BuzzFeed reported Monday night sections of an op-ed the Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul wrote on mandatory minimums in The Washington Times in September appeared nearly identical to an article by Dan Stewart of The Week that ran a week earlier.
Speaking on ABC's This Week Sunday, Paul originally blamed the plagiarism charges on him "being unfairly targeted by a bunch of hacks and haters," adding he wished he could duel his accusers.
Here's the statement from Paul advisor Doug Stafford:
In the thousands of speeches and op-eds Sen. Paul has produced, he has always presented his own ideas, opinions and conclusions. Sen. Paul also relies on a large number of staff and advisers to provide supporting facts and anecdotes – some of which were not clearly sourced or vetted properly.
Footnotes presenting supporting facts were not always used. Going forward, footnotes will be available on request. There have also been occasions where quotations or typesetting indentations have been left out through errors in our approval process. From here forward, quoting, footnoting and citing will be more complete.
Adherence to a new approval process implemented by Sen. Paul will ensure proper citation and accountability in all collaborative works going forward.
The publisher of Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul's 2012 book Government Bullies is also updating future printings to include attribution to a Heritage Foundation case study and a report by a Cato Institute scholar he plagiarized. The copied work ran for more than three pages.
"We are informed that the material used from the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute was used with permission, which was indicated in the source notes at the end of the book," said Rolf Zettersten, the senior vice president and publisher of Center Street, which published the book. "To avoid any future misunderstanding, future printings will include the attribution in the narrative."