Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

yardwork

(61,538 posts)

11. What was slanderous about the alterations?

Reply to MichMan (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 5, 2022, 03:35 PM

Feb 2022

Tweaking Wiki bios to highlight or downplay accomplishments isn't slanderous. It's unethical and looks sleazy and reflects poorly on the former clerk but what was the impact on the nominees?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Former clerk rewrites SCOTUS contenders' Wikipedia bios [View all] MichMan Feb 2022 OP

DINO. Karadeniz Feb 2022 #1

Not helpful. Sneederbunk Feb 2022 #2

jeeze.. really? what a way to disqualify even if she wasn't aware msfiddlestix Feb 2022 #3

Wikipedia is open source. Anybody can become an editor and alter pages. yardwork Feb 2022 #4

No legal consequences for malicious altering ? MichMan Feb 2022 #6

None whatsoever unless somebody won a libel case. yardwork Feb 2022 #7

Hope you're correct on last point msfiddlestix Feb 2022 #14

Anyone who isn't selected should sue him and he should also be disbarred MichMan Feb 2022 #5

Honestly, I doubt the Senate considers Wiki pages as part of the review. yardwork Feb 2022 #8

This message was self-deleted by its author MichMan Feb 2022 #10

What was slanderous about the alterations? yardwork Feb 2022 #11

The perpetrator is currently a lawyer for a DC law firm MichMan Feb 2022 #13

An ultimate "You know we can see you, right?" Sympthsical Feb 2022 #9

I know, right? yardwork Feb 2022 #12