Jack Smith may have provided President Trump with the legal avenue to pardon Tina Peters.
An analysis of the recent release of data from the Arctic Frost documentation, which includes Jack Smith’s list of conservatives he spied on, reveals some shocking information. The House Judiciary Committee began releasing a list of individuals whom Jack Smith and the Biden Administration illegally spied on. One significant finding has emerged.
A smoking gun has surfaced in favor of President Trump’s legal avenue to pardon Colorado’s Tina Peters.
The Arctic Frost Document, an inventory of Americans spied on by Jack Smith, features a unique entry on page 101. It is believed that this entry refers to Tina Peters. In the list of those illegally spied on, there is a line that lists Mike Lindell, and it includes a reference to “Mesa County”.
Mike Lindell was involved with Tina Peters for some time. He invited Tina to his first symposium in South Dakota. That was the first time we heard of Tina, a county clerk from Mesa County, Colorado, in charge of elections. She shared at Mike’s symposium in South Dakota that she had identified altered results in her election systems after a recent election. This was shocking news and the highlight of that first symposium. There are countless articles linking Mike Lindell to Tina Peters and the election fraud she discovered IN Mesa County.
Tina Peters was later indicted in a Colorado state court and indicted on bogus charges and put away for 9 years. President Trump is unable to pardon her because he lacks the authority to pardon a state crime. No President to date has pardoned someone for a state crime. However, if her case in Colorado was managed or significantly impacted by individuals who were part of the federal government, then some believe that President Trump could pardon Tina.
Before today, there was ample evidence that the federal government under Biden was involved in the Tina Peters case. There is an argument that if the federal government led the effort, directed it, or was a significant part of the effort to indict and imprison Tina Peters, it would give President Trump the ability to pardon her.
The Biden Regime’s involvement in Tina Peters Case
The FBI issued a statement almost immediately after Peters came forward, stating that they would investigate her for potential violations of federal laws. The Biden regime never formally prosecuted Tina, but it appears that Biden’s Department of Justice was working closely with local Colorado officials who sought to put Peters in jail. (https://coloradosun.com/2021/08/17/tina-peters-replaced/)
The Mesa County District Attorney, Dan Rubinstein, included Matthew Kirsh, the United States Attorney for Colorado in a May 17, 2022, email to multiple District Attorneys across Colorado. The email is titled “Rule 3.8 Meeting” which appears to reference the rules of professional conduct for prosecutors. (Justice.gov)
Email from Dan Rubinstein to DOJ attorney and Colorado District Attorneys, apparently brainstorming how to appear legitimate and ethical while prosecuting Tina Peters.
Daniel Rubenstein (Credit: Mesa County DA Office)
Matthew Kirsch (Credit: Justice.gov)
The email suggests that Rubinstein was having some trouble reconciling the prosecution of Tina Peters with prosecutors’ rules of professional conduct and had to call in the cavalry to help him brainstorm ways to avoid being “accused of wrongdoing.”
First, Rubinstein appears to recognize that there is no precedent for the prosecution he wants to undertake, as he expresses a desire that this group of legal minds start writing opinions and issuing guidance documents in the vein of the Colorado Bar Association (CBA) and the Colorado District Attorneys’ Council (CDAC). Without a coherent legal pathway for prosecution, it appears that Rubinstein encouraged this course of action to provide prosecutors with cover. Second, Rubinstein notes that it is problematic that they have no formal appointments from a government body to lay the groundwork to prosecute Peters. Third, Rubinstein informs the group of their need to anticipate defending themselves as to why they didn’t seek an opinion on Peter’s case from the Colorado Bar Association Ethics Commission. Rubinstein and his cronies appear to have succeeded in giving their efforts the veneer of legitimacy because three months after this email was sent, Peters was indicted by a grand jury. (ColoradoPolitics.com)
Another glaring piece of evidence that the federal government led the Tina Peters case is that if this was ‘only a Colorado issue’, why were US Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, participating in initial Mesa County discussions via Webex regarding the findings of Clerk Peters and her actions related to those findings?
Tonight, on Real America w/ @DanNewsManBall Gateway Pundit Editor Joe Hoft @GatewayPundit @RealJoeHoft – Should the Trump administration get involved in the case of Tina Peters? on @OANN pic.twitter.com/xZoeg84Zx3
— One America News (@OANN) July 16, 2025