Tag Archives: plagiarism

Ann Coulter: Betrayer Extraordinaire

Ann Coulter and I became friends in the summer of 1997, or so I thought. My side was real; hers faux.

Ann Coulter’s Betrayals

During that time, I gave her everything she asked for and more. Ann was delighted with her Alamo Award, writing to me, “I love those quotes. that is much better than an interview would have been. they are totally, totally great. yes, please, please drop off or send as many copies as you can part with – I’m going to use it as part of my press packet. I had forgotten making most of those remarks but they do sound awfully familiar. thank you for compiling them” [SIC].

But I quickly discovered certain disturbing things about her. In mid-August, Ann was irate over little details contained in items about, and profiles of, her in three different publications.

She asked me to write letters-to-the-editor on her behalf. (I discovered that she routinely scoured the media for anything about her and that she hated any criticism of any kind, no matter how miniscule.)[1]

Ann found my letters-to-the-editor to be lacking in usefulness and, therefore, concluded that I was no longer useful to her. She dumped me with a nasty email. (I later discovered that she threw everything I had given her in the trash.)

But 12 days later, Ann feigned friendship to get back one of those things she had foolishly thrown away: an 11-page collection of Coulter quote highlights from her appearances on TV.

Having gotten what she wanted, she again dumped me (without telling me so this time). Instead, she made numerous false promises, keeping none of them during a four-month period.

When I confronted her about her behavior, she lashed out at me, using a strikingly similar argument she used to her boss at Human Events (without directing any hostility to him).

Coulter has turned her back on (and been rejected by) friends, colleagues, and organizations who were once her champions and benefactors. I remember Coulter saying on Politically Incorrect that she never remembers ex-boyfriends once they become exes. Apparently, her anti-social behavior applies to everyone.

Coulter once boasted of betraying her boss, Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-MI), when she was his staffer in 1995-96. Coulter secretly worked with other senate staffers opposed to Abraham’s immigration agenda. (Coulter was Deep State before the term was invented. No wonder she doesn’t attack the Deep State opposing Trump!)

At the very same time she betrayed me in 1997, she betrayed Paula Jones by leaking attorney-client privileged information to scuttle the settlement Jones’ desperately sought and she betrayed her employer,[2] the Center for Individual Rights, by engaging in a “pro-bono” political case CIR would have shunned (that’s why she kept her activities so secret).

In 1998, Coulter plagiarized both the words and the work of her colleague at Human Events, Michael Chapman, to write her first bestselling book, High Crimes and Misdemenaors. She has never given him due credit for his contribution and she even claimed that she’d never heard of him.[3]

In 1999 and on other occasions, Coulter frequently lied to her friend, Geraldo Rivera, on-air, about her connection with Linda Tripp’s tapes and other issues.

In 2000, Coulter sought to betray the people of Connecticut by running a “total sham campaign” for Congress.[4]

Over a period of many years, Coulter betrayed a host of individuals and organizations who had been very supportive of her.

Her fans are no exception. That’s what she did with me in 1996-97, emailing me her TV appearance schedule so that I could videotape her, transcribe highlights, promote her in my newsletter, and write supportive letters-to-the-editor on her behalf. Then, “Goodbye!”

Coulter forsook her own loyal fan club, one still linked on her website, seemingly for no reason whatsoever (the missing link remains missing).

In September 2017, Coulter boasted of having “TWO fan pages,” but by that December, she severed ties with her long-standing fan club.

Her now defunct fan club had a widely-used forum which promoted her books, columns, speeches, and other events. It vigorously discussed her columns and defended her from spurious attacks. And it actively aided her in organizing and setting up events across the country. They gave her 100% loyalty.

In the end, Coulter has also betrayed her readers and the American People with lies and fabrications, making things up from her own imagination. This was especially true during the past five presidential election cycles during which she defamed any candidate who threatened her chosen nominee.[5]

Let’s look beneath Coulter’s faux humanity. She revealed the real Coulter in an interview for The Drive Home (9/29/16): a phony hypocrite who pretends to like those she hates.

Speaking of conservatives opposed to Trump, Coulter boasted (emphasis added), “But all the people that I had to be talked into liking before because they’re technically on my side, whoa, they’re all gone now.”

Her next words: “I don’t have to pretend I like them anymore. It was all the ones I hated. Gone, gone, gone.”

Hear that, conservatives! Coulter no longer has to pretend to like you. Talk about phony! She really hated you all along!

You are now “gone, gone, gone” down into her personal memory hole. Except, naturally for her, Coulter never forgives and she never forgets.

A split microsecond later, Coulter singled out one name: “John Podhoretz.” (Podhoretz, a former friend and ally, incensed Coulter by shaming her inexcusable behavior.)

A few seconds later, Coulter claimed, “I don’t have to defend the people who were the most embarrassing to our side.”

(Who is the real embarrassment, Ann?)

In the end, Coulter has betrayed a host of people, groups, and organizations.[6]

For many years, post-9/11, Coulter betrayed the American Conservative Union and CPAC on numerous occasions.

In 2017, Coulter trashed her decades-long friendship with Sean Hannity in an extremely petty manner.

Also, in 2017, Coulter trashed her beloved Charles Murray and a 19-year-old Cornell student with one tweet.

In 2019, Coulter even threw her long-time good friends, George and Kellyanne Conway, under the bus.[7] (Ann was Kellyanne’s bridesmaid!)

Her one-time friend and ideological mentor, author Joseph Sobran, wrote that lies are betrayal! (emphasis added):[8]

A lie is not just a statement that isn’t “accurate.” It’s a personal betrayal. It means you are a traitor to whomever you are talking to. You make him a fool for trusting you in the way we all have to be able to trust each other for life to go along. You’re willing to turn his good faith against him for your selfish advantage. You treat him not as your friend or fellow citizen, but as your prey.

For the entire 22 years that I have known Ann, she has been adept at manipulating people. She uses them and then throws them away.

Many conservative organizations fawned over Coulter as she became a conservative icon and “goddess of the conservative movement.” Among them, the Claire Booth Luce Policy Institute, Young America’s Foundation, the American Conservative Union, and the Media Research Center. All of them granted Coulter lucrative speaking fees and/or promoted her work. They have all since effectively boycotted Coulter.

In 2017, Turning Point USA, sponsored her speeches, but not in 2018, even though its four-day conference was held in West Palm Beach, FL, which Coulter calls her home (she was actually in town during the conference!).[9]

Joker: Ann Coulter Unplugged provides an in-depth, detailed analysis this holistic exposé of how and why Coulter became such an untrustworthy human being.

Joker addresses the physical, mental, emotional, psychological, familial, sexual, and spiritual dimensions which have shaped the Coulter that we know today and it highlights both the positives and the negatives of Coulter’s life and career.

Ann’s brokenness provides an object lesson for all of us and, hopefully, this book will act as an intervention to help Ann face her brokenness and seek healing and restoration.


[1]              Even now, Coulter is known to report derogatory social media comments about her. She will often report negative tweets about her to the Guardians of Twitter. Has she nothing better to do?

[2]              Coulter ruined Paula Jones’ life by thrusting her into an unwanted media maelstrom which ultimately destroyed Paula’s marriage.

[3]              See Case Study 2, Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, at http://bit.ly/1N7zDji.

[4]              See Case Study # 3, Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, at http://bit.ly/1M2z2O5.

[5]              Of course, Coulter has famously betrayed Trump for over two years.

[6]              See case studies in Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory at http://bit.ly/1M2z2O5.

[7]              On 3/19/19, Coulter doubled down, tweeting, “Trump should declare Kellyanne Conway’s marriage a national emergency.” Remember, Ann and Kellyanne were long-time best friends and Coulter introduced George to Kellyanne and was her bridesmaid. This displays a total lack of conscience or simple human decency.

[8]              Joseph Sobran, “Liar, Liar,” Sobran’s, October 1998, pg. 6.

[9]              When conservative organizations refuse to sponsor a very popular “conservative” speaker like Coulter, you know that there is a serious problem.

Ann Coulter’s Crazy Funhouse Mirror

Peeking behind the variety of masks Ann Coulter wears can be very intriguing and entertaining. Looking into her soul reveals insights into human nature. Seeing Ann Coulter through her eyes is equally enlightening.

Last year, I noted Coulter’s many conflicted expressions about her self-identity[1] and her divorce from reality. For Coulter, nothing less than superlatives describe her. (Only the best for the best.)


