And from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, "Justices’ feud gets physical: Prosser, Bradley clashed on eve of union ruling":
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."No comment" is basically being taken as "I did it" by progressives, which is typical. But just think about this for a moment. The idea that Prosser got Bradley in a "choke hold" is outlandish, and perfectly suited to the left's progressive thuggery agenda. They're losing in Wisconsin, losing badly. This sounds like a desperate gambit, and I think Althouse really is on to something:
"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.
Sources told the Journal Sentinel two very different stories Saturday about what occurred. Some confirmed Bradley's version. According to others, Bradley charged Prosser, who raised his hands to defend himself and made contact with her neck.
A joint investigation by Wisconsin Public Radio and the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism first reported on the incident early Saturday, stating that Prosser "allegedly grabbed" Bradley around the neck.
Before Bradley spoke to the Journal Sentinel, Prosser issued a statement that said: "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."
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.We've been talking about evil a lot around here lately, but this time it's not me making charges. And it's not Robert Stacy McCain. My criteria earlier was that speech per se wasn't evil, it was the action. That's a kind of ad hoc thing, but evil's a lot like obscenity: You know it when you see it.
Progressives are evil. My money is that these are false allegations, and if so, seems like Bradley should resign.