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

This is the difference between the left and right.

The left will do ANYTHING to win.

The right plays golf with the left.

angryed on June 26, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Kudos to Ann Althouse and Hot Air for bringing the rest of these unhelpful (to the Left) details to light. BTW, this sort of thing is covered in Chapter 7 of Rules for Radicals, isn’t it? Way to keep it predictable, Lefties.

cynccook on June 26, 2011 at 4:06 PM

f 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,

Ah, the best laid plans of liars and scoundrels..

katy on June 26, 2011 at 4:08 PM

The leftwing narrative makes no sense; Prosser said something that Bradley disliked…and then when she got outraged attacked her…and she did nothing about it. Does that make any sense?

Compare that to the other version. Prosser says something Bradley *really* doesn’t like, she comes at him to attack him, and he fends her off – and then both sides cool down.

18-1 on June 26, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Hit job on Prosser?

Look for the Union Label !

William Amos on June 26, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Oh, it is the irony! Wisconsin Dems sure are choke artists.

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 4:09 PM

When asked, Kloppy said, “I liked feeling like a winner better.”

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:09 PM

A year and a half to go…

… expect it to get much, much worse.

Seven Percent Solution on June 26, 2011 at 4:09 PM

Good work, Ann Althouse! Beat this like a drum.

Is it just my imagination, or is Andrew Breitbart teaching us how to handle these thugs.

petefrt on June 26, 2011 at 4:10 PM

If Bradley was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

The union reform law goes into effect tomorrow (assuming a federal judge does not enjoin it). I expect this was released to delegitimize Prosser’s vote to uphold it.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

This is the difference between the left and right.

The left will do ANYTHING to win.

The right plays golf with the left.

angryed on June 26, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Word.

petefrt on June 26, 2011 at 4:12 PM

If Bradley was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

As Legal Insurrection pointed out, for the same reason Weiner never officially reported his tweet and email hacked. Because he wasn’t the victim, he was the perpetrator.

If this really happened, Bradley should report it to the Wisconin Judicial Commission. Bet she won’t.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Prosser certainly wasn’t Huntsman civil when being charged by a maniac.

Marcus on June 26, 2011 at 4:15 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Bradley has hired a private security firm to investigate this attack.

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

All we need is an opinion piece from Media Matters and we’ll have the Soros left trifecta all involved, and to their evident detriment. A good weekend’s work.

MTF on June 26, 2011 at 4:17 PM

“Kudos to Ann Althouse and Hot Air …”

I’d give the kudos to Ann by herself. Keep a close eye on her site over the next couple of days, because I’m guessing things will get interesting on this story.

Ed Morrissey on June 26, 2011 at 4:17 PM

It’s disgusting what depths the left will sink to, to further their agenda.

It seems their depths are a bottomless pit.

That being said….I agree. Whomever the aggressor was…they should resign. But it seems, from what we know so far…it was the commie judge.

capejasmine on June 26, 2011 at 4:18 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM
crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

But its the left making the allegations. Prosser seems to have put this behind him. Why cant the left ?

William Amos on June 26, 2011 at 4:20 PM

If Bradley was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Bradley has hired a private security firm to investigate this attack.

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Exactly the same timeline as Weiner. Exactly the same!

VegasRick on June 26, 2011 at 4:20 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Because he’s too much of a gentleman and doesn’t want to cause legal problems for his colleague.

Ick…liberals…you make my teeth hurt.

GrannyDee on June 26, 2011 at 4:20 PM

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Alinsky 101.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:21 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM
crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Because he has too much class.

He probably thinks comity amongst the judges at the court is worth putting this in the past, especially since they still all have to work together.

It’s a conclusion a grownup would reach.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:21 PM

A year and a half to go…

… expect it to get much, much worse.

Seven Percent Solution on June 26, 2011 at 4:09 PM

You said it there! A lawless president, lawless judges, lawless mobs and gangs, and the neutered GOP will equal unmitigated riots, disaster, and pestilence.

SouthernGent on June 26, 2011 at 4:22 PM

Unions ain’t called “Goonions” for nothing. Doesn’t take a sage to figure out who attacked who.

cartooner on June 26, 2011 at 4:22 PM

Alinsky 101.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:21 PM

I was thinking version 2.0 but you are right 101 it is.

VegasRick on June 26, 2011 at 4:22 PM

Because he has too much class.

He probably thinks comity amongst the judges at the court is worth putting this in the past, especially since they still all have to work together.

