Hit job on Prosser?

posted at 4:00 pm on June 26, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Not too long ago, David Prosser confounded the Left in Wisconsin and around the nation by narrowly winning another term on the state Supreme Court, after the unions failed to take him out in an off-year election.  When reports of a physical altercation arose between Prosser and his colleague Ann Walsh Bradley, Wisconsin Watch’s single-sourced initial report appeared to give the Left a big opening to remove Prosser from the bench altogether:

Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice David Prosser allegedly grabbed fellow Justice Ann Walsh Bradley around the neck in an argument in her chambers last week, according to at least three knowledgeable sources.

Details of the incident, investigated jointly by Wisconsin Public Radio and the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, remain sketchy. The sources spoke on the condition that they not be named, citing a need to preserve professional relationships.

The story got wide play, including at Think Progress, where the progressive site listed “Four Ways Justice David Prosser Can Be Removed From Office.”  But when the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel began checking with its own sources, an entirely different version of the story appeared:

At least five justices, including Prosser and Bradley, had gathered in Bradley’s office and were informally discussing the decision. The conversation grew heated, the source said, and Bradley asked Prosser to leave. Bradley was bothered by disparaging remarks Prosser had made about Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson.

Bradley felt Prosser “was attacking the chief justice,” the source said. Before leaving, Prosser “put his hands around her neck in what (Bradley) described as a chokehold,” the source said. “He did not exert any pressure, but his hands were around her neck,” the source said. The source said the act “was in no way playful.”

But another source told the Journal Sentinel that Bradley attacked Prosser. “She charged him with fists raised,” the source said. Prosser “put his hands in a defensive posture,” the source said. “He blocked her.” In doing so, the source said, he made contact with Bradley’s neck.

Another source said the justices were arguing… [and] Prosser said he”d lost all confidence in [Abrahamson's] leadership. Bradley then came across the room “with fists up,” the source said. Prosser put up his hands to push her back. Bradley then said she had been choked, according to the source. Another justice – the source wouldn’t say who – responded, “You were not choked.”

So far, that looks like two sources for the JSO version supporting Prosser and one for the WW version supporting Bradley as the victim.  Ann Althouse has gone on a weekend whirlwind on this story, and asks whether Think Progress and others on the Left will demand Bradley’s resignation as quickly as they demanded Prosser’s if the second and better-supported version of the story turns out to be true.  She also notes that regardless, the numbers will remain with conservatives:

I’m reading the Journal Sentinel’s account as referring to 3 — not 2 — sources, with 2 of the 3 versions portraying Bradley as the aggressor: “the source… another source… [a]nother source….”

I want to know not only what really happened at the time of the physical contact (if any) between the 2 justices, but also who gave the original story to the press. If Prosser really tried to choke a nonviolent Bradley, he should resign. But if the original account is a trumped-up charge intended to destroy Prosser and obstruct the democratic processes of government in Wisconsin, then whoever sent the report out in that form should be held responsible for what should be recognized as a truly evil attack.

ADDED: Everyone who thinks Prosser must to resign if he attacked Bradley ought to say that if Bradley attacked Prosser, she should resign. If that happens, then the tactic of leaking the original version of the story to the press will have backfired horrifically for Democrats, as Governor Scott Walker will name the Justice to replace Bradley. If both Justices erred and must resign, that will be 2 appointments for Walker, both of whom, I would imagine, will be stronger, younger, and more conservative than Prosser, and, with Bradley gone, the liberal faction on the court will be reduced to 2, against a conservative majority of 5.

Later, Ann wonders whether WW’s Bill Lueders knew of the second version of the story and kept it quiet:

Finally, it must be said: If Lueders had the larger context of the story — including the allegation that Bradley was the aggressor — and he suppressed it in his original account, what he did was not only evil, shameful journalism, it was freakingstupid. All sorts of bloggers and tweeters like Millhiser committed themselves to the firm, righteous position that if Prosser did what is alleged, he must leave the court. Lueders’s article lured them into stating a firm and supposedly neutral principle about physical aggression. With that principle in place, they are bound to call for Bradley’s ouster, if Bradley really did take the offensive and transform the verbal argument into a physical fight.

And what are the methods of ouster? Refer to the list in Millhiser’s post: 1. Resignation, 2. Impeachment, 3. Removal by Address, and 4. Recall. A newly reelected official, under Wisconsin law, cannot be recalled for a year. Unlike Prosser, who was just reelected, Bradley is subject to recall. Impeachment and removal by address are procedures that take place in the state legislature. But the state legislature is controlled by the Republicans, who aren’t likely to go after Prosser. Only Bradley is vulnerable to impeachment and removal by address if the legislature is influenced by political ideology. And if either justice is removed, the replacement will be named by Governor Scott Walker, so only Bradley’s ouster will change the conservative-liberal balance on the court.

