A stunning turn of events unfolded Thursday evening as President Trump issued a full pardon to Tina Peters, a woman many believed unjustly imprisoned. The decision, announced on Truth Social, resonated with those who saw her case as a fight for election integrity and a challenge to what they perceived as political overreach.
The pardon wasn’t a spontaneous act. Just days prior, Peters’ attorney, Peter Ticktin – a childhood friend of the President – had urgently appealed for her release, framing her imprisonment as a consequence of uncovering critical information. He argued she was a vital witness to what he described as the most serious crime in American history.
Peters’ ordeal began after the 2020 election. As a county official, she noticed discrepancies in election results following a system update mandated by the Colorado Secretary of State. Acting in accordance with the law, she preserved copies of the original data, a decision that ultimately led to a nine-year prison sentence.
Ticktin and his legal team expressed profound gratitude for the President’s intervention, hailing it as an act of courage and a victory against injustice. They emphasized Trump’s unwavering commitment to his principles and his willingness to confront perceived wrongdoing.
The circumstances of Peters’ incarceration were particularly stark. Despite being convicted of non-violent offenses, she was held in a maximum-security unit, confined to a cell barely large enough for two people. In the days leading up to the pardon, she was even placed in solitary confinement – a measure typically reserved for the most dangerous inmates – ostensibly for her own protection.
Governor Polis and Secretary of State Jena Griswold maintained Peters belonged behind bars, but critics argued she was a political prisoner. The core question revolved around the President’s authority to pardon state convictions, a legal gray area the Governor acknowledged but chose to navigate through prolonged litigation.
Ticktin vehemently countered that holding Peters while the legal questions remained unresolved was a fundamental injustice. He asserted that the benefit of the doubt must always lie with the incarcerated individual, and that continuing her imprisonment risked holding a pardoned woman unlawfully.
The situation, according to Ticktin, revealed a dangerous complacency among those in power. He accused Governor Polis and Secretary of State Griswold of being blinded by their own positions, failing to recognize the shifting landscape and the potential for accountability.
Ticktin leveled a particularly pointed accusation against Secretary of State Griswold, alleging she had deliberately wiped and rewritten the hard drives of Dominion voting machines after a “Trusted Build” was installed – a move he claims violated federal law. He suggested she should be focusing on her own potential legal exposure rather than pursuing Peters’ continued imprisonment.
The irony, Ticktin concluded, was inescapable: the very person accused of destroying evidence was aggressively seeking to keep the woman who preserved it locked away. He urged a swift end to what he characterized as a wrongful imprisonment, a sentiment echoed by a growing number of supporters celebrating President Trump’s decisive action.
