This probably violates the rule about giving sufficient time before commenting or forming a conclusion, but the Tina Peters travesty is something I have been watching since the day she was unjustly convicted. I have been waiting patiently while an old woman who did nothing wrong wasted away in a miserable confinement, with nobody doing anything until Trump pardoned her, and there she is, still in prison. I’ve done enough silent waiting. My trust is being tested in a way that breaks my heart.
This is a big deal, not just in terms of the injustice it represents, but because of the perception it will likely create of the President and his administration not being able (or perhaps not willing) to enforce his lawful domestic orders. I think I can pretty confidently say that no amount of gung-ho Venezuelan drug-boat sinking or well-deserved Euro-tyrant power-slapping is going to help the President’s image if Tina Peters dies mysteriously in prison. That will become a stain on the back of the President’s pants that no amount of MAGA-strength multi-generational Tide will wash away because she is a central iconic figure in this whole stolen 2020 election mess, possibly the central iconic figure, and what’s been done to her is every bit as cruel and outrageous as what the Democrats did to the J6ers.
I believe, with all due respect, that the President needs to stomp his foot down and put an end to this wonton rebellion from Colorado officials. Don’t let it drag out another minute. There is no secret about the reason Tina Peters is in prison. Corrupt officials in Colorado needed to shut her up and make an example of her so others in their state would be afraid to tell on them, even though all their dirty secrets are already out in the open, and everybody knows what they did. Now they’re trying to use this to make Trump and his administration look like wimpy fools, as if there is no difference after all between them and the dynastic rich Republicans and treasonous RINOs in congress who do nothing but hold endless hearings, pretending they mean to get to the bottom of things while doing everything they can to preserve the sweet lucrative uniparty deal they have with the Democrats: “Say whatever you want to look patriotic and righteous as long as you don’t do anything to hinder our leftist domestic agenda. In exchange we won’t do anything meaningful to stop your foreign wars and insurrections, your forever conflicts based on ancient grudges, or your NGO coups that depose elected leaders in favor of dictators whom you think are better for democracy.”
Now the Colorado political machine will use tortured legal reasoning try to run out the clock, which means keeping Tina Peters in prison and suffering in ill health until she dies, or make her die quicker by the hand of a bribed fellow inmate or corrupt psychotic prison guard. It’s all deliberate, and I wouldn’t be opposed to the President deliberately sending in the military to surround the prison to get her out with extreme prejudice, and then arrest the prison officials who are defying presidential authority. Guantanamo for them. Federalize the prison if you have to, just do SOMETHING with some TEETH.
Having said that, I do trust President Trump. I understand there are timing issues to these things and that the president is committed to doing everything lawfully, but time is running out, law no longer exists as anything but tyrannical oppression in Colorado. If Pam Bondi doesn’t start arresting somebody of note (and not cosmetically slapping the hands of one or two less well-known offenders just to please the voting base), it’s going to erode all the trust and goodwill the President has built up in his supporters from being the only president in living memory who actually kept his promises. Perhaps it’s not fair that things can work out like that, particularly in light of the sheer volume of stunning things Trump has already accomplished, but they often do, and it’s probably going to happen in this case if it isn’t soon brought to a just resolution. People are paying attention to this, Mr. President. Find a way, and find it quickly.
One caveat: If I’m wrong, if tomorrow the President and his administration reveal a brilliant plan to get Tina Peters out of prison by Wednesday, I’ll apologize without feeling bad about my outrage over law-abiding American citizens being put in prison by vindictive soulless Democrats and kept there because distracted soulless Republicans will do nothing.
Agreed.
At what point in time does failure to prosecute and arrest evil doers become treason itself?
It seems like it is past that time IMHO.
Put her Witness Protection as a material witness to a federal crime.
And then what? I mean, let's pretend that this was even something they could legally do without having to actually prove to courts of law that she needed to be in witness protection.
I keep seeing people float this idea that they can just “put Tina Peters into witness protection” and she’ll be out there somewhere living quietly, safe and free, like it’s some kind of alternative to a pardon.
That’s not how any of this works. At all.
Witness protection is not a get-out-of-jail card. It does not pause a sentence, erase a conviction, or magically override a state court judgment. If someone is still serving time, they are still serving time. Period.
If Tina Peters were somehow designated a federal witness right now, one of two things would happen:
She stays incarcerated (maybe in a different facility or protective custody), or
She gets temporarily transported to testify and then goes straight back to prison.
