Peter Ticktin argues passionately that Tina Peters deserves a pardon, framing her case as one at the center of a monumental crime against the United States. According to Ticktin, Peters is not merely a political figure but a witness to an alleged conspiracy that has endangered the electoral process itself. He raises questions about the integrity of the voting system, saying, “the most serious crime perpetrated against the US in history” was uncovered by her.
The crux of Ticktin’s appeal lies in her actions following the 2020 Election. Peters, who was serving as a county clerk, noticed unexplained changes to election results after a system update mandated by the Colorado Secretary of State. Her commitment to her responsibilities led her to notify both authorities and the public about these discrepancies. Despite her efforts to comply with state and federal laws by saving copies of the original election results, she was met with severe backlash. Her subsequent imprisonment for nine years has sparked outrage among those who see her as a whistleblower—the very definition of someone who acts on principle and courage in the face of wrongdoing.
Ticktin’s viewpoint starkly contrasts with the actions of the Colorado government, which seeks to keep Peters incarcerated and has reportedly dismissed her plea for federal transfer. The implications of this decision are profound. As Ticktin contends, the treatment of Peters in prison is concerning, describing it as a form of abuse that strips away her dignity and rights. He highlights the severity of her conditions by stating that “she’s being treated like she’s the worst terrorist in US history,” suggesting that this is an unjust penalty for someone whose intentions were to uphold electoral integrity.
The assertion that Peters’ health is deteriorating reflects the broader issues surrounding her case. The emotional and physical toll of such harsh treatment raises questions about justice in a system that claims to uphold the rule of law. “Something must be done” is a call that resonates not only for Peters but for anyone who believes in fighting against perceived injustice. Ticktin’s plea to President Trump for her pardon emphasizes these points, urging that her actions be recognized not as criminal but as necessary for a transparent democracy.
In the letter outlining his rationale, Ticktin implicates the voting machine companies involved in election oversight, suggesting that their role in altering or destroying data cannot be overlooked. He underscores the importance of protecting whistleblowers like Peters, who take risks to expose misconduct, emphasizing that the punishment she received contradicts her dedication to her professional duties. Ticktin’s words urge a reconsideration of Peters’ situation, presenting her as a dedicated public servant instead of the accused criminal.
The sentiment of solidarity with Peters echoes throughout Ticktin’s request, encapsulating a narrative that many sympathizers align with. The idea that she should be celebrated rather than punished for her transparency reinforces a fundamental principle of accountability in government. Ticktin’s conclusion, framed with an emotional plea for “freedom,” encapsulates the essence of this campaign for Peters’ pardon, not just as an individual, but as a symbol of integrity and truth in protection of the democratic process.
As the tumultuous story of Tina Peters unfolds, it becomes more than just a legal dispute; it reflects a deep societal concern over the integrity of elections and the treatment of those who dare to challenge the system. In the eyes of Peter Ticktin and her supporters, Tina Peters deserves not only to be released from imprisonment but also to be recognized as a crucial figure in the ongoing discourse about election integrity in America.
"*" indicates required fields
