By MICHAEL SLOVANOS
AMERICA has truly fallen when a county official is jailed for nine years for disobeying an illegal order from a superior, in this case from the Secretary of State for Colorado Jena Griswold, a recipient of Soros Foundation donations.
The case of Mesa County clerk Tina Peters is a shocking example of the political show trial that has come to America, most notably in the multiple “sexed up” litigations by Democrat operatives against Donald Trump.
Peters’ trial, parts of which are on social media, reveal the pompous, hypocritical and vindictive lecture given by the judge Matthew Barrett that should make the blood of any half decent person boil. That Peters sat silently, enduring the tirade from a brazenly partisan Barrett, is testament to her courage and character.
As noted by former prosecutor and law professor David Clements, the judge, as operatives are prone to do in Democrat-run show trials, “refused nearly all of her witnesses and excluded virtually all of her defenses”.
The judge rejected Peters’ mitigating circumstances – no criminal record, a deceased husband and son who died in military service – defaming her as “a woman of privilege” who merely “sought fame” by allegedly abusing her position of trust.
Peters put herself offside with Griswold’s Democrat administration after the 2020 US presidential election when, in her role as Mesa County Clerk she began to question discrepancies in vote counts. This was when, according to prosecutors, Peters’ alleged criminal career began.
Griswold simply refused to address the issues raised by Peters. Colorado residents had told Peters that “something didn’t’ seem right” in local city elections and later in the 2020 election. She promised to do something about it if some evidence was found.
Peters had good reason to be suspicious. In May 2023 Judicial Watch settled a lawsuit with Griswold’s office following a 2020 US District Court case alleging Griswold violated the National Voter Registration Act by failing to remove tens of thousands of ineligible voters from the state’s rolls, which led to artificially high registration rates in many counties.
Griswold’s administration also “accidentally” mailed voter registration notices to some 30,000 non-citizens living in the state in late 2021, notifying them on how they could register to vote. The notices allegedly didn’t result in any non-citizens voting.
And then there was the case recently won by the Public Interest Legal Foundation against Griswold. The US District Court issued an order requiring Griswold to disclose Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) data reports concerning potentially deceased registrants on the state’s voter roll.
But none of this was even considered as exculpatory evidence by Judge Barrett, who simply refused to hear it and proceeded, as CNN so gleefully put it, to “excoriate a Colorado county clerk for her crimes and lies”.
“I am convinced you would do it all over again if you could. You’re as defiant as any defendant this court has ever seen,” Barrett told Peters. “You are no hero. You abused your position and you’re a charlatan.” The comments were far from objective.
Peters, a Republican, became even more of a thorn in the Griswald’s Democrat administration when she spoke at an election corruption symposium staged by activist and businessman Mike Lindell.
Peters’ alleged crimes stemmed from the fact that she lawfully made a copy of her machines’ access, audit and adjudication files before performing Griswald’s order that after the 2020 election, all voting machine election data should be erased, which is against the election rules.
The rules required the preservation of access logs in order to show who went in and out of the system, what they did and what functions they performed. “So these, the access, the audit and adjudication files were totally deleted, wiped out,” Peter’s told two interviewers.
She was also accused of making election machine passwords available on the internet. Peters maintains she had nothing to do with that crime and said she was being targeted for documenting election fraud in her county.
“We have a secretary of state that is drunk with power. She makes emergency decrees and when we query her – she refuses to answer in violation of the state law,” she told the crowd during Mike Lindell’s symposium.
“When I started having citizens come to me and tell me that something didn’t’ seem right in our local city elections from years ago to our 2020 election I said if there is a there we will do something about it. I am a Republican — I am a conservative and she’s not and she weaponizes her position to attack people who disagree with her.
“I’ve been persecuted. They are trying to take over our election office. We are the last bastion of freedom in Colorado,” the Mesa County. “We have listened to people. They send me things from all over and there are some discrepancies there that I cannot deny or unsee.”
Peters’ office was raided by the FBI in November 2021 after she decided to not allow the Democrat partisans to wipe clean the election data from her county’s machines. She received numerous death threats for saving the data.
And then thugs from the FBI raided her home at 6 am one morning and accused her of committing a crime. They also raided the homes of her friends, mostly older women. They used a battering ram to break down the door of one of her friends.
“Essentially, they were soldiers in combat gear. They were not men in suits with badges,” Peters said on Lindell’s channel. “They looked very much like they were in a combat zone — soldiers with automatic weapons and combat gear.”
Last week Peters was convicted on three counts of attempting to influence a public servant and one count of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation. Additionally, she faced convictions for first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty, and failure to comply with an order from the Secretary of State—each a misdemeanor, according to CPR News.
The jury found Peters not guilty on three charges: criminal impersonation, conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, and identity theft.
Peters’ defence team argued that her actions were within her authority as she sought to preserve what she believed were critical election records. Defense attorney John Case contended that there was no wrongdoing in copying hard drives, claiming that state officials intended to erase vital information during their updates.