She calls herself, “right-wing crazy and proud of it.”[2] She’s not just a run-of-the-mill crazy, but the best: “I’m second to none in right-wing lunacy.”[3]

Coulter is anything but a squishy conservative or a RINO (as she tells it): “I went to Cornell, but I was a casual conservative. After being in Ithaca, NY, I left a violent conservative.”[4] Indeed, she goes to an extreme to prove herself the ultimate conservative: “I’m like the conservative ayatollah.”[5]

Ann is also the poster child for libertarians, claiming, “I’m more libertarian than most people who call themselves libertarian.”[6]

Condemning Sarah Palin (whom she regards as a fake Tea Party leader), Coulter considers herself the opposite (and a card-carrying member at that): “I’m more Tea Party than most tea partiers.”[7]

Let’s not forget her (not so) warm and fuzzy spiritual side: “I’m an extraordinarily good Christian.”[8] Do “extraordinarily good Christians” actually call themselves that, or, being “extraordinarily good Christians” do they exhibit a tad bit more humility than Ann?

So, to recap, Coulter is the best conservative, best libertarian, best Tea Partier, and best Christian. Oh, I almost forgot, paraphrasing Coulter, nobody does crazy as well as her.

Coulter’s Characters

In addition to superlative characteristics, Coulter imports herself into superlative characters, likening herself to famous people, such as Bob Woodward, Bibi Netanyahu, Abbie Hoffman, H.L. Mencken, and Mark Twain.

(One must wonder whether Coulter really thinks that highly of herself, or whether she thinks so little of herself that she wants to be someone else!)

The masks Coulter chooses to wear are illustrative of how she wants to be seen by others (and how she wants to think of herself).

Coulter’s bio promotes the irreverent, iconoclastic, side of Ann, proclaiming her to be “the Abbie Hoffman of the Right.” Strikingly, the qualities which made Abbie Hoffman Abbie Hoffman are neither conservative nor Christian in nature, suggesting the impossibility of a right-wing version. But irreverence is part of what she sells and is a term frequently used to sell her books. (Wait! Didn’t Ann write a book decrying anarchy and mob-like behavior? Yes – Demonic!)

Coulter has strongly denied any comparisons of her with her counterpart, Michael Moore, but she has offered up two preferred alternatives: “I think I am the right-wing [H.L.] Mencken, the right-wing Mark Twain. I am not the right-wing Michael Moore.”[9]

However, “Newsbusters’ Warner Todd Huston dubbed Coulter ‘the H.L. Mencken of our times … minus the intellect.’” As Ilana Mercer put it, “Coulter is sui generis, but Mencken she is not.”

More recently, Coulter has repeatedly compared herself to the renowned investigative journalist Bob Woodward, only (in her mind) she’s better than him and she does it all on her own. Coulter boasts, “I’m the female. I’m the conservative Bob Woodward, except I don’t hire researchers and co-writers.”[10]

Strikingly, Coulter plays the Gender Card as she crows, “I’m the female Bob Woodward except I don’t have researchers or co-writers.”[11] Coulter reiterates, “As I said, I’m the female Bob Woodward.”[12]

Yes, she thinks she better than Woodward and she does her own work. (Yes, Ann, we believe you: not a smidgeon of plagiarism.[13]) Plus, she’s a woman to boot. (Yes, Ann likes her boots.)

To demonstrate her own courage, Coulter likens herself to a renowned Israeli warrior and statesmen: “I might just show up anyway just to piss them off. I could be the Bibi Netanyahu of CPAC.” Her Facebook bio brazenly states: “Coulter … has emerged as the bold heroine of our day!”

Carrying on in the grand Coulter tradition, others have made their own Coulter comparisons. Brad Miner claimed, “[Coulter] is to the 21st century what Lenny Bruce was to the 20th.”[14] (Again, Coulter is being compared favorably with a decidedly countercultural figure antithetical to conservatism.) Yet, in many ways, such a comparison is apropos. Coulter is known to use profanity, racial (and other) slurs, and, generally, just say whatever she wants to.

In fact, with her book, How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must), Coulter enumerated her rules on how to be deliberately offensive. Coulter fervently and irreverently follows her own rules.[15]

Bernard Goldberg, once a big fan of Coulter, admitted, “Ann Coulter is the Miley Cyrus of political commentary.” Dorothy Rabinowitz said, “[Ann Coulter is] the Maureen Dowd of conservatism.”

Meghan Daum suggested another intriguing impossibility: “[Coulter is] the adopted lovechild of Oscar Wilde and Gore Vidal.”

A Wordsmith – More or Less

I have always regarded Ann Coulter as a gifted wordsmith[16] – and said so.[17] But receiving praise and praising oneself are two different things. The former should be done with grace; the latter is unseemly and tasteless (gauche).

(Rush Limbaugh’s shtick includes tongue-in-cheek superlatives about his own greatness; Coulter is serious.)

Ann Coulter has an exalted sense of self because she constantly exalts herself.[18] Consequently, she says and does some very foolish things.[19] Pride is the embodiment of foolishness.

During Passion Week, Coulter spoke about Christian courage:

“I mean if the one thing – a few days before Easter, it’s worth mentioning besides eternal life with your Creator – the one thing every Christian should have is courage. The most important thing in your life.”[20]

Does Ann Hart Coulter have the courage to face herself and her Creator?


[1]               See “Delusional – New Ann Coulter Book” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-3z.

[2]               Ann Coulter, Vantage Points, 12/5/97.

[3]               Ann Coulter, Southern Illinois University, 3/27/02.

[4]               Ann Coulter, quoted by Rush Limbaugh, “My Conversation with Ann Coulter,” Limbaugh Letter, August 2003, pg. 6.

[5]               Ann Coulter, Piers Morgan, CNN, 10/15/13.

[6]               Ann Coulter, America’s News HQ, FNC, 3/16/13.

[7]               Ann Coulter, CNN Tonight, CNN, 11/3/14.

[8]               “Church Militant: Ann Coulter on God, Faith, and Liberals,” beliefnet.com, 2006, http://www.beliefnet.com/story/196/story_19646.html.

[9]               Ann Coulter, Lou Dobbs Tonight, CNN, 6/8/06.

[10]             Ann Coulter, Daily Caller, 6/16/15.

[11]             Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 6/23/15.

[12]             Ann Coulter, PJTV, 7/10/15.

[13]             See “Case Study # 2: Plagiarism,” Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.

[14]             Brad Miner, Smear Tactics: The Liberal Campaign to Defame America, HarperCollins, 2007, pg. 59.

[15]             See “Coulter, Simply Offensive” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5i.

[16]             See “Ann Coulter at Her Best” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-2u.

[17]             See “An (Almost) Perfect Piece of Propaganda” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4q.

[18]             See Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[19]             See “Fifty Shades of Coulter” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5E.

[20]             Ann Coulter, O’Reilly Factor, FNC, 4/2/15.

Adios, Ann: Coulter’s Bio Fraud

(Saying Goodbye to Integrity Even in a Book Cover)

Bad habits die hard, if ever. Ann Coulter’s proclivity for embellishing her accomplishments continues to this day.


Coulter’s fraudulent biographical claims include:

  • Status as a ten-time bestselling author
  • Writes and researches her own books
  • Founded the Cornell Review
  • Had a private law practice
  • Does pro-bono work

(If you can’t trust Coulter’s bio, how can you trust Coulter?)

Ten Nine-Time New York Times Bestselling Author

Adios, America is emblazoned with the assertion that Coulter is “Author of 10 New York Times Bestsellers.” Wrong!

In 2013, Coulter insisted, “By the way, it’s now ten best sellers.”[1] Two months later, I exposed her claim as fraudulent.[2] Still, Coulter continues to – very unnecessarily, I might add – puff up her résumé.

Coulter’s newly-launched Facebook page claims, “Ann Coulter is a ten-time New York Times bestselling author, gun-clinger and right-wing polemicist.”

Contrary to Coulter’s contentions, her tenth book did not make the best-seller list. Even her publisher disputes Coulter’s claim.[3]

Never Trust a Liberal Over 3 did not make the bestseller list. According to Regnery, her last book made the “Also Selling” list, not the Bestseller list.

Regnery maintains a list of Regnery books making the bestseller list and it necessarily includes rankings from only 1 – 15. Never Trust a Liberal Over 3 is not on this list.

To reiterate, Also Selling is not Bestselling. But Coulter insists it is. (Hint: Also Selling books aren’t given a “number of weeks on bestseller list” number.)

It would be like placing fifth in the Olympics and claiming to be an Olympic medalist, or like being virtually a virgin.

Why does Regnery exclude Coulter’s tenth book from its list of published bestsellers yet promote her as a ten-time best-selling author? I suspect that we can blame Coulter more than Regnery.

A little history is in order. Regnery published Coulter’s first book in 1998. At that time, Coulter boasted, “I had vituperative arguments with Regnery that required a number of tantrums to pull off.”[4] Apparently temper tantrums work in Ann Coulter’s world.

(Oddly, Regnery doesn’t use Coulter’s criteria for its other books. To date, Regnery has not provided a rationale for its  decision.)

