Althouse: "A Michigan judge dismissed criminal charges Tuesday against a group of people who were accused of attempting to falsely certifying President Donald Trump as the winner of the 2020 election..."

September 9, 2025

"A Michigan judge dismissed criminal charges Tuesday against a group of people who were accused of attempting to falsely certifying President Donald Trump as the winner of the 2020 election..."

"... in the battleground state, a major blow to prosecutors as similar cases in four other states have been muddied with setbacks. District Court Judge Kristen D. Simmons... said she saw no intent to commit fraud in the defendants’ actions. Whether they were 'right, wrong or indifferent,' they 'seriously believed' there were problems with the election, the judge said. 'I believe they were executing their constitutional right to seek redress,' Simmons said."

AP reports.

45 comments:

Ampersand said...: These prosecutions were and are disgraceful.; 9/9/25, 11:26 AM
Leland said...: Indeed; 9/9/25, 11:27 AM
mccullough said...: Now investigate Dana Nessel; 9/9/25, 11:31 AM
Enigma said...: A good judge for once. This was obvious from day one. TDS had teeth back then.; 9/9/25, 11:33 AM
rhhardin said...: So not an insurrection, then.; 9/9/25, 11:33 AM
john mosby said...: "attempting to falsely certifying"

The Editors' Union needs to investigate the AP for impersonating a news service. RR, JSM; 9/9/25, 11:33 AM
Readering said...: Constitutiomal right to speedy trial?; 9/9/25, 11:34 AM
Peachy said...: No no no!! Throw them in the Soviet -Democratic gulag!
I want my Democracy! Now!

/asshole off.; 9/9/25, 11:35 AM
Howard said...: I thought judges have too much power?; 9/9/25, 11:45 AM
Peachy said...: btw- Anyone Care to take a look at the "Trump Card" and explain why the boobs are now smaller?

Thanks to MB; 9/9/25, 11:46 AM
Peachy said...: Link to the first version of the Democratic Boobs; 9/9/25, 11:47 AM
Iman said...: A fair-minded district court judge. Who knew!!!; 9/9/25, 11:47 AM
Iman said...: Don’t forget to tip your waitress, Howie!; 9/9/25, 11:48 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Ah the old "illegal electors" case where every lefty on here said it was a crime and every normy pointed out this is the ordinary established process when votes are in dispute. The wheels of justice move so slowly. None of them will come by to own up to it. They will keep defending the indefensible.

So there's no "It's (D)ifferent when we do it" tag?; 9/9/25, 11:49 AM
rehajm said...: …the indulgences aren’t ending well lately…; 9/9/25, 11:50 AM
Ampersand said...: Howard said:
"I thought judges have too much power?"

You miss the point. The judge's exercise of power was necessitated by a corrupt prosecution. Nobody disputes the power of judges to dismiss meritless claims that were brought to punish the legitimate exercise of political freedoms.

'; 9/9/25, 11:51 AM
Meade said...: Here’s hoping a similar outcome occurs in the Wisconsin case:
https://wisconsinexaminer.com/briefs/dane-co-judge-refuses-to-dismiss-case-against-fake-trump-electors/
Disgraceful illiberal undemocratic law-faring Democrats.
https://ballotpedia.org/Jim_Troupis; 9/9/25, 11:51 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: I thought judges have too much power?

No you thought wrong. Judges that rule on cases beyond their jurisdiction appropriate too much power for themselves when they exceed those constitutional bounds. In actuality judges have exactly the power the Constitution assigns them. They just THINK they are or should be more powerful, which is why they (leftists are the problem) keep losing to Trump in higher courts.; 9/9/25, 11:53 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Looks like Meade has identified two conflicting rulings whish means...; 9/9/25, 11:54 AM
Original Mike said...: Ampersand said..."These prosecutions were and are disgraceful."

It's intimidation. Don't you ever question our apparent electoral victories.; 9/9/25, 12:07 PM
J Severs said...: Criminal charges for writing and releasing ""attempting to falsely certifying" are still under investigation.; 9/9/25, 12:10 PM
n.n said...: Be prepared is criminally offensive. Self-defense, too. A clear and progressive pattern of civil rights violations.; 9/9/25, 12:18 PM
Achilles said...: Democrats are going to look back at 2020 and regret stealing the election and installing Joe Biden for decades.

We would probably have a Democrat president right now having just finished a scandal plagued Trump administration.

Instead traitors like Pence and the rest of the GOPe burned their agents and participated in a coup.

Now we have a completely new Trump administration without Pence. Sometimes people get what they deserve.; 9/9/25, 12:27 PM
Achilles said...: Howard said...
I thought judges have too much power?

