The Secretary of State’s comments on this case are both sad and hilarious, given her own allegations of election tampering. Tina Peters, 69, a former Mesa County clerk, was sentenced to nine years in prison for granting unauthorized access to election systems. Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold maintains that Peters jeopardized electoral trust by spreading false information. In August 2024, Griswold was the subject of election interference allegations.
Trump Calls for Immediate Release
President Donald Trump has thrust the case of Tina Peters back into the national spotlight by demanding her immediate release from prison. Peters, a 69-year-old former Mesa County clerk in Colorado, is currently serving a nine-year sentence at La Vista Correctional Facility after being convicted on charges related to election system security breaches. Trump’s statements on social media have reignited debate about Peters’ conviction and the severity of her sentence.
In a strongly worded post, Trump wrote, “FREE TINA PETERS, NOW!” and criticized Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser for what he characterized as selective prosecution. Trump has portrayed Peters as a victim of political persecution, suggesting her actions were aimed at exposing alleged election irregularities rather than compromising election security. Peters’ supporters have rallied around this narrative, lobbying Governor Jared Polis for clemency.
Tina Peters bravely preserved the data about the stolen 2020 election and got locked up for it.
It's amazing to see President Trump stepping in to free her.
Free Tina and Ban The Voting Machines.
pic.twitter.com/LO99Grma3G— George (@BehizyTweets) May 6, 2025
The Case Against Peters
Peters was convicted of multiple charges, including attempting to influence a public official and official misconduct. Prosecutors established that she allowed unauthorized access to Mesa County’s election system in 2021, resulting in leaked sensitive election data. During her sentencing, Judge Matthew Barrett cited Peters’ lack of remorse and described her as seeking notoriety rather than serving the public interest.
Colorado officials, including Secretary of State Jena Griswold, have defended the prosecution, emphasizing that state audits confirmed the accuracy of Colorado’s 2020 election results. They contend that Peters’ actions represented a serious breach of election security protocols, not a legitimate investigation into fraud. The case has become emblematic of broader conflicts regarding election security and claims of election fraud.
President Trump just instructed the DOJ to Free Tina Peters. She tried to blow the whistle on election fraud that she witnessed in Colorado.
The judge insulted her, berated her, told her she had white “privilege” and then gave her 9 years in prison!
These are the kinds of… pic.twitter.com/HMaTIsS5HG
— David J Harris Jr (@DavidJHarrisJr) May 6, 2025
Questions of Proportional Justice
Critics of Peters’ sentence point to what they see as a disparity in how election-related cases are handled in Colorado. Trump highlighted this perceived inconsistency, noting that a man convicted of actual voter fraud in Colorado received a significantly lighter sentence than Peters. This comparison has fueled arguments that Peters’ punishment may be politically motivated rather than proportionate to her actions.
“Radical Left Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser ignores illegals committing violent crimes like rape and murder in his state and, instead, jailed Tina Peters, a 69-year-old Gold Star mother who worked to expose and document Democrat election fraud.” – Donald Trump
The Department of Justice has filed a court brief that could potentially benefit Peters’ case, though Colorado state attorneys have requested its dismissal. This federal intervention adds another layer to the already complex legal situation. While Trump has called for DOJ intervention, the case remains primarily under state jurisdiction, raising questions about the limits of federal authority in state prosecutions.
Broader Implications for Election Integrity
The Peters case has become a flashpoint in ongoing national debates about election security, voter fraud allegations, and the politicization of election administration. After the 2020 election, Peters emerged as a prominent figure in movements questioning election results. Her supporters view her as someone willing to risk her career to investigate potential issues, while detractors see her actions as dangerously undermining public confidence in elections without evidence.
Colorado’s political landscape has shifted toward liberalism in recent years, adding context to the tensions surrounding the case. The state’s changing demographics and voting patterns have transformed it from a battleground state to one that leans Democratic. This political environment forms the backdrop against which the Peters case has unfolded, with both sides viewing it through distinctly partisan lenses.