President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) J. Sonnenberg (R) Lauren Boebert (R) Ted Harvey

15% 10%↓ 10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Doug Bruce

(R) Bob Gardner




CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
September 24, 2021 01:36 PM UTC

Meritless Defense: "Honey Badger" Can't Save Tina Peters

  • by: Colorado Pols
Heidi Ganahl and Mesa County Clerk and Recorder Tina Peters.

We’ve been holding our peace over the past few days as the “defense” of embattled Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters against allegations that she allowed unauthorized access and the subsequent public leaking of proprietary election system data has taken shape. Represented by former Secretary of State and discredited election conspiracy theorist in his own right Scott “Honey Badger” Gessler, Peters is arguing she should not be stripped of her election supervisory duties owing to Peters’ supposedly good intentions. The Denver Post’s Saja Hindi reports:

Last week, Peters — who had been out of the state for more than a month and has become popular among 2020 election conspiracy theorists — responded to the lawsuit by providing to commissioners and the court a report that alleges wrongdoing by the secretary of state’s office and says that a state upgrade wiped out election records that elections officials are required to keep…

Peters’ attorney, former Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler, acknowledged in a Sept. 17 legal filing that there was an “unauthorized release of information on one or more publicly available web sites,” [Pols emphasis] but said the actions by Griswold and the county commissioners to remove Peters and Knisley were “wholly disproportionate and directly violate Colorado law.”

Gessler also wrote that Peters “suspected that the Secretary’s trusted build process (annual system update) wiped out election records that she is required to preserve under Colorado law.” So Peters had a consultant copy the hard drive of the county’s Dominion Voting Systems equipment and commissioned the report “which appears to validate (Peters’) suspicions,” Gessler wrote.

Scott Gessler.

In her response filing yesterday, Secretary of State Jena Griswold effectively shredded these convoluted misinformed arguments, explaining how they betray basically total ignorance of how these systems work. CBS4’s Jennifer McRae:

The brief also states that “there is nothing further from the truth” in regards to Peters’ false claims about the destruction of election records during the routine trusted build. Election records are required to be maintained by county clerks for up to 25 months.

Griswold cited the Colorado Election Code and referenced that election records “include items such as: accounting forms, certificates of registration, pollbooks, certificates of election, signature cards, all affidavits, voter applications, other voter lists and records, mail ballot return envelopes, voted ballots, unused ballots, spoiled ballots, and replacement ballots. None of these items were named in the “report” produced by Peters.”

“The Secretary would have no objection to a county backing up its log files for its voting systems—in fact, Larimer County requested to backup their log files prior to a trusted build, and the Department of State helped Larimer County perform such a backup,” the brief states. “Instead, Peters made copies of the entire hard drive, exposing the security of the entire election system when those copies were posted on the Internet.” [Pols emphasis]

Again, the idea that the proper procedure for Clerk Peters to follow if she suspected some kind of illegal act was to commit another crime is so ridiculous it’s embarrassing to anyone making the argument. Helping uncredentialed unqualified conspiracy theorists steal secure data and then going on the lam for a month instead of cooperating with the investigation is not how legitimate whistleblowers call out problems. The so-called “forensic examination” conducted on Peters’ behalf doesn’t appear to take into account what data is legally required to be preserved, and they don’t know enough about the data they were improperly allowed to access to assess the significance (if any) of files being updated or deleted in a system update. And at no point are they able to demonstrate even hypothetically how any of this adds up to changing the results of an election.

In short, Peters’ response is an epic pile of hopelessly uninformed nonsense–just like Gessler’s garbage legal brief for Donald Trump suggesting the presidential election in Nevada was stolen, and just like Gessler’s fruitless failed quest to uncover “tens of thousands of illegal voters” that landed his political career on the rocks back in 2014. Even the all-GOP Mesa County commissioners acknowledged that the Secretary of State has the power to relieve Clerk Peters of her election responsibilities. It’s a completely meritless defense, and we’re awaiting only the judge’s ruling saying so.

And then at some point after that, hopefully soon, criminal charges.


17 thoughts on “Meritless Defense: “Honey Badger” Can’t Save Tina Peters

  1. Helping uncredentialed unqualified conspiracy theorists steal secure data and then going on the lam for a month instead of cooperating with the investigation is not how legitimate whistleblowers call out problems…

    Wait a minute. How is this not EXACTLY what Edward Snowden did?

    I'm not defending Tina Peters but liberals can be very inconsistent about civil disobedience and whistleblowers….

    1. Nobody's defending Snowden.  Especially since he went and hung with your dear leader's bestie in his home country.  A country who is worse than America when it comes to the issues Snowden was railing against.

    2. One of these things is not at all like the other, oh transparently disingenuous GQP houseboy.

      But of course you know that.

      Stop treating us like your brain-dead, dangerously gullible, proudly ignorant base, Poindexter. We're far too smart and well informed for you ever to get a toehold here, and we don't take kindly to your cockamamie cacophony of crap.

    3. Since when did stealing confidential information to support a contrived theory of election stealing equate to whistleblowing? It never has or could. By nature, whistleblowing is designed to uncover a hidden truth (facts) that should become public to right a wrong. It does not include illegal acts designed to support other illegal activity or a lie, in this case Trump's Big Lie.  Your equivalency argument is another reason why the voters in this country need to go to the polls and destroy the Republican Party. The Republican Party lives in a world where nothing is more precious than a lie, where truth is treated as a mere irrelevancy, morals and ethics are used as a facade to justify any manner of illegal, immoral, and unethical activity, and where shame has been assigned to oblivion. 

  2. Greeley Tribune, via Saja Hindi, Denver Post newsroom: Fight Over Mesa County Election Oversight Heats Up…

    There are three investigations into the possible breach: the secretary of state’s, the Mesa County District Attorney’s office and the FBI. [Deputy Clerk] Knisley has been suspended from her job and charged with felony burglary and a misdemeanor cybercrime, though the charges are independent of the ongoing investigations.

    Are Peters and Gessler trying to get Deputy Clerk Knisley to take the rap for Peters?

    1. As I’ve said elsewhere, I think Gessler has stepped into an ethical minefield by thinking he can be representing Peters and Knisley at the same time. At this point, watching Gessler try to navigate the situation could be interesting.

      1. As long as they both pay him his legal fees, probably Gessler doesn't care whether either, or both, go to jail. As far as ethical minefields, Gessler apparently  thinks  he's blow-up proof. Nothing in his shameful political past has proved that theory wrong.

         It will be interesting to see which woman (Peters or Knisley) throws the other one under the bus first. Popcorn for everyone!

  3. Jeezus Moderatus you are so absolutely pathetic. 
    Each time you swear you’ve got us, you swear your finally gonna shut up those vile liberals, and each and every time you completely faceplant immediately. It’s hilarious, if not completely sad. 
    Please don’t stay away, watching you fail so completely, so spectacularly, post after post over the years has been one of the joys of my life.

    Better luck next time I guess?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

45 readers online now


Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!