See what I mean about stupid? If Lueders didn’t know the allegation about Bradley after doing his investigative journalism, that was stupid. How could he investigate and not find that out?  If Lueders did know the allegation and suppressed it he was not merely stupid but evil. And make no mistake about how stupid: His article initiated a day of furious writing by liberals that threatens to hurt Bradley and the liberal interests in Wisconsin.

Frankly, the entire exercise is rather stupid, starting with the conflict between the two justices.  At least one of them can’t resolve their differences maturely, and in both versions of the story, that certainly describes Bradley, if not both justices.  Anyone attempting a fair report on a story of a physical altercation behind closed doors with apparently a half-dozen witnesses has to know that there will be two sides to the story.  Why run with just the first version?  And if it was so hard to get a more complete account, how did the JSO get two more sources in a short period of time to tell them that Bradley was the physical aggressor and Prosser was just startled into defending himself?

Either Wisconsin Watch tried conducting a hit job on Prosser that backfired, or the Journal-Sentinel got duped by post-incident spin.  One sure sign of which way to bet: Wisconsin Watch has rewritten the Lueders article, and the original version no longer exists on its site, as Ann notes:

I’m linking to the publication of the article in the Wisconsin State Journal, because it seems to be the original version of what Lueders wrote. The version that now appears at the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism has been — according to a note in red at the top, time-stamped 10:15 p.m. — “updated to reflect reports of a statement from Prosser denying the allegations.” But “updated” does not mean that there is an update at the bottom of the original text, adding new material or noting mistakes. The article has been rewritten, so the flaws that I am going to write about here can no longer be detected.

If Lueders got it right the first time, WW would only need to append an update to cover Prosser’s response.  Rewriting the entire article would only be necessary if WW got it wrong.

I’d expect the state legislature to start probing this incident, and perhaps we’ll know more soon.  I’d also expect this to go down the memory hole if the JSO’s sources turn out to be correct.

Update: Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert is whining on Twitter that I’m not “classy” for simply buying Bradley’s argument without question.  Boehlert doesn’t explain why I should do that when the JSO has two sources refuting Bradley’s allegation to the one supporting it, but I assume that has something to do with progressive math.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

They will go as far as they are allowd to go; and then some.

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 10:53 PM

Wanted to also say what a sophomoric existence these libs live. Its like watching the netroots as they’re droning a meme at Brietbart when they attacked him at their convention first accusing him of doing cocaine and then calling him “coward” as he’s riding up the stairs.

I always go back to our troops in the mid-east getting their asses blown off with crap going on here. Their families are getting the real short end of the stick from this whole screwed up existence of Libs in our country and especially in our government!!!

These are our Soldiers. This is America. This is why we make no excuses to take it back from the scum that are there now.

http://tinyurl.com/3dw4n9d

http://tinyurl.com/63y3gnd

http://tinyurl.com/3qdndf4

auspatriotman on June 26, 2011 at 10:59 PM

Wanted to also say what a sophomoric existence these libs live. Its like watching the netroots as they’re droning a meme at Brietbart when they attacked him at their convention first accusing him of doing cocaine and then calling him “coward” as he’s riding up the stairs.

I always go back to our troops in the mid-east getting their asses blown off with crap going on here. Their families are getting the real short end of the stick from this whole screwed up existence of Libs in our country and especially in our government!!!

These are our Soldiers. This is America. This is why we make no excuses to take it back from the scum that are there now.

http://tinyurl.com/3dw4n9d

http://tinyurl.com/63y3gnd

http://tinyurl.com/3qdndf4

auspatriotman on June 26, 2011 at 11:00 PM

Has crr6 ever posted anything while Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is on the t.v.?

crr6 IS Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

“Bet on it.”

BigAlSouth on June 26, 2011 at 11:36 PM

John @ Power Line

What is hard to understand is how a modest change in public employee collective bargaining rights, which leaves Wisconsin’s public sector workers with more such rights than most public employees have, could trigger such a hysterical reaction from the Left.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 11:38 PM

What is hard to understand is how a modest change in public employee collective bargaining rights, which leaves Wisconsin’s public sector workers with more such rights than most public employees have, could trigger such a hysterical reaction from the Left.