That’s it. There is no third option where she’s relocated to a house somewhere, living freely for years while Colorado just shrugs and lets it go. That scenario does not exist in U.S. law.
For her to be “living her best life” anywhere, her state sentence has to be lawfully altered first — overturned on appeal, commuted or pardoned by the Colorado governor, paroled under Colorado law, or fully served. Only after that could witness protection even come into play.
Witness protection is about relocation after lawful release, not hiding sentenced inmates from state authority. If the feds tried to quietly remove a state prisoner and keep her free while her sentence was still active, it would be shut down immediately by the courts. That would be a constitutional train wreck.
I get why people want this to be a thing. It feels like an easy workaround when a presidential pardon isn’t legally available. But inventing Hollywood solutions doesn’t change reality — it just sets people up for disappointment and keeps bad legal ideas circulating.
There are real, valid avenues to help her. This just isn’t one of them.
There is precedent for this. Felons have been pulled from state prisons and put in WP while US Attorneys pursued Mafia related RICO charges. I have to do some digging to cite a case, but I’m sure, given some time, I would find one.
People keep bringing up Mafia/RICO cases as if that proves something magical here, but that’s not what actually happened in those situations.
Yes, inmates have been temporarily pulled from state custody to cooperate or testify in federal cases. That part is real. What didn’t happen is them being whisked away into witness protection to live free while their sentence just…vanished.
In those cases, they were interviewed, sometimes testified, and then sent right back to prison to finish their sentence. Any benefit came later, through formal sentence reductions, plea deals, or clemency — after charges, after prosecutions, after courts were involved. Witness protection does not replace a conviction or pause a sentence.
And the biggest missing piece here: those cases had actual federal indictments. Named defendants. Active RICO prosecutions. DOJ filings. Court dockets. None of that exists here. There is no federal case Tina Peters is a witness to.
So even if you accept the Mafia precedent, it proves the opposite of what people think. At best, cooperation means temporary movement and protective custody — not freedom, not relocation, and definitely not “living her best life under witness protection.”
Conflating those things is how this keeps turning into fantasy law instead of reality.
There is no such case for Peters to be a witness for.
You realize that, right? That those terms are for real things and there are actual laws that are involved and it's not based on feels and wishes and what people think should happen.
So if there's not an actual, real federal case that Peters would actually be needed as a witness for, then it's just magical wishful thinking.
And if she needs to be a witness, then they just take her out of jail for the day or however long her testimony lasts.
I think you guys have been watching too many movies and have some vague notion that she's going to get a new identity and a cute little house out in the suburbs somewhere and then gets to just get out of her prison sentence that way.
POTUS has publicly stated that a lot of evidence of the 2020 Big Steal would be released this week. Tina Peters can be a material witness in the Colorado shenanigans.
Great. Way past due. But the actual case has to be built first. You realize that, right? And even then her being a witness isn't a full time thing. If they need info from her, they go to the prison and ask her questions there. If she needs to testify in court (again, this would need an actual real case) then she gets pulled out of prison to testify. It shouldn't take more than a couple days to testify.
What exactly do you think a material witness does that they would need to be released from prison full time for, exactly?
To be continued…
I’m going to wait and see what information drops this week.
What information do you think could be dropped that would make a difference in any of the questions I asked you?
Are you just counting on me forgetting about this so you won't have to answer? Because I'm stubborn as hell when it comes to stuff like this and I don't memory hole shit.
And when I come back here at the end of the week (and I 100% will) to question you on it, are you just going to get all indignant and ask me why I'm bothering you about it? Which is usually what happens when people try to dodge questions with "let's wait and see what happens" comments and I actually don't forget about them the next day.
Didn't Colorado try to keep Trump off the NATIONAL ballot? And now?
YES!!
Heavenly Father, you place kings in position and you remove them. You made a way where no way could be seen (at) the red sea, therefore we ask you to make a way that Tina Peters is freed, and vindicated. You are known and praised as the God who sets the captives free, therefore we thank you in advance for setting Tina Peter's free. In Jesus name.
AMEN!!
Strictly speaking the Presidents pardon is supposed to cover solely Federal Charges. It just so happens that States have generally also traditionally honored Presidential Pardons as valid for state charges as well. Leading to the belief that Presidential Pardons are valid for everything nationwide.