It’s a conclusion a grownup would reach.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:21 PM

haha. So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Because he successfully defended himself. If he then went public with a claim of “she tried to hit me,” he would be the butt of endless ridicule. As it turns out, karmic justice will come early this year.

pedestrian on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Ann Bradley must resign now

LeeSeneca on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

LOL! Because he’s smarter than you and your ilk and knows all y’all will choke yourselves out, yet again, given enough Rope.

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

By George! I think she’s GOT it!

Thank You President Obama!

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:25 PM

haha. So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Let me explain it to you more slowly. Bradley filed charges in the arena of public opinion and not where, as a supreme court justice she should know, it matters. Same as Weiner. Prosser sees no need for any type of public involvement.

pedestrian on June 26, 2011 at 4:26 PM

BBC: Bradley Be Crazy!

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 4:27 PM

haha. So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Yes. Nothing inconsistent about it, considering the differences.

Bradley claims Prosser actually got her in a chokehold.
That’s serious and should be reported. If it happened.

Prosser said she was coming at him with her fists, and he just put up a hand to stop her and touched her neck somewhere. He may think that someone approaching him with her fists, with minimal contact isn’t worth reporting, since it ended wihtout further contact.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:28 PM

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.

Anybody who stealth-edits in this manner has zero credibility. Just noting an “update” is completely useless unless you fess up about the specific mistakes you are correcting. At best it’s cowardly, at worst it’s unethical, dishonest flimflam designed to cover up the initial partisan hackery.

forest on June 26, 2011 at 4:28 PM

The only thing that can make this incident perfect is if Bradley screeched “PEACEFUL! PEACEFUL!” as she attacked the supreme court justice.

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

It’s easy to forget you don’t have any concept of “class” outside of academia.

cartooner on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM

haha. So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Class is something you no nothing about.

Knucklehead on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Hey, crr6, remember this?

Well, it looks like Kloppenburg won. I am absolutely confident in that fact, and there is a 0% chance that I will later be proven incorrect.

This post will never come back to bite me.

crr6 on April 7, 2011 at 5:21 PM

We know what and who you are, and your opinion on Prosser doesn’t carry much weight around HA.

GrannyDee on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Wow, between Obama ignoring immigration laws and the WI supreme court decorum melting down, what a weekend.

We need to go on verbal offense here. We need to march on DC and complain about our POTUS who is now a scofflaw.

Too bad we have a bunch of sissys in Congress who won’t uphold their constitutional duties and keep this executive branch in check.

karenhasfreedom on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM

I’d give the kudos to Ann by herself. Keep a close eye on her site over the next couple of days, because I’m guessing things will get interesting on this story.

Ed Morrissey on June 26, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Like many others, I suppose, I almost never have time to read many of the indie blogs, Ed, so by shining the HotAir halogens on this, you are doing a good service both to Ann and your readers who may not regularly visit her site. That you are so modest and quick to give credit where it is due is just what I have come to expect from you.

cynccook on June 26, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Crr you are a dim bulb. First he is a man just in case you did not notice and he let it go.

She did not file charges because she attacked him. Watch how this plays out and learn.

You really are pathetic.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Having plenty of experience around angry leftist women, I’ve got no problem figuring this one out.

rrpjr on June 26, 2011 at 4:32 PM

GrannyDee on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM


OUCH!!

cartooner on June 26, 2011 at 4:32 PM

This is what democracy looks like.
/

steebo77 on June 26, 2011 at 4:34 PM

He did not exert any pressure

This should send your BS meters off the chart.

Sorry this SOURCE is a liar and a distorter.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:34 PM

haha. So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6p on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

You’re missing an important distinction, idiot. Prosser is not the one making public allegations about the event. The fact that he was attacked has been alleged by a witness, not him.

stefanite on June 26, 2011 at 4:34 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

D+ for effort.

Prosser never claimed she attacked him, one of the witnesses to the event said that. He’s pretty much kept his mouth shut on the whole matter.

Bradley, however, did run to a friendly newspaper and claim that he attacked her.

But hey, the fact that you can’t differentiate between two so fundamentally opposite scenarios isn’t surprising.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Too bad we have a bunch of sissys in Congress who won’t uphold their constitutional duties and keep this executive branch in check.

karenhasfreedom on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Feeling the same way. Thank God for our American heritage

Battle Hymn of the Republic

Put your faith in God and keep your powder dry. They have not defeated We the People yet.

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:35 PM

CRR ya big dummie. Let me also tell you something. Men are assaulted all the time by women and it is rarely reported.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:36 PM

D+ for effort.

Prosser never claimed she attacked him, one of the witnesses to the event said that. He’s pretty much kept his mouth shut on the whole matter.

Bradley, however, did run to a friendly newspaper and claim that he attacked her.