Don’t know. I’m having a hard time figuring out why other states are doing the same things as Wisconsin with nary a peep from the left.

My conclusion is when Walker won the election, the left made a vow to do anything to destroy him. ANYTHING he did was condemnable, awful, destructive for Wisconsin.

I think they see him as a threat, because his political career looks so bright.

I can tell you that the left is doing little to persuade all but its most ardent proponents to vote for them or their causes, however. Weeks of endless childish, violent, thuggish behavior is not endearing those living outside Madison/Milwaukee to them.

englishqueen01 on June 27, 2011 at 12:05 AM

This Bradley character is channeling my ex.

Mojave Mark on June 27, 2011 at 1:09 AM

Don’t know. I’m having a hard time figuring out why other states are doing the same things as Wisconsin with nary a peep from the left.

englishqueen01 on June 27, 2011 at 12:05 AM

There are probably some particularly energetic leftard activists in Wisconsin that are getting things heated up every time one of these incidents occurs. If they succeed at turning around a decision based on their disruptive tactics, it will spread like wildfire as others imitate their strategy.

pedestrian on June 27, 2011 at 1:32 AM

But another source told the Journal Sentinel that Bradley attacked Prosser. “She charged him with fists raised,” the source said. Prosser “put his hands in a defensive posture,” the source said.

Attacking someone and then accusing them strikes me as a classic leftist move. I threw the punch, but I’m the victim.

As liberals dropped their masks more these last few years, it was disturbing to realize that their behavior resembles the demonic. Traditional archetypes permeate good movies and stories, despite the liberal pollution.

Ann Coulter could not have picked a better title for her new book.

Feedie on June 27, 2011 at 3:33 AM

What is hard to understand is how a modest change in public employee collective bargaining rights, which leaves Wisconsin’s public sector workers with more such rights than most public employees have, could trigger such a hysterical reaction from the Left.

Don’t know. I’m having a hard time figuring out why other states are doing the same things as Wisconsin with nary a peep from the left.

My conclusion is when Walker won the election, the left made a vow to do anything to destroy him. ANYTHING he did was condemnable, awful, destructive for Wisconsin.

I think they see him as a threat, because his political career looks so bright.

I can tell you that the left is doing little to persuade all but its most ardent proponents to vote for them or their causes, however. Weeks of endless childish, violent, thuggish behavior is not endearing those living outside Madison/Milwaukee to them.

englishqueen01 on June 27, 2011 at 12:05 AM

Also the unions are doing their level best to convince the workers that Walker will go after their pensions. That is why your seeing this level of intensity. Although he has never said that. He has said the opposite, it is to preserve the pension of those already vested. Do they want to become Il?

wi farmgirl on June 27, 2011 at 6:42 AM

Also the unions are doing their level best to convince the workers that Walker will go after their pensions. That is why your seeing this level of intensity. Although he has never said that. He has said the opposite, it is to preserve the pension of those already vested. Do they want to become IL?

Apparently. Mentality of the left seems to be “Who cares if we bankrupt future generations so long as I get MINE now?”

Very frustrating.

englishqueen01 on June 27, 2011 at 7:06 AM

Apparently. Mentality of the left seems to be “Who cares if we bankrupt future generations so long as I get MINE now?”

Very frustrating.

englishqueen01 on June 27, 2011 at 7:06 AM

If I had a nickel for every Koch bros/evil corporation comment I hear daily I could start a 401k…as I don’t even get that as a benefit where I work. It is getting harder and harder to stomach the mantra here.

wi farmgirl on June 27, 2011 at 7:21 AM

Libs hurt by their own lies. Sweet.

Kissmygrits on June 27, 2011 at 8:30 AM

And if it was so hard to get a more complete account, how did the JSO get two more sources in a short period of time to tell them that Bradley was the physical aggressor and Prosser was just startled into defending himself?

Arrogance and Desperation. The Left is loosing it’s grip on Wisconsin. And that is a good thing.

Dr Evil on June 27, 2011 at 8:33 AM

Nice..

Opened the SD Trib, story by the AP and not one word about the allegation with fists raised Bradly charged Prosser.

Only mention is Prosser allegly choking Bradley

Oh yeah, battle lines are drawn.

theblacksheepwasright on June 27, 2011 at 9:56 AM

There must be consequences, both for Bradley and the ‘journalists’ who are trying to destroy conservatives.

I’m not kidding. It’s not enough that they be shown to be what they are – most people won’t ever see it.

