LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – The criminal cases against 15 Michigan Republicans who allegedly falsely claimed Donald Trump won the 2020 election, are facing significant challenges, with prosecutors struggling to present compelling evidence to support their high-profile charges.

These developments suggest that, what appears to many to be a partisan-driven case by Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel, may be falling apart and not even proceed to trial.

Democratic AG’s office struggling to prove fraudulent intentions.

MORE NEWS: DNR’s Stuff a Truck Holiday Toy Collections Start Saturday

Over the many days of preliminary examinations in Ingham County District Court, Nessel’s office has reportedly struggled to provide concrete evidence that the GOP electors had fraudulent intentions when they signed a document on December 14, 2020, falsely asserting Trump’s victory.

Key witness James Renner, a Republican elector who cooperated with the prosecution, testified that he believed the process to be a “legitimate” process at the time of signing.

The case is “wishful thinking” according to defendant’s attorney.

For the charges to hold, prosecutors must demonstrate that the defendants intended to defraud. Defense lawyer John Freeman, representing elector Marian Sheridan, criticized the prosecution’s efforts as politically motivated and lacking evidence. “It’s all wishful thinking,” Freeman said. “It’s a politically motivated witch hunt that has no basis in the evidence.”

Prosecutors argue that the false certificate, social media posts from the electors, and efforts to submit the document to the Michigan Legislature and U.S. Congress all indicate a scheme to disrupt the election. Kim Bush, a spokeswoman for Nessel, maintains that they will continue to present their case and await the court’s ruling on probable cause for each of the 15 defendants.

Judge questions credibility of AG’s lead investigator.

However, during the most recent hearings, Judge Kristen Simmons, who is a Governor Whitmer appointee, has repeatedly questioned the credibility of Nessel’s lead investigator, Howard Shock. On multiple occasions, Simmons expressed skepticism about Shock’s testimony, particularly his claim that the electors aimed to “pause” the electoral process. Simmons challenged this notion, asking, “How is it that citizens taking efforts to cause their legislators to pause a process (is) a crime?”

Simmons noted Shock’s poor presentation during one of the hearings, highlighting his reliance on notes and lack of detail recollection. Such doubts from the judge cast a shadow over the prosecution’s ability to meet the probable cause standard necessary for the case to proceed to trial.

Judge: “We’re not getting a great presentation.”

MORE NEWS: AAA Launches ‘Tow to Go’ for Thanksgiving Weekend

Simmons said, “I think it’s glaring that we have a concern in this courtroom about the investigation and his ability to put forth information from that investigation…We’re not getting a great presentation.” She later added, “If you’re not presenting your investigation well, we need to understand what

happened during this investigation that brought us to this point that you can’t even tell us or remember half of the things you claimed you discovered in your investigation.”

What are defendants charged with?

The defendants, including notable figures like Meshawn Maddock, past co-chairwoman of the Michigan Republican Party, and Kathy Berden, a former Michigan Republican national committeewoman, face eight felonies each. Those charges include two for forgery and one count of conspiracy to commit forgery. They were charged by AG Nessel on July 18, 2023.

Defense attorneys argue their clients acted under the direction of Trump campaign lawyers, believing their actions were necessary if court rulings overturned the election results. No charges have been filed against Trump campaign lawyers in Michigan, unlike in other states.

David Kallman, defending elector Hank Choate, emphasized the lack of evidence proving Choate saw the false certificate, highlighting another gap in the prosecution’s case. The defense has effectively leveraged these weaknesses, presenting a formidable challenge to Nessel’s team.

Simmons will ultimately decide if the Attorney General’s office has established probable cause, a lower standard than proving guilt at trial. If Simmons rules against the prosecution, it would be a significant setback for Nessel, highlighting the case’s fragility.

AG going after senior citizens in what is seen by many as a “partisan” case.

Also fragile are many of the defendants, six of whom are in their 70s and two are in their 80s.

The preliminary exams for twelve of the 16 Republicans have concluded with the exams for three other Republicans expected to occur at a later time. Renner from Lansing, the 16th Republican, as stated earlier entered a cooperation agreement with the Attorney General’s office, leading to the dismissal of his charges.