Tina Peters’ mugshot for her arrest on 3/9/2022. She was sentenced to 9 years incarceration on charges related to election tampering and is currently trying to get Trump to help her get out of prison. He can’t pardon her because she was convicted on state, and not federal charges.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), now a tool that convicted felon, sexual abuser and President Trump wields to help his friends and punish his enemies, has agreed to review former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters’ 2024 criminal conviction which led to her incarceration. The DOJ will be looking for “political bias” in her case.
It is a remarkable turn of events considering it is a state, and not a federal case that took place in a Republican-dominated county, under three Republican County Commissioners and was prosecuted by a Republican District Attorney.
Tina is currently serving a 9 year sentence on her conviction on multiple charges related to tampering with election equipment.
The Acting Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ’s Civil Division, Yaakov M. Roth, filed a brief (pdf) on Monday, March 3, 2025, called a “Statement of Interest” in Tina’s case, which states,
“Ms. Peters is currently incarcerated while pursuing a direct appeal of her underlying nonviolent convictions and combined nine-year sentence. The Application explains that Ms. Peters suffers from serious health issues and that, while incarcerated, her physical and mental health have deteriorated. Reasonable concerns have been raised about various aspects of Ms. Peters’ case. These concerns relate to, among other things, the exceptionally lengthy sentence imposed relative to the conduct at issue, the First Amendment implications of the trial court’s October 2024 assertions relating to Ms. Peters, and whether Colorado’s denial of bail pending appeal was arbitrary or unreasonable under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments such that § 2254 relief is appropriate. Accordingly, the United States respectfully submits that the concerns raised in the Application warrant — at the very least — prompt and careful consideration by this Court (and, at the appropriate time, the Colorado appellate courts). Parallel to these proceedings and Ms. Peters’ direct appeal, the Department of Justice is reviewing cases across the nation for abuses of the criminal justice process. See Attorney General Memorandum, Restoring the Integrity and Credibility of The Department of Justice (February 5, 2025). This review will include an evaluation of the State of Colorado’s prosecution of Ms. Peters and, in particular, whether the case was “oriented more toward inflicting political pain than toward pursuing actual justice or legitimate governmental objectives.” Executive Order 14147, Ending the Weaponization of The Federal Government (Jan. 20, 2025).
D.A. Dan Rubinstein (L) prosecuted the case against Tina Peters
At her trial Tina told the judge she couldn’t go to prison because she needs to sleep on a magnetic mattress due to fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue as a result of past injuries. She also said she had had surgery for lung cancer in 2016. At the trial, she displayed a letter from her physician, Dr. Scott Eric Rollins, a family doctor in Grand Junction, in which he vouched for her health conditions.
In January, 2023, Scott Rollins was disciplined by the Colorado Medical Board for unprofessional conduct (pdf) after he prescribed ivermectin for three patients for Covid-19. Ivermectin is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use on humans to treat or prevent Covid-19. It is an anti-parasitic medication used primarily in animals, and only occasionally used in humans to treat conditions like head lice. It is not used to treat viruses. Rollins failed to properly inform his patients about the risks of using ivermectin in this non-approved manner. Rollins also failed to discuss approved Covid-19 treatments with his patients. He was threatened with having his medical license put on probation if he did not comply with the terms laid out by the Medical Board (pdf) to get his license back.
Gosh, Anne, you are such a insufferable person…going after her doctor???
From what I read before, this is a potential federal case because Peters was trying to comply with federal rules and regs which apply to elections.
Everything about Peters’ case was wrong. I am so thankful this will get another look. I hope Barrett, Rubenstein and Shapiro are feeling very sick tonight.
Jena Griswold, too.
Funny, I watched the Tina Peters trial and I don’t remember anything about her trying to comply with “Federal rules and regs” which apply to elections. Since states have the right to run elections as they see fit, I’d like to see some evidence of such rules and regs. Perhaps the defense should have brought this up at the trial instead of trying to justify what she did by making wild assertions about fraud.
Maybe she should have hired you as her defense attorney. You seem to have it all figured out.
Just when I was thinking you were one of the reasonable ones, bad hat.
BadHarry, there’s dumb and then there’s extra dumb. Sadly, your thinking and reasoning falls into the second category. We learned in nursing school that fibromyalgia is pretty much code for hypochondriac. Tina Peters fits this description perfectly. A magnetic bed? What a snowflake! She’s just like Captain bone spurs a.k.a. felon 47, always on to the next con. And you, BadHarry, know this deep down, but your love of trying to own the libs prevents you from sound and critical thinking. You’re a true Maggot!
This will waste a couple of million $$, seems like doge’s muskrats would be all over this.