Midas on June 27, 2011 at 9:56 AM

Libs hurt by their own lies. Sweet.

Kissmygrits on June 27, 2011 at 8:30 AM

Too early to see if they’re hurt by it or not. I’d bet at this point that they will not be hurt by it at all, it’ll simply be a failed attempt that 99.9% of the populace will never even hear about. What will ‘stick’ is that Prosser was a meanie – that’s it.

Midas on June 27, 2011 at 9:57 AM

Any news on the “investigation”?

Should not this case be expedited to ensure the safety of all justices?

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 10:02 AM

Wow, check out this journalistic “excellence” from the Seattle PI

Cops eye Prosser ‘chokehold’ charge

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 10:35 AM

And C-BS “News” still flogs the story like this:

Wisconsin judge Ann Walsh Bradley says Justice David Prosser choked her

And this story was updated this morning at 9:48 AM EDT.

Nope, they’re not backing off this story. They’re continuing full bore with it.

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Will Walker step in and demand answers?

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Hit job on Prosser!

And YES, Ann Walsh Bradley should RESIGN, but not for her actions in the room. She should resign for her spreading the LIE that she, and her Democrat cohorts have worked so hard to produce.

DannoJyd on June 27, 2011 at 11:02 AM

With the deceitful democrat controlled press, and the evil, lying democrats pulling all kinds of shenanigans like this to set up people on our side, I don’t know how we go about overcoming this. Panic has set in on their side, and I truly believe there is nothing they won’t do to keep the dictator in the White House.

silvernana on June 27, 2011 at 11:17 AM

The LA Times is going with the “Prosser choked Bradley” meme in the paper edition.

unclesmrgol on June 27, 2011 at 11:19 AM

Guys like Lueders will continue with attacks like these because they can get away with it without any retribution.

There is no penalty for the media when they deliberately slime someone. “Sullivan” makes it impossible to sue them. The fact that the media has been in the bag for Obama and is militant pro-Democrat, while being immune from public backlash is not what the Founders intended in the First Amendment.

Either Sullivan is overturned (by the courts, or by legislation), or we, on the right, will have to find a better way to put the media on notice that the public will no longer tolerate a biased media.

Unfortunately, attacking their bottom line is too slow.

Obama threatened hostile broadcast media with loss of their FCC license if they were to win. Maybe our side ought to put NBC on notice that their network owned stations will be off the air unless they start reporting fairly.

Maybe the leftist “investigative news” orgs need to have their state tax filings examined.

Maybe press credentials of certain outlets need to be canceled – that’s what Obama does with organizations that don’t play ball with him.

It’s time to play hardball with the leftstream media. They need to know that there are consequences to their slanted libel.

georgej on June 27, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Politico is running a hit job on Prosser right now:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57835.html

Based on the title of the piece and the first page reading there isn’t a word mentioned of Prosser’s side of the story.

taney71 on June 27, 2011 at 11:52 AM

It’s time to play hardball with the left stream media. They need to know that there are consequences to their slanted libel.

georgej on June 27, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Amen

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 12:02 PM

More details from Althouse…Lueders is the guy who “broke” the story (2 weeks after it happened, of course).

Blaska’s at the Isthmus, where Lueders worked for 25 years before moving on to the mysterious outfit that calls itself the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism.

Blaska asked Lueders about his “three knowledgeable sources” who supposedly had to remain unnamed to “maintain their professional relationships.” Blaska said that his “inescapable conclusion” was that they were Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, “and their liberal court ally, Justice Patrick Crooks.”

Lueders replied:

The sources are people we considered reliable. We very carefully represented that they alleged certain events. They did. Justice Bradley has now made the same allegation in her comments to the Journal Sentinel. Your ‘inescapable conclusion’ is incorrect. Beyond that I have nothing more to say.

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 12:17 PM

More from Althouse, who wonders:

I would truly like to know who made the decision to go public with this accusation. Was it one of the judges or someone lower down, with less awareness of the mess it would make, like a law clerk or summer intern?

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 12:19 PM

From Channel 4 Milwaukee

According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s Patrick Marley, who talked on Newsradio 620 WTMJ’s “Wisconsin’s Morning News,” Capitol Police are investigating and they may offer some clues on Monday as to whether the Dane County District Attorney’s office will take the case.