But hey, the fact that you can’t differentiate between two so fundamentally opposite scenarios isn’t surprising.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Crr PWND once again.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:37 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

If for entertainment only, it is quite amusing watching you try to fight yourself out of quick sand.

capejasmine on June 26, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Prosser said she was coming at him with her fists, and he just put up a hand to stop her and touched her neck somewhere. He may think that someone approaching him with her fists, with minimal contact isn’t worth reporting, since it ended wihtout further contact.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Prosser himself didn’t say that. A witness did.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Journal-Sentinel:

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.

No claim by Prosser himself that she attacked him.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Prosser himself didn’t say that. A witness did.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Yes, you’re right.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:40 PM

Prosser still need to be careful because there will be many attempts to goad him into doing something that can get him thrown off the bench.

bayview on June 26, 2011 at 4:41 PM

Del is correct.

I do suspect though that she attacked Prosser . Most guys even if hurt would rarely press charges. Ask you buddies.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Prosser still need to be careful because there will be many attempts to goad him into doing something that can get him thrown off the bench.

bayview on June 26, 2011 at 4:41 PM
-

They will play dirty that is quite clear. Heck with their lemmings like crr why not?

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:42 PM

From Althouse:

ALSO: People may assume that the man is larger than the woman, but — from what I have heard — Bradley is significantly larger than Prosser. Bradley is also 7 years younger than Prosser, who is 68.

Maybe they should start listing height, weight and reach on on their judicial profiles in Wisconsin.

forest on June 26, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Maybe they should start listing height, weight and reach on on their judicial profiles in Wisconsin.

forest on June 26, 2011 at 4:42 PM

heh

…and in this corner….

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:44 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

Well first of all welcome back. It is nice to see you crawl out from under the rock every once in a while.

Prosser isn’t whining. The complaint is coming from Bradley and her sympathizer’s (Looney Lefty Gang).

antisocial on June 26, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Leftists live by smearing others, it is part of their strategic vision. The goal is retain the solidarity of their group, the low information leftist will not follow the whole story and so will in the future be more able to rage against the machine.

The Nation has the hit job on its blog. Written by John Nichols the post remains uncorrected:

http://www.thenation.com/blog/161654/fitzwalkerstan-justice-wisconsin-governor-walkers-judicial-fixer-accused-assaulting-diss

Notice the total cut and paste nature of it. He has boilerplate analysis of WI over the last several months, then inserts the new hit job as further evidence of his thesis…like I say, still uncorrected.

Fake but accurate..that is their motto

r keller on June 26, 2011 at 4:48 PM

Like Pelosi has stated ‘by any means’.

CommentGuy on June 26, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Fake but accurate..that is their motto

r keller on June 26, 2011 at 4:48 PM

It is more like “Fake but were running with it.”

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:49 PM

If Bradley Prosser was attacked, why doesn’t she file formal charges?

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:11 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:16 PM

When one files charges with a disciplinary board, they are usually kept confidential, at least at the start. Sometimes the discipline can be a private reprimand. (There are also public reprimands, as well as more serious discipline. Private reprimands stay private, at least in PA.)

Whether either justice has filed with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, I don’t know, but the fact that Bradley immediately went public with this to a liberal journalist, rather than waiting for the Commission to decide if it should be made public, tells one something about her motives.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Like Pelosi has stated ‘by any means’.

CommentGuy on June 26, 2011 at 4:49 PM

“I want you to get in their face.” — Barack Obama

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Has anyone conducted a welfare check on Mr. Bradley?

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Prosser himself didn’t say that. A witness did.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Well, good for him trying to let it pass. But now that he sees it’s a hit job, I hope he decides to file charges. Thugs have to be held accountable, or the thuggery will just get worse.

petefrt on June 26, 2011 at 4:51 PM

rather than waiting for the Commission to decide if it should be made public, tells one something about her motives.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Reminds me of when Kloppendoogle claimed victory with the smallest of margins and then demanded a recount when Prosser had an obvious win.

I am betting this is a loosely organized attempt to smear Prosser. It has all the signs.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Hit job on Prosser?

Of course.

Isn’t it obvious? This is all the left does. Lie and make up shyt.

darwin on June 26, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Instapundit UPDATE: Professor Jacobson: Applying the Weiner Test to the Wisconsin Supreme Court: “If Bradley has not pressed charges, why not? Inquiring minds want to know.”

DON’T GIVE THE LEFT A PASS ON THIS!!!