But why would Coulter lie? With such an obvious, fact-checkable lie?

Perhaps Coulter felt her 10th book deserved to be a best-seller so she claimed it was. Perhaps she wanted a perfect record of bestsellers.

Alternatively, she may have felt ashamed of her failure to make the list, especially given her history of using that list as a criterion for success.

Coulter’s Obsession

Coulter has an obsession with bestsellers.

As a guest host for a three-hour talk show in 1999, Coulter repeatedly introduced herself as the author of a bestseller which was on the New York Times bestseller list longer than James Carville’s book.

For Coulter, an elite’s elite, rank matters. Status matters. Image is everything.

Coulter loves to cite her bestseller status:

“I’m a massively successful bestselling author.”[5]

“I write about it in my very first New York Times’ bestseller, High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”[6]

“It’s nine [bestsellers] now. .. It does technically make it nine, I made number three the first week.”[7]

“I’m Ann Coulter, the author of NINE massive NYT Best sellers.”[8]

Coulter thinks of her books as her children, and she lavishes praise on every single one. Here are but two examples:

“This fabulous book [Mugged] is available at fine book stores everywhere – or it oughta be!”[9]

“As noted in that great book that came out this week, If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans …”[10]

How gauche! Praising her own books. (More to follow.)

Coulter’s Adios, America

As for Adios, America, Coulter said that the publisher should move up its publication date because, “The country needs this book. … this is the best one ever.”[11] Hubris?

In March, Coulter said, “I’ve just turned in the edits to my next book, which is fantastic.”[12]

Effervescent and irrepressible in praise of her own book, Coulter gushed, “It’s a rollicking book!”[13] It’s an “explosive upcoming book.”[14] “It’s a blockbuster.”[15]Fantastic book. It’s unbelievable. Out June first.”[16]

“I’ve been finishing my page proofs for my magnificent new book that comes out June 1st.”[17]

“This blockbuster book …”[18] “You’re gonna love it.”[19] “But the audiobook is fantastic.”[20] Also, “my smash new book,”[21] “isn’t it fun? Don’t you love [my book]?”[22]

Not only is Coulter’s book yet another blockbuster – and magnificent to boot – but it will save America!

(Didn’t Coulter repeatedly describe both Romney and his catastrophic 2012 presidential campaign as magnificent?)[23]

“And this next book of mine, I’ve told my friends … this is my last shot at saving the country, and if this doesn’t work, then screw it. I’m building a bunker and hiring the cheap maids.” [24]

Yes, Adios, America will save America!

“I’m thinking we may have to move [the release date] up. The country needs [my new] book.”[25]

It is promoted thus: “If you love your country, you need to read ¡Adios, America!

Moreover, Coulter contends that an elite conspiracy seeks to silence her. Coulter claims, “The only problem is going to be getting word out about my book when every elite group in America is against me.”[26]

As if preparing an excuse for not getting a bestseller, Coulter again promoted a vast left-wing conspiracy to deny her due glory as a bestselling author.

Coulter began her last column prior to book launch hyping her book, her bogus bestseller status, and her perceived liberal conspiracy to silence her:

“I have an explosive book on the No. 1 issue in the country coming out next week, I’ve already written 10 New York Times best-sellers – I’d be on a postage stamp if I were a liberal – but can’t get an interview on ABC, NBC or CBS.”[27] She made the very same claim that night on Hannity.

“I love Jorge [Ramos]. I salute Jorge. I finally found a Mexican willing to do a job no American will do: interview Ann Coulter.”[28] Coulter then repeated her column lead virtually verbatim, adding, “Will NBC, ABC, CBS have me on? Oh no, no, no, it’s like I’m a blogger.”

Coulter is insistent on this point: “The media’s just pretending I don’t exist and the book doesn’t exist. … Maybe Barnes and Noble will be forced to stop hiding it.”[29]

Coulter is so paranoid that she accused her friends at Fox News of being part of this vast conspiracy of silence when her segment on Justice with Judge Jeanine was canceled due to breaking news. Coulter tweeted: “Oops – canceled. Immigration is a little too hot.”[30] Were the two killers who escaped from a maximum security prison with the help of a prison employee part of that conspiracy, too?

Yes, Coulter thinks her friends are conspiring against her.

Coulter’s Paranoia Over Godless

Let’s revisit Coulter’s paranoia from nine years ago. Godless was released on June 6, 2006. The very next day, Coulter published her own review of Godless, arguing, “If the New York Times reviews it at all, they’ll only talk about the Ann Coulter action-figure doll, so I think I’ll write my own review.”[31]

Disproving her conspiracy theory, just five days later, the New York Times published a substantive review of Godless,[32] which became her second of two books to top the bestseller list.

But in her fantasy world, Coulter really believes:

“The main problem with ‘Godless’ is that I had to walk through the valley of darkness to find it. You will have to push past surly bookstore clerks, proceed past the weird people in the ‘self-help’ section, and finally past the stacks and stacks of Hillary Clinton’s memoirs. If all else fails, ask for the ‘hate speech’ section of your local bookstore. Ironically, if you find ‘Godless’ without asking for assistance, it’s considered a minor miracle.”

Although couched in humorous terms, Coulter’s personal apocalypse did not occur. Her conspiracy did not materialize. Yet another contrived Coulter controversy.


Coulter unswervingly contends, “I both write and research my own books … I am a maniacal researcher.”[33] Also, “I am a ferocious researcher.”[34]

On Hannity, she again made that same false claim: “I research my own books. I write my own books. … I look it all up myself.”

History proves otherwise. Coulter committed plagiarism in at least two books: High Crimes and Misdemeanors[35] and Godless.[36] And she has gone to great lengths to cover-up her behavior.[37]

Asked about how she came to be an author, Coulter claimed, “I’d been writing about Clinton’s various scandals for Human Events, Regnery’s sister company, so Regnery came to me and suggested to write a book on Clinton’s impeachable crimes.[38] Actually, Regnery first came to Michael Chapman because of his expertise on the Clinton scandals, and then he gave his notes to Coulter when she refused to co-author the book with him.[39]

Cornell Review

Just as Coulter repeatedly and insistently lied about her bestselling status, she exhibited a similar measure of insecurity when she padded her credentials for almost three decades, claiming that she had founded the Cornell Review. That claim was made in interview after interview, profile after profile. And it was false.

But then, once her professional status as a journalist and bestselling author was secure, Coulter admitted (just a few years ago), “I don’t think I was technically a founding editor … of the Cornell Review.”[40]

As with Also Selling being equivalent to Bestselling, Coulter treated being on the newspaper staff after its first edition was published as if she were a founding editor.

There’s something pathological there, an irrepressible neediness and insatiable longing for approval, accolades, and acclaim.

Private Practice

Coulter’s bio still claims, “After practicing law in private practice in New York City …” when, in fact, she was never in private law practice.[41] Coulter worked, consecutively, for two corporate law firms, work which she described as “mind-numbingly boring.”[42] In citing a bogus “private practice,” is she seeking to demonstrate her independence and ability to be successful on her own? Or does she feel that her legal credentials, such as they are, are insufficient as they are?


In the summer leading up to Clinton’s impeachment, Coulter boasted of doing pro-bono work for her law firm: “Pro-bono work is all I do these days. My law firm is a non-profit law firm.”[43] But according to a spokesman at the Center for Individual Rights, Coulter provided no pro-bono work for them.[44]

Clearly Coulter side-stepped the intent of the question which was whether she had ever volunteered her time. While the Center for Individual Rights does pro-bono work, Coulter was paid for her work.

Long after Clinton’s impeachment took place, Coulter again boasted of her pro-bono work for Paula Jones. That year, she also boasted of her betrayal of Jones and took credit for getting Bill Clinton impeached.[45]

In a George magazine essay,[46] Coulter defended her “motives” and accentuated her “pro-bono” generosity in aiding Paula Jones in Jones’ hour of need.

“As Isikoff reports, I had been doing a little unofficial pro bono work on the Jones case, along with a few other civic-minded Gen-X lawyers, a.k.a. the Elves. Unfortunately for Paula, she wasn’t the sort of pro bono client most lawyers favor, like a cop killer.”

“For the benefit of the American Bar Association pro bono awards committee … We are all fairly confident that none of us will be getting any pro bono awards from the ABA, which reserves its awards for enterprises such as getting guys who were convicted of molesting and murdering children off death row. Pro bono work on behalf of some poor girl who’s been sexually assaulted by the most powerful man on the planet isn’t the kind of thing that wins you accolades, at least not if the defendant is a Democrat. That kind of pro bono work gets you fired, harassed, and accused of having bad ‘motives.’”

Finally, “we were just a few nerdy lawyers quietly doing pro bono work for an unpopular plaintiff.”

