Who is Tina Peters? Gold Star mother sentenced to prison amid election controversy
On Memorial Day 2025, posts on X trended demanding the release of Tina Peters, a 70-year-old Gold Star mother and former Mesa County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, sentenced to nine years in prison.
Convicted in 2024 for her role in a 2021 election security breach involving voting machine tampering, Peters has become a polarising figure. Supporters, including prominent voices on X, view her as a patriot exposing election fraud, while critics argue she undermined democracy. Her case, now under U.S. Department of Justice review, continues to spark heated debate.
— liz_churchill10 (@liz_churchill10)
Tina Peter's background and role as Mesa County clerk
Tina Peters served as Mesa County Clerk and Recorder from 2019 to 2023.
As a Gold Star mother, having lost her Navy SEAL son, she garnered sympathy from some quarters. Her tenure was marked by controversy when she became embroiled in efforts to challenge the 2020 U.S. presidential election results, aligning with claims of widespread voter fraud. Peters, a Republican, gained attention for her actions in 2021, which led to criminal charges.
Her supporters argue she acted to protect election integrity, while detractors say her actions were illegal and dangerous.
Public reaction and calls for release
The case has divided public opinion. On X, supporters, including figures like Kari Lake, have called Peters a 'patriotic hero' unfairly targeted for exposing alleged election irregularities. Posts trending on Memorial Day 2025 highlighted her as a Gold Star mother, framing her imprisonment as politically motivated 'lawfare.' Conversely, critics, including Colorado officials, argue her actions justified the sentence, accusing her of endangering democracy.
Some Republican leaders have even urged President Trump to withhold federal funding from Colorado to pressure for her release, a move opposed by state authorities.
The 2021 election security breach
In 2021, Peters was accused of orchestrating a data breach by allowing unauthorised access to voting machines in Mesa County. She allegedly facilitated the copying of sensitive election data, which was later leaked online. Prosecutors claimed this was part of an effort to support unproven election fraud theories.
Peters was convicted on charges including attempting to influence a public servant and conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation.
Her actions were condemned by election officials, who argued they eroded public trust in the electoral process, leading to her nine-year sentence in October 2024.
Legal proceedings and sentencing
Peters' trial in Grand Junction, Colorado, drew significant attention. In August 2024, she was found guilty on multiple felony counts.
On October 3, 2024, a judge sentenced her to nine years, criticising her for 'crimes and lies' that compromised election security. Peters has since been transferred to a state prison, with reports of solitary confinement sparking outrage among her supporters. She is currently awaiting a response from the Courts of Appeals on her request for release, while the U.S.
Department of Justice reviews her case for potential abuses of the justice system.
Trump's involvement and DOJ review
In early 2025, former President
Donald Trump
publicly supported Peters, posting on Truth Social to urge the Department of Justice to secure her release. The DOJ, under Republican leadership, began reviewing her case in March 2025, citing concerns over potential prosecutorial overreach. This move has faced resistance from Colorado's deputy attorney general, who called it an unprecedented federal intervention in a state conviction.
The review has fuelled speculation about a possible pardon, with Peters herself expressing hope for negotiations with Trump, whom she met in 2022.
Ongoing controversy and implications
Peters' case remains a flashpoint in debates over election integrity and judicial fairness. Her supporters view her as a martyr for questioning the 2020 election, while opponents see her conviction as a necessary deterrent against election interference. The DOJ's involvement and calls for her release underscore broader tensions between state and federal authorities. As her appeal progresses, the outcome could set precedents for how election-related crimes are handled, particularly in politically charged contexts.
For now, Peters remains a symbol of division, with her fate uncertain as public and political pressures mount.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
‘Kill the Bill': Elon Musk continues bashing Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill', tells people to 'call their Senators, Congressman'
Elon Musk with Donald Trump (File photo) Elon Musk continued his opposition to US President Donald Trump 's tax and spending bill, this time calling to "kill the bill" by urging the public to call their representatives. "Call your Senator, Call your Congressman, Bankrupting America is NOT ok! KILL the BILL," he said in one of his post on X, as he continued his vocal criticism of what US President Donald Trump referred to as his "big, beautiful bill". In a another post, he shared a posted of the movie "Kill Bill". Additionally, he reposted various X posts that raised concerns over rise of national debt and government spending. Earlier, he had shared his own opinion saying, "A new spending bill should be drafted that doesn't massively grow the deficit and increase the debt ceiling by 5 TRILLION DOLLARS." This vocal protest marks Musk's first public disagreement with Trump after his recent exit from the administration last week. He had condemned Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' declaring, "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong." Also read: Elon Musk calls Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' a 'disgusting abomination'; how White House reacted Following this, Musk indicated that the bill would "massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit to $2.5 trillion" whilst stating that "Congress is making America bankrupt." Musk has earlier expressed his disapproval of the bill. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like サントリーロコモアが５,９４０→１,０８０円で試せる ロコモア こちらをクリック Undo In his role as the former chief of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk commented, "I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decreases it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing." He added, "I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful but I don't know if it can be both. My personal opinion." During an interview with CBS News, Musk had maintained his opposition to the matter despite his close and public association with the US President. The legislation faces broad opposition, with Republican fiscal conservatives raising concerns about national insolvency, while independent analysts project the deficit could rise by up to $4 trillion over a decade. Additionally, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) also released its assessment on Wednesday, indicating that the Republican-proposed tax cuts and reductions in federal programmes would likely add $2.4 trillion to America's national debt over the coming decade. Read more: Trump's big bill could raise national debt by $2.4 trillion; 10.9 million to lose health insurance
