The stats come from the popular vote for those other than the election's winner.  Not all will be devastated, but by definition they would be displeased if their preferred choice did not win.

Not defending the judge at all.  It was bad judgment by the judge, full stop, period.  I support holding him accountable for his mistake.

What I do question is the over-the-top choice of words by the prosecutor.  She didn't refer to Trump's speeches after he was elected.  She was referring to the election result itself as a source of "devastation".   The bar for that term is set really low if an election result in a foreign country can trigger it.

Come to think of it, that's the appropriate word:  "triggered".  Is it a sign of mental illness when people can be "triggered" into highly emotional states so easily?  Seems it could be symptomatic of neurosis to me.