[For those counting, Coulter used “pro-bono” seven times in those 170 words.]

Bear in mind, Paula Jones is the only known client for whom Coulter did pro bono work and Coulter, in the end, betrayed that client!

As for CIR, Coulter’s bio states:

“From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.”

Did you notice? The bulk of that paragraph describes the work CIR does, not the accomplishments of Ann Coulter.

Coulter’s Bio Fraud

Ten-time bestselling author? No!

Writes and researches her own books? Not always.

Founded the Cornell Review? No.

Had a private law practice? Never happened.

Does pro-bono work? One time. Didn’t work out so well for the client.

Coulter’s Blue Max

Recently, I again watched the classic Blue Max in which the antagonist so desperately seeks Germany’s highest honor, the titular medal awarded to superior pilots during World War I. At one point, his aeronautical nemesis asked him whether people respected the medal or the man who wore it.

Coulter faces a similar introspective quandary. With all of her emphasis on her professional accomplishments, literary achievements and bestseller status, does she ever wonder if she would be respected without her own literary Blue Max?

Does Coulter care more about her image than about the person she has become?[47]


[1]               Ann Coulter, Daybreak with Drew Steele, Fox News, 10/28/13.

[2]               See “Appendix 2: Ann Coulter’s Trust Busted,” Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[3]               Regnery’s list of its bestselling books excludes Never Trust a Liberal Over 3. Though clearly Coulter’s tenth book did not make the bestseller list, Coulter’s bio and Adios, America both claim it did.

[4]               Howard Kurtz, “The Blonde Flinging Bombshells at Bill Clinton,” Washington Post, 10/16/98, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/coulter101698.htm.

[5]               Ann Coulter, interview with PJMedia, 2/2/09.

[6]               Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 4/6/15.

[7]               Ann Coulter, Through the Mirror with Larry Sinclair, 10/10/12.

[8]               Ann Coulter, CPAC, 3/16/13.

[9]               Ann Coulter, Bill Frank Show, KTVA, 10/1/12.

[10]             Ann Coulter, “Pretend to be all that you can be,” 10/3/07

[11]             Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufmann Show, WFTL, 2/2/15.

[12]             Ann Coulter, Good Day, LA, KTTV, 3/17/15.

[13]             Ann Coulter, Mark Simone Show, WOR, 4/30/15.

[14]             Ann Coulter, tweet, 5/12/15.

[15]             Ann Coulter, Mark Simone Show, WOR, 5/7/15.

[16]             Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 3/4/15.

[17]             Ann Coulter, Mark Simone Show, WOR, 4/8/15.

[18]             Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 4/29/15.

[19]             Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufman Show, WFTL, 5/8/15.

[20]             Ann Coulter, Mark Simone Show, WOR, 4/30/15.

[21]               Ann Coulter, “Immigration Advocates Frightened by 99-Pound Blonde,” 6/3/15.

[22]               Ann Coulter, Mark Simone Show, WOR, 6/3/15.

[23]             See “Coulter Stumps for Romney – Again!” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4V.

[24]             Ann Coulter, interview at KSU, Kennesaw, GA, 4/22/15.

[25]             Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufman Show, WFTL, 2/2/15.

[26]             Ann Coulter, Joyce Kaufman Show, WFTL, 5/8/15.

[27]             Ann Coulter, “Ramos Can Stay, But Matt Lauer Has to Go,” 5/27/15.

[28]             Ann Coulter, Hannity, FNC, 5/27/15.

[29]               Ann Coulter, Mark Simone Show, WOR, 6/3/15.

[30]              Ann Coulter, tweet, 11:45 a.m., 6/13/15.

[31]             Ann Coulter, “Hey you, browsing ‘Godless’ – buy the book or get out!” 6/7/06.

[32]             David Carr, “Deadly Intent: Ann Coulter, Word Warrior,” New York Times, 6/12/06, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/12/business/media/12carr.html?_r=0.

[33]             Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 5/11/15.

[34]               Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 6/1/15.

[35]             See “Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism – High Crimes” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4l.

[36]             See “Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism – Godless” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4z.

[37]             See “Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism Cover-up 2014” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4o.

[38]               Ann Coulter, “Ann Coulter Exposes The Illegal Immigration Cabal,” Conservative Book Club interview, http://www.conservativebookclub.com/ann-coulter-exposes-the-illegal-immigration-cabal/.

[39]               See “Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism – High Crimes” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4l.

[40]             Ann Coulter, In Depth, C-Span, 8/7/11.

[41]             See Chapter 1: “The Seduction of Ann Coulter,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[42]             Howard Kurtz, “The Blonde Flinging Bombshells at Clinton,” Washington Post, 10/16/98.

[43]             Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 6/8/98.

[44]             Author interview.

[45]             See Case Study # 1: “Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[46]             Ann Coulter, “Spikey and Me,” George, May 1999.

[47]             See Daniel Borchers, Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

Ann Coulter’s Cover-ups

Ann Coulter is becoming ever more brazen in her commentary, condemning elites for “covering up and protecting one another,”[1] when Coulter has herself been a recipient of and participant in any number of cover-ups.

In Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, you will discover numerous times when Coulter’s friends and colleagues have covered up her scandalous behavior.


In speaking about the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal, Coulter insisted, “This is a really important story,” explaining that “this is the elites getting cozy and covering up and protecting one another.”

She found it “shocking” that “thus far this has only been covered on Fox News,” and accused “the elites [of] circling the wagon and protecting” the guilty person.

But Coulter has herself been protected countless times on Fox News by her colleagues and friends, most notably Sean Hannity. Hannity routinely comes to her rescue in controversy after controversy. He devoted a series of shows (both TV and radio) to defend her when she defamed the 9/11 widows in 2006. More recently, as noted in Propaganda, Hannity leapt to Coulter’s defense over her spurious attacks on – of all things – soccer.

For well over a decade, Coulter’s colleagues have excused her plagiarism. Just last year, a colleague at Human Events repeatedly lied to me in an interview, denying her plagiarism with multiple falsehoods and specious arguments.

Christian conservatives, like Erich Erickson, have even defended Coulter’s defamation of selfless Christian missionaries serving overseas, people Coulter called ungodly traitors.

When will Fox News and other conservative organizations hold Coulter accountable for her immoral and unethical behavior?

See the new exposé on Coulter for more details. This free 245-page PDF book – Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter – is available at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.


[1]               Ann Coulter, Hannity, FNC, 1/6/15.

Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism – Godless

Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism – Godless

[See Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter for a more detailed examination of Ann Coulter’s history of plagiarism. – DB]


Plagiarism Redux

Ann Coulter unquestionably plagiarized in her first book, High Crime and Misdemeanors. Coulter’s fifth book, Godless, also plagiarized the work of others, as extensively unearthed by numerous bloggers.

Allegations of plagiarism in Godless arose on the heels of Coulter’s “ecstatic widows” controversy. The New York Post broke the story in early July.[1] Philip Recchia reported:

John Barrie, the creator of a leading plagiarism-recognition system, claimed he found at least three instances of what he calls “textbook plagiarism” in the leggy blond pundit’s “Godless: the Church of Liberalism” after he ran the book’s text through the company’s digital iThenticate program. …

Barrie, CEO of iParadigms, told The Post that one 25-word passage from the “Godless” chapter titled “The Holiest Sacrament: Abortion” appears to have been lifted nearly word for word from Planned Parenthood literature published at least 18 months before Coulter’s 281-page book was released. … [other examples cited]

Instances of plagiarism appear throughout Godless.[2] One lengthy sentence on page five apparently came from a 1999 Portland Press-Herald article.[3] Language on page 37 appears to have been derived from a Parents Television Council report in 2002.[4] One sentence on page 95 came from a 2004 Planned Parenthood pamphlet.[5] Another lengthy sentence on page 209 was lifted from a San Francisco Chronicle article in 2005.[6]

On page 55, “Coulter employs language similar to a December, 2004 article written by Gregory D. Kesich for the Portland Press Herald[7] on convicted killer Dennis Dechaine, but offers no citations for her summation of the case.”[8]

On page 63, “Coulter employs language similar to that in a February, 2005 article published in the New York Sun,[9] written by David Salisbury, the Director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the Cato Institute, as well as numbers used in the Sun, without citing any source at all.”[10]

Several sentences and phrases on pages 66-67 were taken from an “October 27, 1988 press conference with Republican Senate candidate Alan Keyes and Cliff Barnes.”[11] Coulter “presents the exact same information in the exact same order as Barnes did back in 1988, including many directly quoted phrases, without citing anywhere the source for the information. As if it just appeared out of thin air. No footnotes. No mention in the text.”