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Hmmm…where has crr6 gone all of a sudden? Oh well, if you can’t stand the heat…

cynccook on June 26, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Hmmm…where has crr6 gone all of a sudden?

cynccook on June 26, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Polishing precious turds

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:59 PM

“Once there’s a proper review of the matter and the facts surrounding it are made clear, the anonymous claim made to the media will be proven false. Until then I will refrain from further public comment.”

Justice Prosser. This is the only public statement he’s made.

BTQ the Kool Aid Drinkers at TPM are convinced Prosser’s guilty as sin.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/wis_justice_ann_walsh_bradley_justice_prosser_put.php

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Crr you are a dim bulb. First he is a man just in case you did not notice and he let it go.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Althouse (and others in the headline thread) stressed that Bradley is bigger and younger than Prosser. If he was assaulted, why didn’t he file charges?

She did not file charges because she attacked him. Watch how this plays out and learn.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 4:32 PM

I have no idea exactly what happened and neither do you. I do know that either way, the WI Supreme Court in general, and Prosser in particular, are an embarrassment to the profession. The WI Supreme Court used to be among the most respected in the nation. Now look at it.

D+ for effort.

Prosser never claimed she attacked him, one of the witnesses to the event said that. He’s pretty much kept his mouth shut on the whole matter.

You don’t know who the witness was. It could have been Prosser himelf. I’m not sure why it matters anyway.

Bradley, however, did run to a friendly newspaper and claim that he attacked her.

But hey, the fact that you can’t differentiate between two so fundamentally opposite scenarios isn’t surprising.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 4:35 PM

So they’re fundamentally different scenarios because they’re fundamentally different scenarios? Try again:

haha. So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 5:03 PM

Breaking: Prosser quoted Ted Nugent song Stranglehold while choking Bradley!

/

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 5:04 PM

“If Bradley has not pressed charges, why not? Inquiring minds want to know.”

DON’T GIVE THE LEFT A PASS ON THIS!!!

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Because she like Wiener and Ernesto is a liar.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Class is something you no nothing about.

Knucklehead on June 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM

So Prosser is a classy guy? In case you’ve forgotten…

As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a “b****” and threatening to “destroy” her.

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Ummmm …..crr ….

There are two basic options when something like this happens – the victim decides “to make something of it” or not.

Bradley’s obviously decided to “make something of it” – the original story came from her or from interests sympathetic to her …. the press release she issued, that’s 100% on her.

If she’s “going to make something of it,” one would expect her to file a criminal complaint and/or a complaint with Wisconsin’s version of the Judicial Qualifications Committee. If it happened and she’s outraged by it, why would she stop at half-measures?

Prosser didn’t put out the story in the first instance. Prosser’s also chosen not to speak to Bradley’s actions. Both are 100% consistent with a decision not to “make something of it.”

If it’s such a big deal to Bradley, why wouldn’t she take the next step and file a complaint? She’s made it a public issue, the press, etc. will now be digging into it to get at the truth …. why make the charge at all and then shy away from backing it up?

BD57 on June 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Has anyone conducted a welfare check on Mr. Bradley?

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Funny you bring him up, as I came across some info about him, or more accurately, his father, who was one of the guys who raised the flag on Iwo Jima.

Justice Bradley’s father-in-law has been dead now for 17 years, but she was recently quoted as saying that her relationship with him (by marriage) somehow made her more “qualified” as a Judge to understand veterans than most people.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 5:04 PM

I heard it was “Cat Scratch Fever” as he defended himself.

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Althouse (and others in the headline thread) stressed that Bradley is bigger and younger than Prosser. If he was assaulted, why didn’t he file charges?

Again if she attacked him guys rarely have charges brought. You’re slow.

I have no idea exactly what happened and neither do you.

I know that the likely truth is he did not attack her and she is liar. If she was truthful this would not be the way she would treat the situation. See: Wiener.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 5:08 PM

So Prosser is a classy guy? In case you’ve forgotten…

As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a “b****” and threatening to “destroy” her.

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM

You forgot Prosser’s response to that incident.

“I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely warranted…They (Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley) are masters at deliberately goading people into perhaps incautious statements. This is bullying and abuse of very, very long standing.”

Sounds like they’re just as “classy” as Prosser is.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Just like with Wiener this will be another embarrassment for the left. Watch and learn. Especially you crr. When you grow up you may be able to figure this stuff out on your own.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 5:10 PM

But its the left making the allegations. Prosser seems to have put this behind him. Why cant the left ?

[William Amos on June 26, 2011 at 4:20 PM]

As to Prosser putting it behind him, yes, you’re right. As for the Left, let’s clarify a little — Judge Bradley [put out a press release stating]/[in an interview stated] she was choked by Prosser. Per JSOnline:

Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley late Saturday accused fellow Justice David Prosser of putting her in a chokehold during a dispute in her office earlier this month.