Tina Peters was charged under State Charges. So Colorado is well within its remit to legally ignore the Pardon. The issues within the state and its legal system that led to her conviction are another matter.
Ironically the States Rights and Separation of Powers obsession is coming back to bite the right.
The demoncrats use the very thing they abuse everyday: the Constitution ot these united states of America. (This is the original title of the Costitution.)
One: President Trump is about to reassert a federal authority concerning pardons that existed prior to Lincoln. Just like ‘a previous court’ was wrong about Roe vs. Wade, the states have been wrong for 150 years on presidential pardon authority. That is about to be challenged hard, and Trump will easily win just like he did when Colorado courts unanimously worked to remove him from the ballot, and the Supreme Court unanimously trounced the Colorado courts and put Trump on the ballot.
Two: The Clerk manages, collects, tabulates, reports, and protects election data for the US House of Representatives under federal authority. This has been forgotten and overwritten over time; it is about to be revisited.
No president has ever pardoned any person convicted of a state crime - it didn’t exist prior to Lincoln either. As a previous posted mentioned, we should tread very carefully about setting precedent in eroding state’s rights.
Instead, let’s see a red wave swallow Colorado and elect a MAGA governor who will then pardon Tina Peters.
100% agree. The fact that people want to just start yanking states rights away because it's inconvenient in this one case is just asinine.
How is he going to do that, specifically? I think you'd need a Supreme Court ruling, and the Supreme Court has consistently limited the President's pardoning power to federal charges.
And yes, the Supreme Court overturned Roe Vs Wade. On a federal level and turned it over to the individual states to decide abortion laws.
So on this, recent Supreme Court rulings actively work against President Trump being able to pardon state charges.
Charge her federally.
Extradite her out of Colorado.
Pardon her and drop the charges.
Charging her federally doesn't make her CO charges and conviction magically disappear. Just her being extradited out of CO doesn't mean she's free to go if federal charges against her were dropped.
Just....I'm trying to figure out if you're being silly or if you're serious and that's how you think laws work.
When the feds are done with her could they put her in a state that refuses to extradite her back to CO?
That would be the play
Not legally, no.
I was listening to Jovan Pulitzer podcast yesterday on his take about Tina Peters. He had some interesting comments on how she was 'set up' and by who. Regardless he suggested that Trump have a SCIF drive up to the prison in order to interrogate Tina in a high classified setting in relation to federal investigation. Then simply drive her away as a witness to serious federal crimes, and into witness protection. I don't know if that would work, but it is an idea.
What do you think a SCIF is, exactly?
Interrogating her doesn't remove her from state custody.
They can't just "drive her away as a witness" because there are actual court orders and red tape to process through.
Basically what you're describing is a Hollywood style kidnapping/prison break with the federal government, on orders from the President of the United States being the bad guy.
Reality is boring, but much preferable than living in whatever LaLa Land bizzaro world came up with that scenario....
Just repeating what the brilliant Jovan Pulitzer recommended. My thoughts are like yours, they are unlikely to let her leave the jail into the portable SCIF. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbDd-TopP0Q
I don't know who Jovan Pulitzer is. He's obviously not a lawyer, and that's what matters here. So while he may be brilliant at something else, it's obviously not law. Why do you think he's brilliant?
Why do you think they would bring a portable SCIF with them? It's a room. Where in the world are you getting this stuff? If it's from this Jovan Pulitzer person, you need to realize that this is some of the silliest stuff I've ever heard.
He is the guy that did what he calls a 'full kinematic audit' of Maricopa County in Arizona. Every single ballot. He has the proof of stolen election fraud and how they did it. He invented QR codes and has the patent on it, among other patents. He is highly intelligent, but that doesn't mean one has common sense also. I assumed when he talked about a portable SCIF, that perhaps the government has them. I would think he would know. Here is from GROK "Yes, the US government uses portable SCIFs (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities), which are secure enclosures for handling classified Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).These include temporary, mobile, modular, or containerized versions designed for rapid deployment in field operations, travel, emergencies, or remote locations. They comply with standards like ICD 705 and provide protection against eavesdropping, including RF shielding and sound attenuation." "Vehicle-based or air/ground/maritime SCIFs — SCIFs can be established in vehicles, aircraft, ships, or quickly set up at temporary sites."
Still think it's silly?
Which cases were his proof of election fraud used in?
QR codes were invented by Denso Wave in 1994.
