Now that the right wing echo chamber has put enough pressure on Sheriff Dave Mahoney that he has handed off the \"Prosser Choking\" investigation to his chief deputy. While Sheriff Mahoney probably would not have done the investigation himself anyway, the aggressiveness and fake outrage from the right was out in full force(I would link somewhere but you can see the exact same story on every right wing blog).
Now that precedence has been set in terms of ruling on something that might affect a person who you supported(or supported you) in an election, we are sure our friends on the far right will feel the same next time Justice Prosser has a case in front of him with similar “conflicts of interest”. In case they forgot who those people might be(research tends to get in the way of the “fine” folks at WPRI, I thought I would make it easy on them):
Here is a list of people who endorsed Justice Prosser:
Here is a list of campaign donors to the Prosser Campaign.
I would expect that if anyone on either of these lists, is associated with any case in front of Prosser, he will be recusing himself.
One last note: Justice Bradley asked Justice Prosser to get help with anger management! According to the right wing spin, it looks like Justice Prosser should be taking classes on how not to “accidentally” strangle co-workers.
Of course the good people at WPRI don’t want to go into the real details.
How many terrible races has Prosser Spokesman Brian Nemoir worked on. I suppose that Prosser should recuse himself from every case involving someone who has worked for him has worked for.
It’s no small irony that the Booboisie respond to charges that their flagbearer is an unstable hothead with an epic freakout.
There are quite a number of things Prosser should be recusing himself on, including anything to do with domestic violence. Then there is the Judicial Commission case, which will be coming to the Supreme Court. How weird is that, six of the seven justices witnessed the event, two of them as participants, and the Commission is going to tell them all about it.
And I’m sure my friends on the left would hold the same standard for all justices, not just the ones you disagree with, right?
From your linked site, here is a list of the number of campaign donors to each of the justices:
Justice Prosser – 265 Contribution(s) Found
Justice Gableman – 769 Contribution(s) Found
Justice Roggensack – 800 Contribution(s) Found
Justice Bradley – 1053 Contribution(s) Found
Justice Ziegler – 1593 Contribution(s) Found
Justice Crooks – 1691 Contribution(s) Found
Chief Justice Abrahamson – 6392 Contribution(s) Found
Sort of interesting…
I would expect that if anyone on either of these lists, is associated with any case in front of
Prosserany of these justices he or she will be recusing him/herself.Might make things a bit tough for the Chief Justice though – there’s a heck of a lot of lawyers on her list.
The issue here is raised because of the whining about Mahoney. Mahoney recused himself. No Justice has done so at all, and certainly the right wingers aren’t whining that they should. To be consistent, they should at least address the issue honestly. Will they call for Prosser or any right winger to recuse themselves on ANYTHING?
exactly Steven you beat me to it. Do i think they should recuse themselves every time there is a slight conflict of interest? no not at all.
I just wanted to point out the ridiculousness of the right wing echo chamber yesterday and the veracity that they went after without a single instance of favoritism was unbelievable. What was even more unbelievable was that the Mainstream Media did not treat them with the disdain they deserved. The hypocrisy on the right is tiring and their fake outrage gets overwhelming.
Locke…keep in mind that this past Supreme Court election was run under the new public finance model. Both AG Kloppenburg and Justice Prosser elected to participate in the program…so raw contributor counts aren’t necessarily a valid comparison. And if we are going to look at contributions maybe a total dollar amount raised and the average amount per donor are more valuable metrics.
I’d rather see 1,000 donors contribution $20 each than one donor contributing $20,000…
I get your point on number of donors – while that’s an interesting topic itself, it’s really ancillary at best to the current one. If you argue that a financial contribution to a justice’s campaign merits recusal if they appear before him/her – as Jeff is arguing with his post – then a donor is a donor.
The hyperbole was so high it sailed right over your head.
Who is the common denominator in all court disputes over the last 10 years? Yeah that’s right the BITCH. Why don’t you figure out the real story already rather then just praying that the wrong one you heard three days ago is actually a correct interpretation of what happened. Looks like were going to have to start differentiating the term bitch between the old one who should retire for the sake of the Supreme Court and the younger one.
Wow, Pete,
Wow, everyone is now dumber for reading this. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
Yumpin’ yimini, son. Seek therapy, stat.
It sure isn’t surprising that you post anonymously. With that kind of attitude, you sure don’t want women to know your name, much less normal citizens.
I wonder if Pete thinks his mother is a bitch, or his grandmother for that matter.
actually the problems started when WMC bought the seat for the incredibly unqualified and lightweight Mike Gableman.