On page 162, “Coulter apparently lifted language, along with the entire premise, primarily from the ‘executive summary’ of a 35-page report[12] written by Paul Ciotti in March of 1988 for the Cato Institute called ‘Lessons from the Kansas City Desegregation Experiment.’”[13]

Chapter 7 of Godless provides 16 examples of “successful treatments achieved by adult stem cell research.” Columnist Ron Brynaert notes that 15 of those examples “are nearly identical to items in a longer list of seventeen compiled by the Illinois Right To Life website,[14] that has been available since at least September of 2003.” Brynaert adds, “For these fifteen items, Coulter appears to do little more than remove the parentheses and slightly change a word or two, such as ‘using’ into ‘with.’”[15]

Coulter’s publisher, Crown Forum, after a cursory examination of only three “snippets,” ridiculed plagiarism accusations in their official statement: “We have reviewed the allegations of plagiarism surrounding Godless and found them to be as trivial and meritless as they are irresponsible. Any author is entitled to do what Ann Coulter has done in the three snippets cited: research and report facts. The number of words used by our author in these snippets is so minimal that there is no requirement for attribution. As an experienced author and attorney, Ms. Coulter knows when attribution is appropriate, as underscored by the nineteen pages of hundreds of endnotes contained in Godless.”

About those endnotes, Recchia also reported: [16]

Meanwhile, many of the 344 citations Coulter includes in “Godless” “are very misleading,” said Barrie, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley, where he specialized in pattern recognition.

“They’re used purely to try and give the book a higher level of credibility – as if it’s an academic work. But her sloppiness in failing to properly attribute many other passages strips it of nearly all its academic merits,” he told The Post.

Initially, Universal Press Syndicate claimed it would investigate these allegations, declaring, “We take allegations of plagiarism seriously. It’s something we’d like to investigate further. We’d like to see a copy of the report. We’d like to start looking into it.”[17] A whitewash was apparent in its final statement to Editors & Publishers: “In addition to looking at the columns mentioned in the New York Post story, we also reviewed a sampling of other columns that have been mentioned in the media. Like her book publisher, Crown, Universal Press Syndicate finds no merits to the allegations of plagiarism brought by the software company executive. There are only so many ways you can rewrite a fact and minimal matching text is not plagiarism.”

The websites of Coulter’s two alma maters offer definitions of plagiarism which refute the claims of Coulter’s publishers.[18] Cornell University is very clear in what constitutes plagiarism:[19] “where you reproduce part or all of someone else’s idea in your own words (commonly known as paraphrasing), where you use or summarize someone else’s research, where you use facts or data that are not common knowledge, where you reproduce source material in slightly altered form while retaining the main idea or structure. Both direct and indirect citations require proper documentation.”

The University of Michigan is equally direct and damning:[20] “Plagiarism is representing someone else’s ideas, words, statements or other works as one’s own without proper acknowledgment or citation. Examples of plagiarism are: Copying word for word or lifting phrases or a special term from a source or reference without proper attribution. Paraphrasing: using another person’s written words or ideas, albeit in one’s own words, as if they were one’s own thought. Borrowing facts, statistics, or other illustrative material without proper reference, unless the information is common knowledge, in common public use.”


[1]       Philip Recchia, “Copycatty Coulter Pilfers Prose: Pro,” New York Post, 7/2/06, http://www.yuricareport.com/Religion/CoulterPlagiarismInGodless.html.

[2]       Justin Rood, ““’Complete’ List of Coulter Plagiarism Allegations,” TPMuckraker, 7/7/06, http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001070.php.

[3]       “People and events that made Maine’s century,” Portland Press-Herald, 12/12/9.

[4]       “Retraction to WWE And the Public,” Parents Television Council, 7/11/02.

[5]       “About Planned Parenthood,” Planned Parenthood Federation of America pamphlet, 2004.

[6]       “Pity This Blushing Bride-To-Be,” San Francisco Chronicle, 7/3/05.

[7]       See http://www.romingerlegal.com/newsviewer.php?ppa=8oplo_ZkrmmsspTUnjy30qbfek%5C%21.

[8]       Ron Brynaert, “More examples of ‘possible plagiarism’ from Coulter’s ‘Godless’ book,” Raw Story, 7/10/06, http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/More_examples_of_possible_plagiarism_from_0710.html.

[9]       See http://www.cato.org/research/articles/salisbury-050217.html.

[10]     Ron Brynaert, “More examples of ‘possible plagiarism’ from Coulter’s ‘Godless’ book,” Raw Story, 7/10/06, http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/More_examples_of_possible_plagiarism_from_0710.html.

[11]     “More Ann Coulter Plagiarism (Updated),” The Rude Pundit, 6/14/06, http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2006/06/more-ann-coulter-plagiarism-updated.html.

[12]     http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-298.pdf.

[13]     Ron Brynaert, “More examples of ‘possible plagiarism’ from Coulter’s ‘Godless’ book,” Raw Story, 7/10/06, http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/More_examples_of_possible_plagiarism_from_0710.html.

[14]     http://www.illinoisrighttolife.org/stemcellsummary.htm.

[15]     Ron Brynaert, “In new book, Coulter ‘cribs’ stem cell list from right-to-life group,” Raw Story, 6/14/06, http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/In_new_book_Coulter_cribs_stem_0614.html.

[16]     Philip Recchia, “Copycatty Coulter Pilfers Prose: Pro,” New York Post, 7/2/06, http://www.yuricareport.com/Religion/CoulterPlagiarismInGodless.html.

[17]     Greg Sheffield, “Ann Coulter Faces Charges of Plagiarism,” NewsBusters.org, 7/7/06.

[18]     References courtesy of Rude Pundit.

[19]     http://plagiarism.arts.cornell.edu/tutorial/logistics6.cfm.

[20]     See http://www.lsa.umich.edu/lsa/detail/0,2034,53%5Farticle%5F294,00.html.

Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism Cover-up 2014

It is well-known but underreported that Ann Coulter committed plagiarism with the publication of her first book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors. Even today, Coulter denies doing so. However, a recent interview with a Coulter colleague leads to the inescapable conclusion that Coulter did, in fact, use the words and research of Michael Chapman and that she has never given him credit for his contribution to her very first best-selling book.

On July 15, 2014, I published a column chastising Coulter for daring to falsely accuse a National Review columnist of plagiarism. At that time, I brought up Coulter’s own plagiarism in 1998. That night, I briefly interviewed Mark LaRochelle, columnist for Human Events, about a number of matters unrelated to plagiarism.


The next morning, we continued our interview. I initiated the chat and he said he would be right back. A few minutes later he returned. It quickly became apparent that Coulter was coaching him. He was more reserved, not as forthcoming as he had been the previous evening. The relevant portions are provided below with annotated endnotes.

July 16, 2014

Daniel Borchers

Have you seen my essay, “Ann Coulter Falsely Accuses Journalist of Plagiarism” at http://t.co/lig5hQLg5S? If so, what are your thoughts?

Mark LaRochelle


Daniel Borchers

Would you mind checking it out and giving me your thoughts? As a member of the Human Events team, you might be able to provide some insight.

Mark LaRochelle

I know Chapman.

We talked about the dispute. I understand his frustration.

Daniel Borchers

What did Chapman say to you?

Mark LaRochelle

He wanted Coulter to give him something more for his articles from which she had copied passages.[1] Instead she removed him from the acknowledgements.[2]

Daniel Borchers

Do you mean that he wanted payment of some kind?

Mark LaRochelle

I don’t know the details. I think Coulter had paid him something for research.[3] He may have wanted co-author (or “with”) credit or something.

Daniel Borchers

Do you think it was right for Coulter to fail to ever publicly acknowledge his contribution to her book? To claim that she wrote every word of it? To even deny ever having heard of his name? To threaten lawsuits against those publishing reports about it?

Mark LaRochelle

I don’t know about all that.[4]

I do research, too.[5]

Sometimes I ghostwrite.[6]

I’m more concerned about getting the information out than getting credit.[7]

Daniel Borchers

You don’t have an opinion, Mark?

Do you think her behavior is emblematic of someone with integrity?

Michael wasn’t ghostwriting. Totally different. Did you get paid for ghostwriting?

Michael published articles and reports and did research and he was given absolutely no credit. Ann even besmirched his name.

Mark LaRochelle

I have too many beams in my own eye to go around throwing stones. I have forgiven people for much worse. And there are much bigger problems confronting us.[8]

Daniel Borchers

This isn’t about throwing stones, it is about accountability. And it is about the truth.

Ann plagiarized from Michael, lied about Michael, threatened legal action against anyone who spoke the truth about it. Is that integrity?

Moreover, this is but one example – an instance you are personally familiar with. But Ann has exhibited a pattern of such unethical, immoral, and ungodly behavior.

How can conservatives possibly hold liberals accountable for their misconduct if we can’t even address significant failings such as this on our side of the aisle?

