We know that Democrat politicians and judges can be vicious and corrupt, but with regard to Tina Peters, they outdid themselves.

 Tina Peters, a former election official from Mesa County, Colorado, has been in prison since October 2024 after being sentenced to nine years for her actions regarding the 2020 election. This summary outlines the key events surrounding her case, focusing on the charges against her, her findings related to the elections, and the reactions of the courts and officials involved.

1. Background of the Case:

• Peters was the top election official during the 2020 election and was sentenced for exposing issues within that election.

• She uncovered errors in Mesa County's election database, which led to serious charges against her.

2. Charges Against Peters:

• Peters was charged with multiple felonies and misdemeanors for making a copy of the election database and sharing it with data experts, who later revealed significant anomalies in election records.

• Despite these actions revealing problems in the election process, the state accused her rather than acknowledging her findings.

3. Details of the Findings:

• An 87-page report showed that election data had been improperly altered, with thousands of ballots unaccounted for or mismanaged.

• This evidence demonstrated that over 25% of the county's election results could not be verified.

4. Court Proceedings and Sentencing:

• Throughout her trial, the presiding Judge Matthew Barrett showed bias against Peters, labeling her a "charlatan" and dismissing her claims about election integrity.

• Peters received a lengthy prison sentence immediately after her conviction, with no chance for appeal.

5. Appeals and Judge Bias:

• Peters's legal team has appealed the conviction, raising questions about serious procedural errors made during the trial.

• Panel judges at the Colorado Court of Appeals expressed skepticism regarding the validity of the charges and the sentencing, particularly concerning the judge's apparent bias linked to Peters's views on election security.

6. Reactions to Peters's Actions:

• State officials and the District Attorney took aggressive actions against Peters, including armed raids on her home and threats against her safety.

• Instead of being thanked for uncovering election vulnerabilities, Peters faced criminal charges and public backlash.

The case of Tina Peters highlights significant tensions surrounding election integrity discussions in America. While she has been punished for her actions related to election data, the larger issues of election anomalies she uncovered remain unaddressed. The Colorado Court of Appeals is currently reconsidering her case, which may lead to a reduction of her sentence. Nonetheless, the fundamental problems with election transparency highlighted by Peters continue to provoke debate among officials and voters alike. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/01/tina_peters_free_at_last.html

Samuel E. Burns’ Free Tina Peters is a passionate and provocative anthem that captures the struggle for truth, justice, and the defiance of authority. Written with urgency and directness, the song dives into the controversial case of Tina Peters, a public official caught in a contentious legal battle, and uses her story as a vehicle to address broader themes of accountability and transparency in systems of power.

https://rumble.com/v744xro-free-tina-peters-lyrics-by-samuel-e-burns.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp_a