At the Painted Fern Café...

... talk about what you like. I'm working on a slightly complicated insight into the Wisconsin Supreme Court story, and I don't like to keep you waiting for the first post, but I need to take a few extra minutes with this. I woke up realizing something. Look back at my posts about the incident from yesterday, and maybe you'll see it too.

An alternate account of the Prosser-Bradley confrontation surfaces: Did she "charge him with fists raised"?

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel presents new detail to the undersourced report that everyone's talking about today:

A source who spoke to several justices present during the incident told the Journal Sentinel that the confrontation occurred after 5:30 p.m. June 13, the day before high court's release of a decision upholding a bill to curtail the collective bargaining rights of public employees.

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."

According to the Journal Sentinel, Prosser issued a statement today, saying the accusation against him "will be proven false."

The NYT has picked up the story: "Wisconsin Judge Said to Have Attacked Colleague." The NYT article refers to the Journal Sentinel's new article this way:

Late Saturday, a separate Milwaukee Journal Sentinel report described a physical encounter in which two sources offered conflicting accounts of what happened, including one in which Justice Bradley was said to have charged at Justice Prosser.

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.

AND: Remember, the legislature has the power to impeach, so it is Bradley who is at the greater risk as the story, suppressed for 11 days, comes out. The legislature could play neutral and impeach both Prosser and Bradley, but that would give 2 appointments to Scott Walker.

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.

"Few states have done so good a job as Wisconsin when it comes to retaining a sense of a distinct radical history."

Says John Nichols at The Progressive:

That understanding is essential to the spread of uprisings and movements like the one that has developed in Wisconsin....

Make no mistake: What is often referred to simply as “Wisconsin” has spread. And it will continue to spread if activists in other states go to their own histories for inspiration.

Every state has radical roots....

In each state, we need to reclaim our progressive history, honor this heritage, and celebrate its continual life. There should be yearly progressive festivals in every state to invoke this unique collective progressive memory....

The empowerment comes from sensing that we are a part of something constant and strong.

To me, Nichols sounds...
	... inspiring.
	... creepy.
	... festive.
	... fascistic.
pollcode.com free polls

Think Progress explains "Four Ways Justice David Prosser Can Be Removed From Office."

We've already been talking about this rather odd report that Prosser "grabbed" Justice Ann Walsh Bradley "by the neck." No one was arrested, and the story only got into the press via "at least three knowledgeable sources" that cannot be named because "professional relationships" need to be "preserv[ed]."

Ian Millhiser speculates about what might be done if it is, in fact, true that Prosser did this.

Like all accused criminals, Prosser enjoys a presumption of innocence and he should not be condemned until the evidence clearly shows that he is guilty.

It's very poor writing to say "accused criminals" when you mean "persons accused of a crime" and you're trying to stress the presumption of innocence. But no one was arrested, there's no pending prosecution, so why is he even saying that Prosser is accused of a crime? We don't even have a whole report of what supposedly happened. If there were a prosecution here, the whole story would come out — all sorts of details about the justices, and not just the snapshot of one hard-to-comprehend instant within the longer event. Who would end up looking the worst here? A decision was made, privately, to suppress the incident, and then 3 individuals — who? — decided to leak it out in a way that is, presumably, affected by subjectivity and political interest.

But sure. If Justice Prosser committed a criminal attack on another Justice, he shouldn't be on the court, even if he only lashed out after weeks or years of merciless bullying. And let's have the whole story. Maybe there are some other Justices who don't belong on the court. Clear out everyone who doesn't belong on the court. How will they be replaced? By appointment of the Governor — the formidable Scott Walker.

Is that what you want, Think Progress?

Anyway, Think Progress outlines the methods of ousting Prosser:

Resignation...

This is the easiest way for Prosser to end the controversy and give Scott Walker the chance to appoint a virtuous, strong, smart conservative.  Walker should pick someone with nerves of steel so to stand up to any verbal aggression without resorting to felonious neck-wringing.

Impeachment...

Removal by Address: A supermajority of both houses of the state legislature can also remove Prosser through a process known as “removal by address.”...

News flash: Wisconsin has a Republican legislature. 

Recall: As a last resort, Prosser may be removed by a recall election using the same process that was recently invoked to attempt to recall several state senators.

But you can't start this process until 1 year after his reelection, so settle down, people. But what is the point of all this? If Prosser goes, Walker appoints someone younger, more vigorously conservative, and without the baggage of old intra-court grudges. I think the point is to discredit Prosser and the conservative majority on the court, to undermine the public's faith in the work of the court. But I agree with Millhiser that if it's true Prosser reached a breaking point and started strangling Bradley, he should go. I doubt that's true, however, because there was no arrest. That's why we're getting the story in this unsourced, piecemeal form.

UPDATE: A more nuanced report from the Journal Sentinel has (unnamed) sources disagreeing about what happened. Someone is saying Bradley charged at Prosser with fist raised, and she ran into his defensively raised hands, then cried choked. 

NY Post is still kicking Anthony Weiner, this time for buying "pathetic" flowers for Huma.

They only cost $22.97, purchased at a — gasp! — bodega:

"It's ridiculous, and it could make her angrier," said Elayne Rapping, a professor of American Studies at SUNY Buffalo. "He knows there are photographers and reporters outside of his house. He could have easily called up a florist and had flowers delivered to her -- this seems to be more of a gesture for the press than for her. A way of him saying, 'I'm being a good husband.' "

Well, let's make sure that gesture backfires. (Can't the guy get some credit for patronizing a neighborhood shop and for not being snooty?)

A clerk at the ritzy Madison Avenue Florists identified Weiner's peace offering as orange roses, white carnations and blue agapanthuses -- and added that they're a lame way to say, "I'm sorry."

"It's ill-conceived," the clerk said. "Carnations are not really popular among women these days -- and orange roses? He should have stuck to red."

Call in the ritzy clerk to sniff at the disgraced Weiner! I love the remark "It's ill-conceived." I'm going to use that in casual conversation when I get the chance.

CORRECTION: The headline originally said "... flowers for Human."

At the Clematis Café...

... things are looking up.

"Abrahamson's clique wanted to game the system in order to buy time for the Democrats to make their political comeback..."

"... either in this summer's recall elections or in the 2012 election cycle in a case brought by Democrats, including the Assembly minority leader and the Dane County district attorney, against the majority party."

Isthmus columnist David Blaska goes after Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson.

ADDED: Meanwhile, there's this very odd story titled "Prosser allegedly grabbed fellow justice by the neck."

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.

A need to preserve professional relationships, eh? Hmmm.