Skip to main content

View Diary: OH-02: Mean Jean strikes again (131 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not 'they'. Victoria Wulsin (0+ / 0-)

    If I were Wulsin, I'd be outraged, and would have already contacted a lawyer to begin a suit for slander and defamation of character.

    I am become Man, the destroyer of worlds

    by tle on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 01:38:40 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  You can't as a political candidate. (0+ / 0-)

      I do not remeber where I read it but I believe politicians in general have no recourse against slander other than denying it and verbally assulting the person producing the slander.

      "It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said." "The War Prayer" by Mark Twain

      by Quanta on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:17:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  no, that's not true (0+ / 0-)

        Immunity from possible legal action is given when statements are made on the Floor of the House or Senate: comments made outside of those locations are not protected.

        This is clearly a case of actionable libel.

        "If you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together." We need to go far, quickly.

        by shpilk on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:27:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You have it mixed up. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ArtSchmart

          A congressperson cannot slander a private person except from the house floor. The immunity extends to slander suits brought by private persons who are not political candidates.

          The First Amendment, however, protects all political speech, which includes anything said about anyone running for office in their public capacity.  You can slander a candidate without legal liability, as long as it is not a slander limited to the candidate's private life.

          This would be an interesting case. Wulsin could sue because the slander was entirely personal and Wulsin was not in public office at the time. However, Schmidt would claim that the issue speaks to Wulsin's suitability for office and therefore is protected speech under the First Amendment.

          Would be an interesting court case, but Wulsin would never risk it. Too appealing to let Schmidt run off at the mouth.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site