Source: Tina Peters’ / The Truth Matters
In a powerful new episode of Tina Peters’ official show, Truth Matters, Jason Sullivan steps in to co-host for the first time — joined by none other than Trump attorney Peter Ticktin, who is now representing Tina Peters as her new lead counsel in a high-stakes constitutional battle for her freedom.
This episode meticulously walks viewers through exactly what has taken place, and why Tina Peters is being hailed as a national hero — a Gold Star mother now imprisoned for doing her job, protecting election integrity, and standing up against powerful forces determined to wipe digital evidence clean.
The Trusted Build Flashpoint
The show dives deep into the central controversy that triggered Peters’ legal saga: the Colorado Secretary of State’s sudden order for a “Trusted Build” of Dominion Voting Systems machines in Mesa County — just six months after the 2020 election.
This timing was highly unusual and alarmed Peters, because federal law clearly mandates that all election data, logs, and materials must be preserved for a minimum of 22 months in all 50 states. Specifically, 52 U.S. Code § 20701 requires: “Every officer of election shall retain and preserve, for a period of twenty-two months from the date of any general, special, or primary election… all records and papers which come into his possession relating to any application, registration, payment of poll tax, or other act requisite to voting…” Yet here, the Colorado Secretary of State moved prematurely to overwrite the systems, potentially destroying critical evidence from one of the most hotly contested elections in American history. Based on available records and public documentation, Colorado appears to be the only state where the Secretary of State ordered a Trusted Build process during the federally mandated 22-month retention period following the 2020 election.
The Trusted Build, by design, removes any “unauthorized code” found on the machines. The Colorado Secretary of State’s office confirmed that the Trusted Build involved overwriting existing software on Dominion voting systems, which raised concerns about potential violations of federal record retention laws. And that’s exactly what concerned Tina Peters — because if there had been election tampering or code designed to manipulate results, this process would have erased it. Rather than sit by, Tina Peters acted, doing what any responsible election official should: she sought to preserve the evidence.
A Bold Legal Strategy by Trump Attorney Peter Ticktin
Tina Peters is currently facing a nine-year prison sentence. Representing her is Peter Ticktin, a seasoned attorney and longtime friend of President Donald Trump, who has recently parachuted into her case to advocate for her immediate release on bond while her state-level appeal is pending. In a bold and unprecedented legal maneuver, Ticktin has filed a federal habeas corpus petition in the U.S. District Court of Colorado, arguing that Peters’ ongoing incarceration violates her First Amendment rights.
“She’s being held not for what she did, but for what she might say,” Ticktin told the court — referencing Judge Matthew Barrett’s own words during sentencing, where Peters’ speech and public statements about election fraud were cited as justification for denying her bond pending appeal.
Judge Matthew Barrett’s own words during Tina Peters’s sentencing strongly suggest that her continued speech — particularly her claims about election fraud — influenced his decision to deny bond. This bolsters Peter Ticktin’s argument that her incarceration is not just punitive, but preventative, aimed at silencing her voice.
Key Judicial Remarks:
Judge Barrett called Peters:
“A charlatan who used, and is still using, your prior position to peddle a snake oil that’s been proven to be junk time and time again.”
He added:
“I’m convinced you’d do it all over again if you could… You’re as defiant a defendant as this court has ever seen.”
These statements show that Barrett factored Peters’s speech and defiance into his sentencing, which Ticktin now frames as a First Amendment violation — the core of his habeas strategy.
Legal Implication:
Ticktin argues:
“We have a person in prison because of a fear that she’s a danger to society because of what she might say.”
This aligns with well-established First Amendment jurisprudence, which holds that punishing someone for anticipated speech — particularly political expression — is constitutionally impermissible unless the government can satisfy strict scrutiny. That standard requires a compelling interest and proof that the speech incites imminent lawless action, as defined in Brandenburg v. Ohio.
Ticktin’s argument is not just novel — it’s legally coherent. If Judge Barrett’s denial of bond was motivated by Peters’s speech, then Ticktin’s habeas petition may indeed succeed on First Amendment grounds, especially given the federal court’s exclusive focus on that issue.
Key Legal Points:
Federal Habeas Petition: Filed in the U.S. District Court of Colorado, seeking immediate bond release for Tina Peters.
First Amendment Focus: Ticktin strategically dropped all other claims to center the petition solely on free speech grounds.
Legal First of Its Kind:
Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak noted this may be the first time in U.S. legal history that a federal habeas petition has been filed exclusively to secure bond during an ongoing state appeal.
Prior Restraint Argument:
Ticktin contends Peters’ incarceration constitutes unconstitutional prior restraint — she is being punished not for what she did, but for what she might say.
Why Tina Peters Is a Hero
Tina Peters held the official title of Mesa County Clerk and Recorder during the 2020 election. She had a federal duty to preserve election records. She took that responsibility seriously — and for that, she now sits behind bars. But her actions were neither reckless nor partisan; they were patriotic, and anchored in the rule of law. She did her job. And that job — preserving election evidence — may ultimately be what exposes the truth and restores trust in our electoral system.
The federal court requested refined constitutional briefs by July 25, focused solely on the First Amendment claim. If successful, this legal strategy could mark a historic turning point in American jurisprudence — protecting the rights of election officials who dare to speak out.
A Show That Lays It All Out
The episode meticulously walks viewers through exactly what happened, why Tina Peters is a national hero, and how she was targeted for doing her job—protecting election integrity and preserving critical voting machine data that Colorado’s Secretary of State ordered erased just six months after the contested 2020 election.
That data, wiped through a process known as a “Trusted Build”, was scheduled for deletion well before the federally mandated 22-month retention period, raising serious constitutional and evidentiary red flags. Peters, understanding the process would remove any “unauthorized code” from Dominion Voting Systems machines, acted to preserve potential evidence of tampering—and was prosecuted for it.
Ticktin’s Historic Legal Challenge
Peter Ticktin has now filed a federal habeas corpus petition in the U.S. District Court of Colorado, claiming Peters is being held not for her actions, but for what she might say. This challenges Judge Matthew Barrett’s original sentencing rationale, which cited Peters’ public statements as justification to deny bond pending appeal.
Federal Judge Scott T. Varholak has acknowledged the unprecedented nature of the filing. If successful, Ticktin’s move could set a historic precedent for using habeas relief to challenge incarceration as a form of prior restraint—punishment for speech not yet uttered.
If readers wish to support Tina Peters’ official legal fund, they can visit American Rights Alliance.
The post Jason Sullivan Co-Hosts Truth Matters with Tina Peters’ New Lead Attorney — Trump Lawyer Peter Ticktin appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.