There are temporary, modular SKIFs. They aren't something that someone can roll up to a prison in, someone get inside one and drive away in. It's a room not a magic immunity van. Go ask Grok if someone can drive one up to a prison, have an inmate get in it and then just drive away with them inside it. It would be entertaining to see the answer to that. You know what. Never mind. I'll ask Grok that myself.
Here's the conversation, verbatim. (Other than me adding the "me:" and "grok:" headers)
Me: Can this actually be done?
" Regardless he suggested that Trump have a SCIF drive up to the prison in order to interrogate Tina in a high classified setting in relation to federal investigation. Then simply drive her away as a witness to serious federal crimes, and into witness protection. I don't know if that would work, but it is an idea."
Grok: No, this specific proposal is not realistically feasible under current U.S. law and practices.
The idea involves deploying a mobile SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) to a state prison to interrogate Tina Peters (a state inmate convicted on Colorado charges) about classified matters in a federal investigation, then extracting her as a federal witness and placing her into witness protection—effectively removing her from state custody.
Here's why it wouldn't work:
Tina Peters is a state prisoner with no known federal charges or investigation tie-in.
As of December 2025, Peters is serving a nine-year sentence in Colorado state prison (La Vista Correctional Facility) for state-level election tampering convictions. President Trump issued a symbolic pardon in December 2025, but it has no legal effect on state crimes (presidential pardons apply only to federal offenses). Colorado officials have rejected it, and she remains incarcerated under state authority. There are no public reports of an active federal criminal investigation involving her as a suspect or witness requiring classified handling.
Federal authorities cannot unilaterally remove a state inmate without state cooperation or a legal basis.
The federal government can temporarily borrow state prisoners via a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum (for court appearances or testimony in federal cases) or under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers—but this requires a valid federal proceeding and returns the prisoner to state custody afterward. It does not allow permanent removal or "driving her away."
Witness protection (WITSEC, run by the U.S. Marshals Service) is for witnesses cooperating in federal cases, typically against federal crimes (e.g., organized crime, terrorism). It doesn't apply to overriding state custody for state crimes. Even for incarcerated witnesses, protection is handled within the Bureau of Prisons for federal inmates, not by extracting state inmates.
Mobile SCIFs exist, but they're irrelevant here.
Transportable SCIFs (e.g., containers, tents, or vehicles meeting ICD 705 standards) are used for classified discussions in remote or temporary locations (like presidential travel or military operations). They could theoretically be deployed near a prison for secure interviews. However, prisons already allow secure federal interviews of inmates (via writs or agreements), and classified discussions with a state prisoner would require extraordinary justification—which doesn't exist in this case.
In short, this sounds like a creative but legally unfounded workaround to free Peters from state prison by reframing her as a federal protected witness. Without an actual federal case or charges providing leverage, state authorities (Colorado in this instance) would not relinquish custody, and federal agencies lack the authority to force it. Attempts to pressure states (e.g., via symbolic pardons or custody transfer requests) have failed in her case so far.
Well I guess she is fucked then, along with POTUS. If she dies in prison they will blame POTUS for not getting her out, and if he tries to get her out with taking her into federal custody they will likely impeach him for it. Sounds like habeas corpus is her best chance, which I believe is pending before the slow moving courts.
No, there are other legal avenues available. People just want a presidential pardon to take care of everything because it's quick and easy and would piss off liberals that Trump was personally responsible for it
Jovan Hutton Pulitzer - from Grok "He is credited as the inventor on numerous U.S. patents, primarily in areas like scan-to-connect technologies (precursors to QR codes), mobile commerce, medical diagnostics, image processing, and interactive systems. Sources indicate he has filed over 150–200 patents (including applications), with a major portfolio around "scan commerce" and "scan-to-connect" licensed to hundreds of companies (e.g., Google, IBM, Nokia, Samsung)."
So I was wrong on the QR code, he had patent on the precursor to the QR code.
Ok
Is Tina Peters still in jail? Didn't President Trump pardon her?
On a slightly unrelated, but also related note in the sense that the Pres needs to assert his authority over rogue states, Trump is just going to stand by and allow California's insane energy policies to permanently shut down not one but TWO oil refineries in California?! Those are strategic national assets. You think that's just going to affect California?! All this yapping about energy independence and drill baby drill, but if you lose the capacity to refine it by losing TWO of our rapidly diminishing national supply of oil refineries that's kind of a moot point, no?!