And would God – the God who indeed does forgive – would He want the truth to be hidden, the lies to be concealed, the sin to be continued? I think not.

Mark LaRochelle

I don’t think criticism of Coulter is that well hidden.[9] She is probably the single most defamed individual since McCarthy.[10]

Daniel Borchers

It’s only defamation if it is false.

But you still haven’t addressed my questions.

Mark LaRochelle

Virtually all the vilification of Coulter that chokes the media is false.[11]

Daniel Borchers

We can disagree on that. But what of Ann’s plagiarism? Do you condone that? Excuse that? Ignore that?

Mark LaRochelle

Any number of left-wing luminaries have committed genuine, legally actionable plagiarism.[12] Yet they are lionized and promoted by tax-funded agencies like the National Institute for the Humanities, PBS and NPR; they are given awards and rewards.[13] Whenever a conservative such as Rush or Coulter dares speak out, they must be silenced and banished like McCarthy.[14]

Daniel Borchers

So, because others do it, it’s OK for Ann to break the law? It’s OK for Ann to besmirch the reputation of the person she victimized? It’s OK for Ann to threaten truth-seekers? It’s OK for Regnery to side with Ann – lie! – and leave Michael high and dry?

When does doing the right thing cease to be the right thing to do?

Mark LaRochelle

When Chapman wrote for Human Events, he was writing for Regnery. They paid him for his work. It was theirs.[15] They allowed Coulter to use it. She put Chapman in her acknowledgements.[16] I understand Chapman’s position. Been there, done that.

Daniel Borchers

1) Ann did not put Michael in her acknowledgements. She has never publicly acknowledged his contribution. In fact, she denied his contribution, denied even ever having heard his name.

2) Michael’s research was Michael’s.

3) Regnery lied about Michael’s part in her book, saying that every word was Ann Coulter’s. EVERY WORD.

Mark LaRochelle

I have a first edition hard copy. Chapman is in the acknowledgements.[17]

[I was taken aback by his clear, bold, and unequivocal statement. For a very brief moment, I questioned myself. But then I distinctly remembered that High Crimes is the only Coulter book without an Acknowledgment.

LaRochelle lied. Why would he lie about possessing a book he did not have with an Acknowledgement it did not contain? Why would he lie about something so fact-checkable? It wasn’t his lie, it was Coulter’s.

Liars live in the moment. They always believe that their next lie will cover-up their last one. Besides, Coulter wasn’t lying to me (she knows I know the truth). She was lying to her colleague. – DB]

Daniel Borchers

Would you please provide the citation?

Mark LaRochelle

After Chapman made a public dispute, Coulter (or Regnery) removed his name from later editions.[18]

Daniel Borchers

Please provide the citation.

Also, why spitefully remove his name if he was originally acknowledged? His contribution to her book still remains his contribution.

When privately questioned about the omission of Michael’s name, why did Ann say it would be corrected in the softcover, but never correct it?

Mark LaRochelle

I don’t know about that. Acknowledgement is at the author’s discretion. If I accused an author who acknowledged my research of plagiarism, I wouldn’t be surprised to be removed.[19]

As far as “Chapman’s research is his own” – I wish! Human Events retains the rights to every article I ever got paid for.

Daniel Borchers

“Research” not “article” – unpublished research.

Mark LaRochelle

How did Coulter acquire Chapman’s unpublished work?

Daniel Borchers

Terence Jeffrey wanted Ann and Michael to co-author the book. Terence asked Michael to give everything he had to Ann. He did so, expecting credit and/or co-authorship.

Mark LaRochelle

I’ll ask Terry about that.

Daniel Borchers

Please do. Also, would you mind scanning that Acknowledgement for me?

Thanks in advance.

[After a lengthy pause]

Can you get back to me on Terry and the Acknowledgement?

July 21, 2014

[I waited for several days for LaRochelle to do his research on Terry and the Acknowledgement. – DB]

Daniel Borchers

Hi Mark. Are you there?

Hi Mark. Do you have a moment?

Were you able to scan the High Crimes’ Acknowledgement for me?

[Shortly afterwards, LaRochelle blocked my access to his Facebook page. – DB]

July 22, 2014

[The following morning, I sent the following email to LaRochelle. – DB]

Subject: Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism

Dear Mark,

Thank you for your (abruptly terminated) Facebook chat. Have you ever noticed that people who refuse to talk are generally those who have something to hide?

I eagerly anticipated seeing your scan of Ann’s Acknowledgement in High Crimes. My own first editions (both hard cover and soft cover) of High Crimes contain no Acknowledgement whatsoever. I’d like to see what yours looks like.

Ann lied to you, she lied about Michael (and me), and she has turned you into a liar, too.

You have discovered how easy it is to become an enabler, to condone and enable sin, instead of what we are called to do: expose the unfruitful works of darkness (Eph. 5:11-14).

The bottom line: Ann plagiarized from Michael, using his words and his research without giving him credit. That is the very definition of plagiarism. Then she denied knowing him, attacked him, and threatened legal action against the press reporting on it. Cover-up? Of course.

Moreover, Regnery literally said that High Crimes was 100% Ann Coulter. A lie. And now you have joined the ranks of those who will defend Ann no matter how wrong she is.

Would Jesus approve?

If you want to talk, I can be reached at 240-476-9690.

You can use this email address: coulterwatch@yahoo.com.


Dan Borchers

[Not without its irony, in my first interview with LaRochelle, Mark wrote “My personal experience (with Ann) is mostly in helping with the research for her McCarthy chapters in ‘Treason.’” Would that be the Treason in which LaRochelle was not credited? Yes!

I wonder what Mark thinks of Ann’s tweets: “I do all my own research[20] and “No one does my research for me, but me.[21] – DB]

[See Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, available as a free PDF download at http://www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf, for a more detailed examination of Ann Coulter’s much-neglected plagiarism in her very first book. To date, Coulter has yet to publicly acknowledge the many contributions in words and research provided by her colleague, Michael Chapman. – DB]


[1]       This is an admission that Coulter “copied passages” from Chapman’s articles.

[2]       This is an utter impossibility as High Crimes and Misdemeanors did not have an Acknowledgements section. Already the lies are materializing.

[3]       Coulter paid Chapman absolutely nothing!

[4]       He doesn’t have an opinion about a colleague’s adherence to moral and ethical practices in journalism?

[5]       So? Don’t all journalists?

[6]       Relevancy?

[7]       That’s nice. Stealing credit is illegal. Besides, Chapman did want the credit – credit to which he was entitled.

[8]       In other words, he is turning a blind eye to his colleague’s wrongdoing – because she is his colleague (and rich and powerful). What she did wasn’t so bad, so let’s forget it. Let’s hide the truth. Besides, I forgive her, so Chapman should, too.

[9]       Certainly, Coulter is a very criticized person – from the Left. Very few conservatives criticize her, especially when she deserves criticism.

[10]     Actually, Coulter is probably the most defaming individual since McCarthy. Most substantive criticisms of Coulter are largely accurate and based in reality. Coulter does lie, does use hate speech, does employ elimination rhetoric, and does deliberately offend other people.

[11]     The reverse is true.

[12]     Consider his immediate parsing and equivocation: “genuine, legally actionable plagiarism.” Coulter’s plagiarism was definitely genuine and legally actionable, but his assertion implies it isn’t.

[13]     The Left gets away with it, so shouldn’t Coulter? Can we please dispense now and forever with the “everybody does it” defense?

[14]     The issue is not silencing or censorship, it is plagiarism – a crime!

[15]     Human Events may have owned the published work, but not the credit. Chapman deserves the recognition.

[16]     Once again, High Crimes did not contain an Acknowledgement. This is pure fiction.

[17]     A flat out lie, as noted above. Coulter must have provided these words to LaRochelle. Who would volunteer such an assertion on their own, one which could so easily be refuted if inaccurate? LaRochelle clearly did not know there was no Acknowledge in High Crimes. Coulter must have dictated his answer, lying to me (and to LaRochelle).

[18]     Yet another detailed lie provided by Coulter. Chapman certainly never made that claim. Coulter is the only possible source for this lie. Moreover, the public dispute arose years later, not 1998. Chapman tried, privately, to address the matter.

[19]     Yet another rationalization. If Coulter had credited him in her Acknowledgement, there would have been no basis for a charge of plagiarism. She could have easily said, “Look, here’s your credit!”

[20]     Ann Coulter tweet, 3/7/12, 11:37 p.m..

[21]     Ann Coulter tweet, 3/7/12, 11:23 p.m..

Ann Coulter’s Plagiarism – High Crimes

[See Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter for a more detailed examination of Ann Coulter’s much-neglected plagiarism in her very first book. To date, Coulter has yet to publicly acknowledge the many contributions in words and research provided by her colleague, Michael Chapman. – DB]

The publication of High Crimes and Misdemeanors launched Ann Coulter’s literary career and expanded her meager credentials as a journalist.


