Election denier Tina Peters is pushing near-Martial Law move to Trump ahead of midterms: report

Election denier Tina Peters is pushing near-Martial Law move to Trump ahead of midterms: report Tina Peters, a former Colorado elections clerk, was convicted for her role in a breach of election equipment and imprisoned before her sentence was commuted this summer - Bookmark - CommentsGo to comments Become an Independent member to bookmark this article Already a member? Log in Election denier Tina Peters met with President Donald Trump at the White House last month, where she and her attorney pushed for an order “tantamount to martial law” ahead of the midterm elections, according to a report. Peters told Trump at an October meeting that he has the authority to send in federal law enforcement to investigate how votes are counted “if there’s something in criminal in nature,” she revealed to MSNOW. “He already has the authority to do all this — he doesn’t have to go to Congress to ask,” said Peters, a former Colorado elections clerk who was convicted for her role in a breach of election equipment and imprisoned. Her sentence was commuted this summer. “If there’s something that is criminal in nature, he has every right to have the administration, the attorney general’s office or, you know, law enforcement go in and investigate,” she told the outlet. Her attorney, Peter Ticktin, separately told MSNOW that Trump should be ready to “enter an emergency order that basically would be tantamount to martial law.” “I’m pushing for it,” the lawyer said. Ticktin, a childhood friend of the president’s, also made a similar urging on a September 30 call for MAGA election activists, Axios reported. He said that “there would have to be martial law in the event... [of] another rigged election.” “They'll probably need to be commandeering of ballots and election equipment to make sure that we can get to the bottom of it before anything further occurs,” he added to Axios following the call. Obtaining ballots or voting equipment as part of a federal investigation typically requires a search warrant or subpoena, and Martial Law does not give Trump the authority to seize election materials. The president also cannot override federal and state election laws. In April 2025, a federal judge wrote that the Constitution “does not grant the President any specific powers over elections” in an effort to block Trump from asserting control. When previously reached by The Independent about the meeting between Peters and Trump, White House spokesperson Lauren Bis said: “We do not comment on private meetings that may or may not have happened.” As the Mesa County, Colorado, clerk, Peters oversaw elections in the county from 2018 to 2023. Investigators began examining her conduct in 2021 after sensitive voting system information surfaced online. Prosecutors ultimately accused her of allowing an unauthorized individual linked to MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell to access voting equipment during a software update while searching for evidence of election fraud. In August 2024, a jury convicted Peters on seven of 10 charges, including four felonies. She received a nine-year sentence that October. Peters, however, maintained her innocence, saying she was trying to expose fraud in the 2020 election. Trump spent months publicly pressing for Peters’ release, describing her as an elderly woman with cancer and repeating his unsubstantiated claim that the 2020 election was “stolen.” In May, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, commuted her sentence and she walked free. In a letter explaining his decision, Polis said Peters had committed serious crimes and deserved prison time, but called her sentence “extremely unusual and lengthy” for a first-time, nonviolent offender. The decision attracted sharp criticism from fellow Democrats. Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold called it a “dark day for democracy” and accused Polis of “selling out our state’s justice system for Trump.” Join our commenting forum Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies Comments