In that story he wrote, among other things, that the plaigarisms that occurred while he was writing for the William & Mary paper were the results of the editors of that paper inserting the plaigarized material. One of the editors at the time wrote an email to Atrios rebutting this.
Wanting to get Ben's response, I posted this email (properly cited, of course), and was rewarded by a response from another RedStater. His theory as to what happened is enough to make a tinfoil theorist blush. So, who is to blame for what happened? Look below for the frankly unbelievable answer
Before that, insertions had been routinely made in my copy, which I did not question. I did not even at that time read the publications from which I am now alleged to have lifted material. When these insertions were made, I assumed, like most disgruntled writers would, that they were unnecessary but legitimate editorial additions.
One of your editors wrote in to Atrios to say this:
This all seems to have happened really fast. I hadn't really checked the news til midday today when I saw all of this happened. It might be kind of moot now, but I was Domenech's editor at The Flat Hat when he was writing the reviews. Four people, including me, would have handled his copy, the others being my assistant section editor, the managing editor and the editor.
This should seem obvious, but no one on the editorial staff was going into Salon (or wherever) and pasting whole sections into his reviews. We were more concerned about getting the paper done so we could get home at 2 in the morning instead of 5. We may have put additional words in the story, but it would never have been completely foreign content. It was just editing.
Now, this is he said/she said (or perhaps he/he; I don't know the gender of the former editor), but I think this requires a response.
Now, the "theory":
Probably a set-up By: BlueHoo
For all we know, these "editors" were a bunch of liberal kooks intent on setting Ben up to tear him down later (I'm sure Ben's politics were no mystery to the rest of the Flat Hat staff, and these "editors" seem to be conveniently lurking on Atrios). They could have easily snuck passages into Ben's original work, and stored this nugget away as ammunition against his promising future. It's really sad what antics people will stoop to...
That's right. A setup by the editorial staff of a college newspaper 6 or 7 years ago. These wily "editors" foresaw Ben's future greatness, and cleverly engineered a trap which would doom him in his moment of triumph. Or something like that.
And, just when you think that's as good as it gets, Our Hero manages to top himself. A saner commentator calls this a bunch of malarkey, and he comes right back with:
Then you'd rather believe By: BlueHoo
An Atrios reader who somehow manages to remember specific details about some crummy movie reviews from 7 years ago? Also, the "editor" acknowledges putting some "additional words in the story," and some "foreign content" -- just not "completely foreign content." Reading this side-by-side with Ben's response, I don't think it's ridiculous at all to explore the possibility of a set-up (college papers being as controlled by the MSM as any publication).
So, there we have it. The Liberal Media Conspiracy controls the MSM, and has reached its tentacles into the nation's colleges and universities. Somebody call Horowitz; this is clearly more evidence of liberal extremism in higher education.
But wait, there's (even) more:
Perhaps a simpler explanation would be that the editors are now forensicly manufacturing certain "editorial techniques" in order to save face. They are likely facing the same questions from their employers as Ben faced from the Washington Post -- as an editor, one of your responsibilities is to ensure that your writers use proper citations for their sources, and these editors either failed in this duty or were trying to destroy a young, politically charged young writer (CBS attempted to destroy Bush in an analogous manner, after all). Only additional investigation will uncover the truth.
So, now we've tied Dan Rather in to this web of deceit. Though, now that I think of it, there is a good analogy between Ben and Bush; they're both unqualified for the position they hold, and only got that position through a combination of nepotism and deceit.
And, finally, it wouldn't be a RedState thread without a gratuitous slam at us, this time from HaroldHutchinson, a RS regular:
Why are the DailyKos thugs getting a pass?
How many false charges must be hurled against someone before I can doubt their veracity on their face?
At this point, I see no reason to trust any allegation from MyDD, Atrios, or Kos. None. Zip. Ben's far more credible at this point than the left-wing character assassins at those sites.
Anyone up for some good old-fashioned character assassination?