The 1776 report.

Hilltrot

Well-known member
Something tells me that the Whitehouse link will soon die after the anti-American President gets sworn in - so I attached it here. It's an interesting read.
 

Attachments

  • 1776 part 1.pdf
    988.6 KB · Views: 22
  • 1776 part 2.pdf
    622.1 KB · Views: 17
  • 1776 part 3.pdf
    403.5 KB · Views: 14

annabenedetti

Well-known member

A big chunk of Trump’s 1776 report appears lifted from an author’s prior work

The report was meant to be the definitive conservative rendering of U.S. history. But historians have slammed it as sloppy and slanted.

President Donald Trump’s 1776 Commission was supposed to be the definitive “patriotic” rejoinder to the academic left for what conservatives view as a slanderous rendering of U.S. history. But the report released by the commission on Monday has been mocked by historians as slapdash and slanted. And a good chunk appears lifted or recycled from other publications.

An entire page of the report suggesting classroom discussion topics for teachers appears to be copied nearly verbatim from an opinion piecepublished in 2008 by one of the commission’s members, Thomas Lindsay.

The similarities are pronounced enough to raise questions about how much original work actually went into the construction of the 1776 report. And it will undoubtedly fuel criticism that the final product was not meant to be an academic endeavor but, rather, a partisan effort to tilt the educational playing field.
 

ok doser

Well-known member

A big chunk of Trump’s 1776 report appears lifted from an author’s prior work

The report was meant to be the definitive conservative rendering of U.S. history. But historians have slammed it as sloppy and slanted.

President Donald Trump’s 1776 Commission was supposed to be the definitive “patriotic” rejoinder to the academic left for what conservatives view as a slanderous rendering of U.S. history. But the report released by the commission on Monday has been mocked by historians as slapdash and slanted. And a good chunk appears lifted or recycled from other publications.

An entire page of the report suggesting classroom discussion topics for teachers appears to be copied nearly verbatim from an opinion piecepublished in 2008 by one of the commission’s members, Thomas Lindsay.

The similarities are pronounced enough to raise questions about how much original work actually went into the construction of the 1776 report. And it will undoubtedly fuel criticism that the final product was not meant to be an academic endeavor but, rather, a partisan effort to tilt the educational playing field.
This is retarded anna, even for you.
 

Hilltrot

Well-known member
How long did it take her to post - 6 minutes? She is so obsessed with me she is sitting here hitting the refresh button waiting for me to post.

It's pretty obvious I have a stalker.
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
Yeah, she has nothing to do with her time than to wait for me to post something and then post a reply showing how illiterate she is.

You thought I was waiting for you? Really? Please let me reassure you Hilltrot, I rarely think about you.

You, on the other hand, have actually tagged me to come to one of your threads. : )

How long did it take her to post - 6 minutes? She is so obsessed with me she is sitting here hitting the refresh button waiting for me to post.

It's pretty obvious I have a stalker.

😂
 

Hilltrot

Well-known member
You thought I was waiting for you? Really? Please let me reassure you Hilltrot, I rarely think about you.

You, on the other hand, have actually tagged me to come to one of your threads. : )



😂
Just making fun of the stupid stuff that you are doing right now.

I know you're trying to become one of TOLs truth and safety teams and have absolutely no interest in other people.
President Donald Trump’s 1776 Commission was supposed to be the definitive “patriotic” rejoinder to the academic left for what conservatives view as a slanderous rendering of U.S. history. But the report released by the commission on Monday has been mocked by historians as slapdash and slanted. And a good chunk appears lifted or recycled from other publications.
Opinion - no facts.

appears to be copied nearly verbatim from an opinion piecepublished
Unlike Biden's speeches, they are completely different.

The similarities are pronounced enough to raise questions about how much original work actually went into the construction of the 1776 report. And it will undoubtedly fuel criticism that the final product was not meant to be an academic endeavor but, rather, a partisan effort to tilt the educational playing field.
Simply speculation.

This is a basic smear piece annabenedetti has posted. You should actually read the report and learn what real scholarship is.

Unfortunately, anna doesn't have any original thoughts of her own. She's forced into posting what her leftist handlers tell her.
 

ffreeloader

Well-known member

A big chunk of Trump’s 1776 report appears lifted from an author’s prior work

The report was meant to be the definitive conservative rendering of U.S. history. But historians have slammed it as sloppy and slanted.

President Donald Trump’s 1776 Commission was supposed to be the definitive “patriotic” rejoinder to the academic left for what conservatives view as a slanderous rendering of U.S. history. But the report released by the commission on Monday has been mocked by historians as slapdash and slanted. And a good chunk appears lifted or recycled from other publications.

An entire page of the report suggesting classroom discussion topics for teachers appears to be copied nearly verbatim from an opinion piecepublished in 2008 by one of the commission’s members, Thomas Lindsay.

The similarities are pronounced enough to raise questions about how much original work actually went into the construction of the 1776 report. And it will undoubtedly fuel criticism that the final product was not meant to be an academic endeavor but, rather, a partisan effort to tilt the educational playing field.
Mocked by revisionist Marxist psuedo historians. And denigrating a report because the commission creating the report used known historical fact? Really? That's mighty stupid because that's what commissions do. They report on what is known.

And oh, wow. The commission used one of their member's work. Oh. How pathetic. They plagiarized him with his consent. How unethical. How decietful.

Just how many ways can a list of suggest reading material be written? And considering the subject, just how many books can they suggest for grade levels? This attempt to imply plagiarism and intellectual dishonesty is off the charts dishonest. I've seen a lot of dishonesty in these types of accusations, and this is right up there with the most dishonest of them.

Anna, you're getting crazier all the time. Or do you just post what you're given without even reading it any more?
 

ffreeloader

Well-known member
Something tells me that the Whitehouse link will soon die after the anti-American President gets sworn in - so I attached it here. It's an interesting read.
Thanks. I downloaded them and will add them to my offline reading material. Calibre is a great tool for organizing reading material in many different file formats.
 

Hilltrot

Well-known member
Thanks. I downloaded them and will add them to my offline reading material. Calibre is a great tool for organizing reading material in many different file formats.
Thank you. Glad I did. Biden has already taken it down. I'm glad some people on this forum can read.
 
Top