“The facts are that I was demanding that he get out of my office and he put his hands around my neck in anger in a chokehold,” Bradley told the Journal Sentinel.

So, Bradley herself made the accusation of a crime public, yet it does not appear she either reported it to the police or filed charges. I like William Jacobson’s sarcastic reference to the application of the “Weiner Accusation Rule”: Claim a crime was committed against you in public but never call the police!

Dusty on June 26, 2011 at 5:10 PM

You forgot Prosser’s response to that incident.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 5:08 P

Forgot? You are much too kind Del.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 5:10 PM

haha. So if Bradley doesn’t file charges, it’s evidence that she’s lying, but if Prosser doesn’t file charges it’s because he has “too much class”?

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Yes. Nothing inconsistent about it, considering the differences. Distinguishable on the facts.

Bradley claims Prosser actually got her in a chokehold. That’s serious, could have cause injury and should be reported. If it happened.

Witnesses say she was coming at Prosser with her fists, and he just put up a hand to stop her and touched her neck somewhere. He may think that someone approaching him with her fists, with minimal contact isn’t worth reporting, since it ended without further contact.

He may have privately reported her to the Wisconsin Judicial Commission; we don’t know. As noted above, complaints to ethics bodies should be made privately and publicized if the ethics body decides to.

Bradley went to a liberal journalist.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 5:11 PM

If it’s such a big deal to Bradley, why wouldn’t she take the next step and file a complaint? She’s made it a public issue, the press, etc. will now be digging into it to get at the truth …. why make the charge at all and then shy away from backing it up?

BD57 on June 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM

A sad attempt to get the public behind his removal.

darwin on June 26, 2011 at 5:11 PM

A gentle choke hold mind you. Just unlucky for her it left no marks.

/

God the crrs of the world are stupid and naive.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 5:12 PM

With the Democrats it’s all about tactics. Not legislating, not doing the right thing, just tactics. It’s about getting your message out, although I have no clue what message they’re trying to get out in Wisconsin. Perhaps it’s “We’re the cry-baby party, the one that your 6th grader would embrace, because we certainly don’t have a clue how to handle things when we’re not in power, party.”

Vote Republican and only be called a racist one more time.

bflat879 on June 26, 2011 at 5:12 PM

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Witnesses describe it as a “Free For All.”

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Wonder how Mark feels about her using his father’s legacy?

John Bradley was a Navy “Doc” who cared for Marines, deserving of every honor.

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Polishing precious turds

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 4:59 PM

You were right!

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 5:03 PM

pedestrian on June 26, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Weird how Crr evades the fact that Prosser has not come out and accused Bradley of ANYTHING. Crr you’re such a useful one.

CW on June 26, 2011 at 5:15 PM

Christien on June 26, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Sure it wasn’t more of a Wango Tango?

Roy Rogers on June 26, 2011 at 5:15 PM

This is just another incident in a long line of incidents by the fanatical left in Wisconsin who simply can’t believe they don’t run the state anymore. The unions on their backs screaming about the millions they can’t steal anymore probably doesn’t help.

darwin on June 26, 2011 at 5:15 PM

Sounds a little like when Bachmann was asked questions in the restroom and she started screaming that she was being held against her will.

Whatababy.

If that happened to Palin, well, I’m sure she packs heat to use if she really felt threatened.

stenwin77 on June 26, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley late Saturday accused fellow Justice David Prosser of putting her in a chokehold during a dispute in her office earlier this month.

Why wait until later in the month and release it on Saturday? So it can make the Sunday papers? The weekend before the union reform law goes into effect? Enquiring minds want to know.

Wethal on June 26, 2011 at 5:17 PM

As the deeply divided state Supreme Court wrestled over whether to force one member off criminal cases last year, Justice David Prosser exploded at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson behind closed doors, calling her a “b****” and threatening to “destroy” her.

crr6 on June 26, 2011 at 5:05 PM

You forgot Prosser’s response to that incident.

“I probably overreacted, but I think it was entirely warranted…They (Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley) are masters at deliberately goading people into perhaps incautious statements. This is bullying and abuse of very, very long standing.”

Sounds like they’re just as “classy” as Prosser is.

Del Dolemonte on June 26, 2011 at 5:08 PM

crr6, why did you deliberately leave out Prosser’s response?

Oh, wait. You’re a lib. Twisting and turning the facts to suit your purposes is what you and your ilk do.

No need to answer my question.

GrannyDee on June 26, 2011 at 5:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3