In early March, Donald Trump’s Justice Department raised eyebrows with an unexpected move: The DOJ’s civil division unexpectedly filed a brief in federal court, raising “concerns” about the criminal conviction of a former Colorado county clerk named Tina Peters.
The effort didn’t amount to much, but the president’s interest in the case didn’t fade. And in May, the Republican not only called for Peters’ release from prison, he also directed the Justice Department to take “all necessary action” to help secure her freedom. As part of the same online harangue, Trump, who lacks the authority to pardon those convicted of state crimes, went on to describe Peters as a “Political Prisoner” and a “hostage” whose trial deserved to be seen as “a Communist persecution.”
This, too, went largely ignored, prompting the president to kick things up a notch. NBC News reported:
Trump threatened to take unspecified ‘harsh measures’ if Tina Peters, a former Colorado county clerk who promoted conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, is not released from prison. The president referred to Peters as ‘a brave and innocent Patriot who has been tortured by Crooked Colorado politicians,’ calling to ‘FREE TINA PETERS.’
I appreciate the fact that Trump’s online tantrums tend to generate widespread eye-rolling, but it’s worth taking a moment to consider the broader significance of his message: An American president publicly threatened to impose “harsh measures” unless an American state releases a convicted felon the president likes.
If there’s precedent for this, I’m not aware of it.
In the same rant, Trump insisted that Peters is “innocent” and “did nothing wrong.”
Reality tells a very different story. In case anyone needs a refresher, Peters was a county clerk in Colorado who eagerly embraced Trump’s lies and conspiracy theories about his 2020 election defeat, but that’s not all she did. Peters also acted on those lies and conspiracy theories, using someone’s security badge to allow a Mike Lindell associate to access county election equipment.
The apparent point of the endeavor was to leak election machinery data in pursuit of a conspiratorial plot that never existed in reality.
Not surprisingly, Peters was caught and indicted. She pleaded not guilty, but after she and her attorney struggled to present a compelling defense, a Colorado jury convicted Peters, finding her guilty of three counts of attempting to influence a public servant, one count of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty and failing to comply with the secretary of state.
Ahead of sentencing, Peters showed no remorse. A judge ultimately sentenced her to nine years behind bars.