The Supreme Court certainly does.; 9/9/25, 12:30 PM
Mr. T. said...: Thank you Judge Captain Obvious.; 9/9/25, 12:39 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Interesting how the same local DAs that put a revolving door in for rapists and carjackers suddenly start charging like mad if it appears to help GetTrump (TM).; 9/9/25, 12:39 PM
rehajm said...: …I always keep in mind they expected to have their people on the Supremes backstopping all this shit. It makes sense why they were so traumatized over Hillary! that night. It was more than losing the election they’d lost all of their grander plan. Gone..:; 9/9/25, 12:43 PM
ccscientist said...: People forget that there were videos of ballot dumps, stations closing early and opening the next morning with a huge gain by biden, and a record number of dem votes compared to recent years. So there was REASON for suspicion.; 9/9/25, 1:40 PM
bagoh20 said...: Pretty straight forward case of intimidation by your government.; 9/9/25, 1:45 PM
bagoh20 said...: "I thought judges have too much power?"
This one stayed in her lane, in her jurisdiction, within the law, and within the facts. She made no attempt to usurp Presidential power, and she's a Democrat. The climate has changed. The nuts are losing the reasonable crowd.; 9/9/25, 1:51 PM
bagoh20 said...: It's supposed to be extremely hard for the government to win a case like this. The same goes for those pursuing Trump, but venue is more important now than law or facts.; 9/9/25, 1:54 PM
Original Mike said...: "and she's a Democrat."

Yeah, I was pretty surprised at that.
Good for her.; 9/9/25, 1:57 PM
BG said...: Peachy, the signature also differs.; 9/9/25, 2:01 PM
FormerLawClerk said...: Ampersand wrote: "These prosecutions were and are disgraceful."

The Supreme Court created a Star Chamber, sweetie. Our entire judicial system is fake. Nobody knows what goes on there. All that court's deliberations and decisions are completely secret.

You don't live in the country that you think you do.; 9/9/25, 2:07 PM
rehajm said...: People forget

…they choose to forget, or choose to not acknowledge or choose to ‘I’m not going to help your side’…; 9/9/25, 2:19 PM
Jim at said...: People forget that there were videos of ballot dumps, stations closing early and opening the next morning with a huge gain by biden...

Forget? I've been told on this board (by a certain asshole who's been banned repeatedly) that none of those things happened.

Debunked, even.; 9/9/25, 2:36 PM
Bob B said...: This is a Michigan state judge appointed by left-wing governor Whitmer.; 9/9/25, 2:38 PM
Tarrou said...: Lets add these numbers to the J6 and "kidnapping" entrapment numbers of political prisoners I won't give a fuck about if the Republicans ever get in on this game.; 9/9/25, 2:49 PM
Quaestor said...: "Criminal charges for writing and releasing 'attempting to falsely certifying' are still under investigation."

The penalty is official Semi-Literate Moron status. And there's no commuting that sentence.; 9/9/25, 3:02 PM
john mosby said...: Quaestor: "The penalty is official Semi-Literate Moron status."

If they actually were semi-literate morons, I could forgive their best attempt at intelligibility. But errors like "attempting to falsely certifying" come from negligence - trying the sentence one way, halfway changing it to another way, and never noticing that you didn't make everything agree with the change. Negligence by people with degrees on the wall and paychecks taken from subscribers and advertisers who think they're buying a quality product.

No, they deserve the Chinese 1-yuan solution, with the bill sent to their next of kin. RR-JSM; 9/9/25, 3:11 PM
Jaq said...: Judges can have all the power they want to dismiss utterly unfounded charges,; 9/9/25, 3:35 PM
G. Poulin said...: An honest Democratic judge. Quick! Put her on the Endangered Species List.; 9/9/25, 4:31 PM
lonejustice said...: The most interesting fact to me is that they definitely were fake electors, something the Court does not deny, but they never had the intent to be fake electors, so they should not be prosecuted. I was a criminal prosecutor for 20 years, and in all of my career it was always up to the jury to determine criminal intent, not a Judge.; 9/9/25, 4:32 PM
Hassayamper said...: These were not "fake" electors, they were alternate electors, as the Democrats themselves nominated in the narrow election of 1960 in Hawaii.

Anyone can propose a slate of electors, and it is up to the Secretary of State to certify the winning slate after the election, unless there is a lawsuit disputing the result, in which case the court will direct the appointment of the valid electors.

The Democrats are working hard to make disputing the results of Democrat-won elections a crime, even when there are obvious statistical anomalies and other evidence of fraud or error. This shows just how much all their sanctimonious bleating about "our democracy" really means to them.; 9/9/25, 4:39 PM
Jaq said...: Bush v Gore turned out opinions that in the case of disputes, the state legislatures had the final authority, that’s thing one.

Thing two is that the Congress only passed the law making questions about elections illegal *after* the election, which hasn’t been tested, but which does raise doubts about exactly how illegal sending a second slate of electors actually was, you know, since there is historical precedent.

Thing three is why were the charges against Hillary dropped on the basis that no jury would convict her?

It almost makes me doubt your claim, but then again, there are plenty of nakedly partisan prosecutors.; 9/9/25, 5:40 PM