You would think it would be a simple matter to provide whatever material that was supposedly copied. But the moonbat idiots don't. They spew and provide nothing except inuendo.
If you read the entire article (rather than just the excerpt here) they do show some of the source material that is repeated almost verbatim in her book.
To me though if you're only talking about two or three little paragraphs out of an entire book then that isn't plagerism, it's just oversight and would be corrected in subsequent editions. I mean this article states that she had 19 pages of endnotes. So what if she inadvertantly missed a couple? I imagine it happens quite frequently in books of this nature and if every such book were put under this sort of scrutiny you'd find similar mistakes.