Anyway, the reviewer's contempt for Stephen Ambrose is breathtaking even by my standards:
In academia, Ambrose had become a joke for his mass production of feel-good war stories before the plagiarism, which only sealed his reputation; outside
academia, he remained beloved even after the imbroglio.
Not surprisingly, this old piece (which I missed during the uproar) points out that Amrose's citational transgressions started with his Civil War doctoral thesis and that he specifically victimized Bruce Catton and Russell Weigley.
It's been very quiet on the scandal front. "Too quiet" as they say in the Westerns.