Followed by this hilarious public schooled kid comment below the story:

Koch addiction will always make people go bad. Prosser has always been a violent person. prosser with his accomplise walker wrote truth in sentencing without revamping the sentencing guide lines. Some 100,000 people served decadeds longer than they sould have because of this. Some 30 yeras more than sentenced. It cost the taxpayers an extra 38 billion sinse 1997. Walker and Prosser created Wisconson pudget problems . This was a get rich quick scheme. It was then realized private prisons are against the wisconsin constitution.Something Scott Walker could read if he ahad any type of education. Before walker became Governor he cost the taxpayers some 100 billion with his dozens of get rich quick schemes. Wisconsin`s corrections population went from less than 7,000 to 105,000 because of Walker and Prosser and their sick ideals. This choke hold should get prosser 13, 000 563 years under his guide lines. Maybe their is a God.

His English Teachers must be so proud of him…

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 12:50 PM

This whole story is very disturbing to me. If they are allowed to get away with it, it will be only the beginning. The Dems and unions are desperate and there are trillions of federal and state dollars involved.

Missy on June 27, 2011 at 1:51 PM

This reminds me of my sons when they got in a fight when they were little. Job hit me first! No! He’s lying! Sean hit me first! Usually Job told the truth and Sean was lying. Which makes sense considering Sean became pro union lefty!

MCGIRV on June 27, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Wow, the Dane’s County Sheriff’s Office will be handling the investigation, not the Capitol Police.

A JS comment notes:

I can only imagine the kind of kangaroo court this is going to be. I’m sure they are hoping to draw judge Marianne Sumi. Between her, Ozanne, Noble Wray(Madison Chief of Police who continues to cite people who legally open carry because it goes against his political beliefs), and just about every other notable Dane County Liberal, the lack of logic and intelligence is astounding. Prosser may as well just save his energy for the appeal. He could (show) them a video of Walsh choking herself and they would still convict him because his politics and policies differ from theirs. That is how Dane County operates.

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 3:14 PM

Madison – The Dane County Sheriff’s Office is investigating a claim by Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley that Justice David Prosser put her in a chokehold earlier this month.

“After consulting with members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, I have turned over the investigation into an alleged incident in the court’s offices on June 13, 2011 to Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney,” Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs said in a statement. “Sheriff Mahoney has agreed to investigate this incident.”

It was not immediately clear why Tubbs would consult with the court on who should investigate the matter.

Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne said he has not talked to law enforcement about the incident but would review anything that is referred to him.

“As far as I know, nothing at this point has been referred to our office,” Ozanne said Monday.

JS Online.

Crooks, the justice who wasn’t there, is a Dem and a partisan ally of Bradley and Abrahamson. So there was one other Dem in the room. If he backs up Prosser, it will look odd.

While Bradley might whine to the media, “lying to investigators” is a crime.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 3:25 PM

They want to drive him from office, so Kloppy can run again. Apparently the WI governor cannot appoint a replacement justice under the WI constitution?

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Crooks, the justice who wasn’t there, is a Dem and a partisan ally of Bradley and Abrahamson. So there was one other Dem in the room. If he backs up Prosser, it will look odd.

While Bradley might whine to the media, “lying to investigators” is a crime.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Oops. Six justices were there. One Dem (Crooks) not there. So the two Dem feminiazis and four GOP justices in the room.

Wonder if Abrahamson will lie for Bradley. Or if Bradley will dare lie to authorities.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Wasn’t Crooks one of the pro-union votes in the collective bargaining law case?

Oh, and as for the Sheriff who will be “investigating”, he’s this guy:

Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney, whose territory covers Madison and the Wisconsin state Capitol, says he refused to bar protesters from entering the building as state troopers have done this week, limiting entrance after protesters overran the building for more than a week.

That was 3 months ago.

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Wasn’t Crooks one of the pro-union votes in the collective bargaining law case?

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Yes. Don’t know why he wasn’t there.

What got this argument started was that Abrahamson said the opinions (majority and dissent) might not be ready for release for a month, when the legislature had asked for a ruling by 6/13. Apparently the opinions were already written and ready.

The suggestion that Abrahamson would delay the release for political reasons got Prosser angry, and he said he had no faith in her leadership if she’d do such a thing.

At which time Abrahamson’s friend Bradley got out of her chair and moved towards Prosser with her fists up.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM

At which time Abrahamson’s friend Bradley got out of her chair and moved towards Prosser with her fists up.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Prosser should have allowed her to leave a mark.

She’d be gone by now.

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 5:54 PM

They want to drive him from office, so Kloppy can run again. Apparently the WI governor cannot appoint a replacement justice under the WI constitution?

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 3:30 PM

Apparently he can appoint a replacement, accoding to Legal Insurrection.