In 1998, on Washington Journal, Coulter boasted of how impressed her law professors were over her own research: “Both my undergraduate at Cornell and University of Michigan professors have been quite impressed with what I’ve turned up on “high crimes and misdemeanors.”[1] What, exactly, did Coulter “turn up” that so impressed her professors? As it turns out, one of her most cited sources was the Rodino Report (on Watergate), which was coauthored by Hillary Rodham Clinton who, seemingly, did the grunt work for Coulter.

While Coulter verbally took credit for research performed by Hillary Clinton, wife of her intended impeachment target in High Crimes, in late 2001, it was discovered that she also took credit for her colleague’s research into and reporting of various Clinton scandals.

In October 2001, the Boston Globe published a scoop revealing allegations of plagiarism by Coulter, who then threatened a lawsuit if the story was published. Regnery stood by its best-selling author (money talks, power corrupts), denying any plagiarism took place. The facts prove otherwise.

The most factual of Coulter’s books, High Crimes perhaps owes that accuracy in part to its undisclosed de facto co-author, Michael Chapman.

Published in June 1998, to both capitalize on and influence the impending impeachment of President Clinton, High Crimes included both the words and the research of Michael Chapman, who at that time was Associate Editor for Human Events. According to a corroborating source at Human Events, Regnery “should have given him credit. They treated him wrong on that. He really wrote and researched most of the material. The book does not acknowledge the huge amount of research done by Michael Chapman.”[2]

As of this writing, Regnery and Eagle Publishing have never officially credited Chapman’s contribution to this book, despite the written evidence and the direct personal knowledge of key players at Eagle Publishing. Indeed, they – and Coulter herself – assert Coulter’s sole authorship of High Crimes.

Not only does Coulter continue to claim she wrote every word, she even denies knowing – and knowing of – Michael Chapman, a co-worker with whom she attended weekly editorial meetings at Human Events. However, Coulter did admit to a Coulter fan and friend of Chapman, at a CPAC conference, that the exclusion of Chapman’s name from her book was “an editorial oversight.” The chronology – and the actions of Coulter et. al. – prove otherwise.

Plagiarism & Ghost Writers

Chris Matthews asked Coulter about her about-to-be-released third book, Treason (2003):[3]

MATTHEWS: “Let me ask you, why’s your book going to be better than Hillary’s?”

COULTER: “Well, for one thing, because I wrote my book.”

MATTHEWS: “Are you charging Hillary with plagiarism or having a ghost writer?”

COULTER: “No, no, well, of course, she has a ghost writer. I mean, I don’t think that’s disputed or particularly dishonorable. But I believe you write your own books.”

Coulter chided Hillary Clinton for not writing her book when, as it turns out, Coulter’s first book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors, was not entirely her own. Coulter borrowed some sections from a co-worker whom she later disavowed even knowing. Portions of High Crimes were unquestionably plagiarized from Michael Chapman and portions may even have been ghostwritten by David Wagner.[4] Let’s examine the chronology.

February & March, 1998 – Other Authors

Circa Feb. 12th – Terence P. Jeffrey (Editor, Human Events) and Michael Chapman (Associate Editor and Clinton reporter for Human Events), were originally tasked with writing an impeachment book.

Circa Feb. 13th – Jeffrey dissolved the agreement because he didn’t believe that Clinton had committed an impeachable offense.

Feb. 19th – Regnery asked Chapman to co-author what would become the Coulter book.

Feb. 20th – Chapman presented Regnery with a proposal containing the same terms and conditions of his previous agreement with Jeffrey.

Circa Feb. 23rd – Mark Ziebarth rejected Chapman’s conditions, which included insistence on co-authorship credit and copyright retention.

Circa March 2nd – Coulter entered Chapman’s office, demanding his files and research. Chapman says, “She was adamant, impatient, and acted as if she deserved those files.” Chapman later gave those files (paper and electronic) to Thomas M. Winter (Editor-in-Chief, Human Events). “Tom told me that he was sure they would have to give me some type of credit or acknowledgement.”

Early March – David Wagner (former writer for Insight magazine) took possession of the office next to Chapman’s to ghost-write the manuscript for Coulter. Chapman says, “Wagner was ghostwriting the Coulter manuscript. He had Human Events articles and the booklets on impeachment and other materials in his office. Everyone in the office knew what was going on. It was no secret.”

June 8, 1998 – Original Research

Coulter appeared on C-Span’s Washington Journal boasting that “both my undergraduate at Cornell and University of Michigan professors have been quite impressed with what I’ve turned up on ‘high crimes and misdemeanors.’”[5] Actually, Coulter drew heavily from Raoul Berger’s book,[6] the Rodino Report,[7] and the Federalist Papers.

Indeed, the preponderance of materials directly related to “high crimes and misdemeanors” is actually contained in those three sources. Hardly “original” research. One could reasonably contend that Hillary Rodham “turned up” more on “high crimes and misdemeanors” in the Rodino Report than Coulter did in High Crimes.

August, 1998 – Book Publication

Regnery published High Crimes and Misdemeanors under Coulter’s sole byline. The cover prominently featured President Clinton’s photo. Subsequent reprints and paperback versions sport a Coulter photo and sole authorship given to Coulter.

December 17, 1998 – Michael Chapman

Michael Chapman sent a letter to the Trustees of the Phillips Foundation. In it he stated:

“From what I have seen so far, verbatim passages from my writing are found on pages 121, 122, 219 and 220 of the High Crimes book. Rewritten passages are reproduced on pages 125, 126, 127 and 220. Other material I wrote is paraphrased on pages 123, 124, 203, 204, 205, 214, and 218.”

“Furthermore, mostly all of chapter 18, ‘Wampumgate,’ is a rewrite or paraphrase of reporting I did for HE.”

October 18, 2001 – Boston Globe

Rumors about Chapman’s work reached the Boston Globe[8] and Coulter’s attack machine immediately went into action. Coulter threatened lawsuits and denied ever knowing – or having heard of – Chapman.

Richard E. Signoreli, Coulter’s lawyer, sent Alex Beam an email[9] to dissuade him from publication.

“I am legal counsel for Ann Coulter. I write in connection with an article that I understand you are preparing about my client and her book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors. You should know that Ms. Coulter’s book was not ghostwritten at all. Ms. Coulter researched and wrote the entire book from beginning to end with no assistance whatsoever from any ghostwriter.”

“This e-mail will put you on notice that the information you are receiving from a Michael Chapman about this subject is completely false. Ms. Coulter does not even know who Mr. Chapman is and Mr. Chapman did not contribute any writing or research for her book.”

“We consider any statement by anyone that Ms. Coulter’s book was ghostwritten not only to be totally and recklessly false, but libelous as well. Ms. Coulter’s reputation will be significantly harmed if such a statement was printed in your newspaper. Please be advised that legal action will be taken against you, the Boston Globe, and Mr. Chapman if your article states that Ms. Coulter’s book was ghostwritten, or was even partially written by someone else.”

Nevertheless, the Boston Globe story was published:

“… But now Coulter is facing less welcome publicity – the suggestion that she is not the sole author of the 1998 bestseller ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’ that brought her to national prominence as a telegenic Clinton-basher and poster girl for the right-wing establishment.”

“The charges were first leveled in a memo by Michael Chapman, formerly a colleague of Coulter’s at the conservative weekly Human Events. In December 1998, shortly after Coulter’s book came out, Chapman complained to his bosses that a lot of his original research and reporting – carried out for a special 1997 Human Events supplement called ‘A Case for Impeachment’ – ended up in Coulter’s book. In several instances, he wrote, his work was reproduced verbatim, paraphrased, or slightly rewritten, but never acknowledged. Chapman had originally volunteered to ghostwrite the impeachment book, but Regnery Publishing, which is owned by the same company as Human Events, didn’t sign a contract with him. Instead, David Wagner, then a writer at Insight magazine, was hired to write a draft of the impeachment book project. …”

“Regnery’s executive editor Harry Crocker said Wagner ‘drew some stuff together. Ann read those chapters and she read Chapman’s work as well. They offered some basis for source material, but it was my impression that she threw those drafts away as irrelevant. … If you took a page of [Chapman’s impeachment report] and a page of her book, she thinks you wouldn’t find any overlap. The book is 100 percent Ann Coulter.’”

Richard E. Signoreli sent Beam a second email,[10] this one to encourage a retraction. In the second, Signorelli wrote:

“Your October 18, 2001 column suggesting my client Ann Coulter engaged in a misuse of the May 23, 1997 Human Events Impeachment Report is recklessly and intentionally false. You have falsely identified a Michael Chapman as the author of the Report. In fact, Ann Coulter was herself a co-author of the May 23, 1997 Human Events Impeachment Report.”