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Trump administration signals it will slash funds for long-delayed California high-speed rail project
LOS ANGELES — The Trump administration signaled Wednesday that it intends to cut off federal funding for a long-delayed California high-speed rail project plagued by multibillion-dollar cost overruns, following the release of a scathing federal report that concluded there is 'no viable path' to complete even a partial section of the line. Voters first authorized $10 billion in borrowed funds in 2008 to cover about a third of the estimated cost, with a promise the train would be up and running by 2020. Five years beyond that deadline, no tracks have been laid and its estimated price tag has ballooned to over $100 billion. In a letter to the California High-Speed Rail Authority, which oversees the project, Federal Railroad Administration acting Administrator Drew Feeley wrote that what was envisioned as an 800-mile system connecting the state's major cities has been reduced to a blueprint for 'a 119-mile track to nowhere.' After a $4 billion federal investment, the California agency 'has conned the taxpayer ... with no viable plan to deliver even that partial segment on time,' Feeley wrote. State officials defended what's known as the nation's largest infrastructure project and said they remain committed to construction, though it's not clear what funding would replace the federal support if it's withdrawn. Feeley noted the FRA could seek repayment of the federal funds but is not proposing to claw back those dollars at this time. Carol Dahmen, the state authority's chief of strategic communications, said in a statement that the federal conclusions are misguided and 'do not reflect the substantial progress made to deliver high-speed rail in California.' Dahmen noted that the majority of the funding for the line has been provided by the state and that Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's budget proposal would extend at least $1 billion a year for 20 years to complete an initial segment of the line. State officials are focused on a stretch connecting the Central Valley cities of Bakersfield and Merced, which is set to be operating by 2033. The state agency has about a month to formally respond to the FRA, after which the grants could be terminated. State Sen. Tony Strickland, a Republican from Huntington Beach who is vice chair of the Transportation Committee, said that 'commonsense has prevailed" and urged the Legislature's dominant Democrats to redirect the funds from the rail line to lowering gas prices or investing in viable construction projects. 'Let's stop wasting California's hard-earned taxpayer dollars,' Strickland said. There is no known source for the billions of dollars that would be needed to complete the line. California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Ian Choudri suggested in April that private investors could step in and fill the funding gap for the project that promised nonstop rail service between San Francisco and Los Angeles in under three hours. At the time, he acknowledged that even if funding is secured, it might take nearly two more decades to complete most of that segment. President Donald Trump said in May that his administration will not continue to fund the line. 'That train is the worst cost overrun I've ever seen,' Trump told reporters at the time, calling it "totally out of control.' This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Justice Department sues Texas over in-state tuition for students without legal residency
AUSTIN, Texas — The Justice Department on Wednesday sought to block a Texas law that for decades has given college students without legal residency in the U.S. access to reduced in-state tuition rates, Texas was the first state in the nation in 2001 to pass a law allowing 'Dreamers,' or young adults without legal status, to be eligible for in-state tuition if they meet certain residency criteria. Twenty-four states now have similar laws, according to the Higher Ed Immigration Portal, which tracks state policies on immigration and education. The lawsuit filed in Texas federal court asks a judge to block the law, which some state Republican lawmakers have sought to repeal for years. The lawsuit is the latest effort by the Trump administration to crack down on immigration into the country. 'Under federal law, schools cannot provide benefits to illegal aliens that they do not provide to U.S. citizens,' said Attorney General Pam Bondi said. 'The Justice Department will relentlessly fight to vindicate federal law and ensure that U.S. citizens are not treated like second-class citizens anywhere in the country.' Texas has about 57,000 undocumented students enrolled in its public universities and colleges, according to the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a nonpartisan nonprofit group of university leaders focused on immigration policy. The state has about 690,000 students overall at its public universities. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and state Attorney General Ken Paxton, did not immediately comment on the lawsuit and staff did not immediately respond to email messages seeking comment. The Texas law was initially passed by sweeping majorities in the Texas Legislature and signed into law by then-Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, as a way to open access to higher education for undocumented students already living in the state. Supporters of the Texas law argue it boosts the state's economy by creating a better educated and better prepared work force. 'Targeted attacks on Texas students who are seeking an affordable college education, led by the Trump administration, won't help anyone- they only hurt us all,' said Luis Figueroa of Every Texan, a left-leaning public policy group. The difference in tuition rates are substantial. For example, at the flagship University of Texas at Austin, a state resident paid about $11,000 in tuition for the 2024-2025 academic year compared to about $41,000 for students from outside of Texas. The law allows for students without legal resident status to qualify for in-state tuition if they have lived in the state for three years before graduating from high school, and for a year before enrolling in college. They must also sign an affidavit promising to apply for legal resident status as soon as possible. But the policy would soon come under fire from conservatives and critics who called it unfair to legal residents as debates over illegal immigration intensified. In the 2012 Republican presidential primary, Perry ended up apologizing after saying critics of the law 'did not have a heart.' Legislative efforts to repeal the Texas law have repeatedly failed, but have started to gain traction elsewhere. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, earlier this year signed a bill that will repeal Florida's in-state tuition law in July.