If Bradley had to go, then Wslker coud replace her with…well, it wouldn’t be a liberal.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 6:09 PM

Apparently he can appoint a replacement, accoding to Legal Insurrection.

If Bradley had to go, then Wslker coud replace her with…well, it wouldn’t be a liberal.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 6:09 PM

Vicki McKenna

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Another great speculation from a poster at Ann Althouse

Maybe the fact that so many women in my writing group have been submitting romance fiction for workshop that my judgment has been colored, but my interpretation of events is as follows:

Prosser and Bradley have been sneaking away for romantic rendezvouses* for months.

During these trysts, the two roleplay as counter-ideological judges whose deep-seated animosity for one another is overcome only by the sexual tension so intense it’s palpable.

During an actual meeting with other justices present, tempers flare and the divide between fantasy and reality becomes blurred, and in an intense moment of conflict Bradley approaches with fists raised, while Prosser does what he always does to cool the hot heart of this judicial vixen: cradles her neck and pulls her in for a torrid embrace.

BUT! They quickly compose themselves, and attempt to avoid talking about the scene for six days. But of course the gossip machine is already humming at the Wisconsin courthouse.

To quell the inquisitive voices, Bradley offhandedly says that Prosser attacked her.

The logical conclusion is that Bradley will take the stand and declare, “If loving Justice Prosser is a crime, then I’m guilty.”

*apparently Firefox’s spell-check knows the plural of “rendezvous”

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 7:32 PM

So who am I to believe…

An upstanding elderly man most likely from The Greatest Generation attacked a woman and fellow justice with a chokehold of all things…

Or a middle-aged angry liberal with a political axe to grind, in an environment that has been trying to destroy Judge Prosser for months on end?

Which to choose…

BKennedy on June 27, 2011 at 8:01 PM

One of Legal Insurrection’s commenters is from Milwaukee. Apparently Abrahamson and Bradley thinks themselves far superior to the others in intellect and are insufferable because of it.

So instead of being the manager, referee and conciliator in disputes, CJ Abrahamson is in there swinging (so to speak) herself.

Wethal on June 27, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Del, thanks for making the connection between Justice Bradley and Doc Bradley.

Now I really hate her.

Doc Bradley deserves better.

Roy Rogers on June 27, 2011 at 8:31 PM

BKennedy on June 27, 2011 at 8:01 PM

Reports I’ve seen have Prosser as 5′ 2″. He’s also in his late 60s.

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 8:41 PM

Reports I’ve seen have Prosser as 5′ 2″. He’s also in his late 60s.

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 8:41 PM

Guess I’m off on the Greatest Generation thing, but nonetheless that lines him up to be a Vietnam era veteran. If he’s 5’2 no way he’s chokeholding a lady (If you can call Bradley a lady considering her alleged behavior).

Either way, it’s time to play another round of “Spot the Union Label.”

BKennedy on June 27, 2011 at 11:45 PM

Reports I’ve seen have Prosser as 5′ 2″. He’s also in his late 60s.

Del Dolemonte on June 27, 2011 at 8:41 PM

Guess I’m off on the Greatest Generation thing, but nonetheless that lines him up to be a Vietnam era veteran. If he’s 5’2 no way he’s chokeholding a lady (If you can call Bradley a lady considering her alleged behavior).

Either way, it’s time to play another round of “Spot the Union Label.”

BKennedy on June 27, 2011 at 11:45 PM

Vintage comment at Althouse

Prosser can’t even choke his chicken anymore, much less Bradley. The idea that he throttled her hideous, jiggly-skinned neck in front of most of the other justices is just absurd.

Del Dolemonte on June 28, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Vintage comment at Althouse

Prosser can’t even choke his chicken anymore, much less Bradley. The idea that he throttled her hideous, jiggly-skinned neck in front of most of the other justices is just absurd.
Del Dolemonte on June 28, 2011 at 10:03 AM

That is brilliant..but even if Bradley is shown to have attacked Prosser, in a liberals mind it will have been justified by the fact Prosser said something Bradley disagreed with…

Conservatives aren’t to be seen let alone heard..in the minds of liberals

theblacksheepwasright on June 28, 2011 at 1:20 PM

When the lies and deceptions of the liberal nutjobs are so obvious that only a brainwashed lemming with a single digit IQ would swallow their swill, it just reinforces that liberalism is definitely a mental disorder. The mainstream media stopped reporting the truth years ago. They only exist if you pay any attention to them.

volsense on June 29, 2011 at 11:56 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3