacon on Tuesday, raises concern but does not constitute a serious example of plagiarism. The instance occurred when Harris was district attorney of San Francisco. She testified at the time before the House Judiciary Committee in support of the John R. Justice Prosecutors and Defenders Incentive Act of 2007, which would have created a student loan repayment program for state and local prosecutors and public defenders. Her prepared testimony lifted paragraphs from the prepared testimony of Paul Logli, then a Republican state’s attorney from Illinois and chairman of the board of the National District Attorneys Association, who testified before the Senate two months earlier. The paragraphs use the same survey and nearly identical language to each other. At the time, Harris served on the board of directors of the National District Attorneys Association, according to her testimony. CNN reached out to Logli for comment but did not receive a response. Logli told the Free Beacon that he remembers the organization researched and drafted his opening statement. He said the organization likely used similar statements to be consistent with its positions.
Former President Donald Trump has long vowed to protect Social Security. But the bevy of tax breaks he’s promised – including pledging to stop taxing Social Security benefits – could hasten the depletion of the beloved entitlement program’s trust funds and leave seniors with smaller monthly payments.
The publication on social media of two classified US intelligence documents detailing Israeli preparations for an attack on Iran has set off a scramble inside the US government to discover how they were leaked, a closely held investigation in its early stages that is zeroing in on who had access to the documents.