Coulter’s attorney wrote:

“As is obvious on the face of the report, Chapman was the sole author only of the introduction to that report (which is not the source of the statements you cite as evidence of misuse.) The rest was a Human Events staff report that lifted passages directly from, among other things, Ms. Coulter’s earlier columns in Human Events. It is outrageous – intentionally malicious – that you neglect to mention the indisputably crucial fact that Ms. Coulter herself was part author of the very report you accuse her of misusing. Incidentally, Ms. Coulter still does not recall knowing Mr. Chapman. …”

“As I repeatedly informed you, Ms. Coulter researched and wrote all of High Crimes and Misdemeanors from beginning to end with no assistance whatsoever. Her editor and publisher can confirm this. …”

Errors in these two emails from Coulter’s lawyers include:

  • If Coulter was a co-author of the Special Report, this contradicts her claim of not knowing Chapman.
    Material from Chapman’s article (“Casino Lobbyist: ‘I talk to Al Gore a Lot,’ Wanted Veep to Intervene with Babbitt,” by Michael Chapman, Human Events, 2/13/98) was not in the Special Report, but was in Coulter’s book.
  • The Special Report first appeared as a special supplement in the 5/23/97 issue of Human Events. Michael Chapman was the sole byline, with no reference to “Human Events editors.”
  • The booklet version of the special report (“A Case for Impeachment?”) also has a sole byline for Chapman. Of its approximately 50 pages, Coulter provided short sections subtitled “The Law” on pages 10, 15, 23, 27, 31, 34, 38 and 43 (a total of 24 paragraphs out of 50 pages). The remainder of the material was not Coulter’s. The plagiarized portions were not part of her paragraphs.

Coulter’s editor and publisher do not confirm that Coulter had “no assistance whatsoever.” Coulter had the benefit of the writing, research and analysis of both Michael Chapman and David Wagner. (The Globe published the feature but rewarded Coulter with a coveted seat at their table at the next White House Correspondents’ Dinner.)

Alfred Regnery, President of Regnery Publishing, explained the genesis of Coulter’s first book. “We originally came up with it in our office. Part of it was published in Human Events originally. Ann Coulter then got involved in it. She wrote the book. It didn’t take more than six months probably from the time she got involved till we had book. The book’s first printing went out in large quantities. Subsequent printings. New York Times best seller. Lots of promotion. It was a big book.”[11] He confirmed that the concept arose before Coulter became involved.

January, 2002 – Book Publication

Regnery published High Crimes in paperback, again without acknowledging Michael Chapman’s contribution.

Current Status

Coulter lied and threatened lawsuits to conceal the personally humiliating fact that her career-making first (and perhaps best) best-selling book plagiarized the work of a colleague. Neither Coulter nor Regnery will publicly acknowledge Chapman’s contribution to High Crimes, nor have they even offered Chapman a private apology for their “editorial oversight” in failing to give credit where credit is due.

[The media resurrected Coulter’s plagiarism in High Crimes when it was discovered that she also plagiarized in Godless (2006). This column does not delve into that already well-documented instance of plagiarism. The point has already been made: Coulter is a confirmed plagiarist!.– DB]

See Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter for additional material. It is available as a free PDF download at http://www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.


[1]       Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 6/8/98.

[2]       Author interview.

[3]       Hardball, CNBC, 5/1/03.

[4]       Author interview.

[5]       Ann Coulter, Washington Journal, C-Span, 6/8/98.

[6]       Raoul Berger, Impeachment: The Constitutional Problems, 1973.

[7]       Staff report, House Committee on the Judiciary, 93rd Congress, “Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,” 2/22/74.

[8]       Alex Beam, Boston Globe, 10/18/01.

[9]       Email provided to me by Richard E. Signoreli.

[10]     Ibid.

[11]     Author interview.

Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter

For almost two decades, Ann Coulter has proven herself untrustworthy.[1] From betraying her own client[2] and scamming voters,[3] to using lies and employing elimination rhetoric,[4] Coulter has shown herself to be unscrupulous – all in the pursuit of self-promotion and self-glory.[5]

A new book – Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter – delves into the various ways in which Coulter promotes herself and her worldview, and it examines why so many people can come to believe her distortions and lies, even when confronted with a wealth of irrefutable evidence.


That Coulter retains any credibility at all – despite her pathological prevarication, her eager employment of elimination rhetoric, and her enmity to all who do not fit into her scheme of life – is perhaps the mystery of the ages. Propaganda endeavors to explain the seemingly inexplicable.

In a startling manner, Coulter audaciously adopted Orwell’s iconic 1984[6] as a blueprint for her own career. What totalitarian governments and dictators do on a national and international level, Coulter does on a somewhat smaller scale. Ever ideological, always self-promoting, Coulter uses the tactics and techniques, the verbiage and the principles, of 1984 to pursue her own agenda. Where that agenda collides with conservative principles or Christian values, those interests become subservient to her own.

If George Orwell is the Father of Big Brother, then he is the cherished uncle of Ann Coulter. Coulter certainly seems more at home with 1984 then she does with either the Bible or the Constitution.

Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter is structured in a simple fashion.

Chapter One compares and contrasts Coulter with Nazi propagandist Leni Riefenstahl.

Chapter Two provides a humorous review of a fictitious Ann Coulter book, Delusional, in which all of the quotations contained therein are from Coulter, demonstrating the schizophrenia of Coulter’s own self-identity.

Chapter Three examines Coulter’s first distinctly Orwellian book, Slander, and its incorporation of many Orwellian propaganda techniques. It further looks at Coulter’s own addiction to addictive thinking and its implication in her work.

With Chapter Four, we see the pervasiveness of Orwellian thinking as it is exhibited in Coulter’s third book, Treason, which is steeped in the thought processes of 1984. This chapter explores the many and varied Orwellian techniques and constructs employed by Coulter in Treason.

Chapter Five looks at Coulter’s first compilation of essays, How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must), which is an instruction book – or, How To manual – for conservatives.

A series of case studies then fleshes out the reality of Coulter’s utilization of propaganda and its political and cultural impact.

An Epilog renders hope possible in the life and work of Coulter.

An Appendix critiques an (almost) perfect piece of propaganda by Coulter.

Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter is available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.


[1]       See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[2]       See “Case Study #1: Oh, Paula (Jones)! Ann Coulter’s Betrayal,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[3]       See “Case Study #3: Coulter for Congress: Only Scoundrels Need Apply,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[4]       See “Appendix 1: Sampling of Coulter’s Elimination Rhetoric,” The Gospel According to Ann Coulter, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/gospel.pdf.

[5]       See Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free PDF download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[6]       The full text of Orwell’s 1984 is available at http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/0.html.

Ann Coulter Falsely Accuses Journalist of Plagiarism

In a stunning entry on her website, Ann Coulter falsely accused a journalist of plagiarism. On July 11th, Coulter wrote, “When people wonder what plagiarism is, here’s a perfect example:” Her example (contained in the graphic below) certainly isn’t “perfect.” In fact, it isn’t plagiarism at all.


Where does this nonsense come from? Perhaps from far too many years defaming innocent people and getting away with it. No one ever holds Coulter accountable for her lies!

Coulter’s Plagiarism

Remarkably, while she falsely accused another journalist of plagiarism, Coulter herself has plagiarized on at least two occasions: in High Crimes and Misdemeanors (1998) and Godless (2006).

Coulter very first book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors, contained the words and work of her co-worker, Michael Chapman, whom she later claimed she had never even heard of.

According to Chapman (corroborated by published materials provided by him),

“From what I have seen so far, verbatim passages from my writing are found on pages 121, 122, 219 and 220 of the High Crimes book. Rewritten passages are reproduced on pages 125, 126, 127 and 220. Other material I wrote is paraphrased on pages 123, 124, 203, 204, 205, 214, and 218.”

Chapman continues:

“Furthermore, mostly all of chapter 18, ‘Wampumgate,’ is a rewrite or paraphrase of reporting I did for [Human Events].”

Coulter later privately admitted that she should have given Chapman credit, but she has never done so publicly. The paperback version omitted Chapman entirely.

Coulter’s fifth book, Godless, also plagiarized the work of others, as extensively unearthed by numerous bloggers. As noted by Rude Pundit,

“Much of what has been found in Godless has come from right wing websites or speakers, so the chances of someone suing Coulter is practically nil.” [He was right.]

“The Coulter story is about the basic acceptance of dishonesty in the conservative movement.”

Conservatives Should Be Embarrassed

This reality should embarrass conservatives. Do honesty and integrity no longer matter?

As with her first book, the publishers of Godless, of her Human Events’ column, and of her syndicated column all defended Coulter.

The golden goose had to be defended at all costs.


Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.