CENSORED EVIDENCE

Tina Peters’ Story
By Jerry Kelley, P.E., Former Technical Consultant to the US Space Force (retired)
Now Citizen Journalist with The Peak News (11/20/2024)

Abstract: Censorship and media manipulation has framed Tina Peters’ story into an absurdity. If this piece encourages citizens to ask more questions of their favorite media with motivations to protect their votes and individual freedoms for all, it will have served its purpose. Here multiple surprises are available including evidence that massive electronic election fraud is being committed in multiple states by both major parties even now associated with the November 2024 election and before.

This story begins with the U.S. Elections Integrity Plan that began in Colorado in November of 2020 after citizens witnessed election irregularities and grew with outright election fraud caught in the Grand Junction Municipal 2021 election. It is 100% volunteer, grassroots, unaffiliated, and non-partisan. You can see more of their many alliances, history, resources, and mission at their website: useip.org.

In April 2021 I volunteered with the USEIP and found phantom voters immediately in a random search, which suggests this problem is bigger than most realize. In my first hour of searching and working off El Paso County’s voter registration data, which is publicly available, I found five units that didn’t exist at one small apartment complex in Colorado Springs. I wondered, “Maybe one or two people could forget what unit they were in, but would five forget and record a non-existent unit number?” In my relatively new neighborhood, where most of us are the original homeowners, and asking about a voter registered at a neighbor’s address down the street, the homeowner immediately replied, “No, she has never lived here!” I wondered again, “Is this another phantom voter?” Then I met a receptionist who claimed her mother lived most of her life in Oklahoma and didn’t know if she ever lived in Colorado and died over 20 years ago, but somehow got her mother’s ballot for the November 2020 election. I also found a “registered voter” whose residence was the Lowe’s Garden Center on Nevada Avenue in Colorado Springs. We will explain later how these are used to manipulate elections.

While USEIP volunteers were canvassing their neighborhoods in April 2021 and asking if anyone had any voting problems with the recent past November 2020 and promised to report their issues, some responded with a “Thank you for asking.” It was during this same time that major media lied about our actions and accused us of intimidating voters by asking how they voted. None of us did that because that wasn’t our goal of learning about the 2020 General Election. Even the FBI attempted to terminate this multiple-state canvasing effort while we were finding many phantom voters. This alone should raise questions on the FBI’s involvement.

Sherronna Bishop and others were doing the same thing over five hours away in Grand Junction, Colorado and bringing their findings to Tina Peters of people who voted in the 2020 General Election, but did not live at the “registered” addresses they were canvassing. Tina Peters was the elected clerk and recorder in Mesa County and believed Colorado’s 2020 General Election was performed as the Gold Standard just as Colorado’s Secretary of State, Jena Griswold, had stated. Surely reasonable explanations exist to answer her citizens’ concerns. She just needed to research it and then assure Mesa County’s citizens. Then the Grand Junction April 2021 Municipal Election happened with the “winning” parties reporting their “win” and “winning margins” thirty minutes before Tina publicly posted the election results. Tina felt sick. This was impossible for the “winners” to know before she had published the election results. Something was definitely wrong with Mesa County’s elections.

On November 7, 1988, a New Yorker article titled, Counting Votes, author Ronnie Dugger reported, “Wallis Ware, a Rand Corporation computer specialist, warned those attending a 1987 conference on the security of computer-tabulated elections, “There is probably a Chernobyl or Three Mile Island waiting to happen in some election.” And added, “Computers can transfer votes from one candidate to another in accordance to a specified percentage spread. . . All computer experts I have spoken with agree that no computer program can be made completely secure against fraud.”

Then on December 13, 2004 before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee Public Hearings on Election Irregularities, Clinton Curtis was asked, “Mr. Curtis are their programs that can be used to secretly fix elections?”

Curtis replied, “Yes.”

The Committee Person then asked, “How do you know that to be the case?”

Curtis answered, “Because in October of 2000 I wrote a prototype for present Congressman Tom Feeny at the company I worked for in Oviedo, Florida that did just that.”

The Committee Person followed up with: “And would that program you designed be something election officials could detect?”

Curtis answered: “They would never see it.” (Reference 1)

Tina didn’t know in 2020, but Texas’ Secretary of State released a report dated January 24, 2020 and signed by Deputy Secretary of State Jose A Esparza that explained why Texas rejected Dominion Voting System. The reason, Dominion was not “safe from fraudulent or unauthorized manipulation.” (Reference 2)

Dominion Voting Systems is used in sixty-two of Colorado’s sixty-four counties. I asked El Paso County’s clerk and recorder, Steve Schleiker, in a private interview, “Why is Colorado using Dominion?” He replied, “It’s the law.”

In April 2021, Tina Peters’ office got an email from Colorado’s Secretary of State (SOS), Jena Griswold’s office, that a software upgraded called, “Trusted Build,” was to be installed on Mesa County’s Election Management System (EMS) server and was given specific instructions to backup “Election Projects” to removal media.

Tina Peters knew QR codes are needed for election audits and learned from David Stahl, a Dominion employee, that the upcoming “Trusted Build” would delete these QR codes. Tina contacted the SOS’s office and it was again confirmed that the “Trusted Build” would delete these QR codes, which would make the 2020 General Election and the Grand Junction April 2021 Municipal Election impossible to audit/verify. Tina knew Colorado statutory law (CRS 1-7-802) required her to save election records for twenty-five months and federal law (52 U.S.C. 20701) for twenty-two months, so she asked her IT department for help in the backup, but they declined. Did Tina’s IT department lack the necessary skills?

Tina had also asked the SOS’s office if members of the public could witness the “Trusted Build” process. Their answer was adamant that only Dominion employees, Mesa County employees, and the SOS office staff could witness in person the “Trust Build” installation. They made it clear that if any other person was present, they would simply go on to the next county to install the “Trusted Build.” Their recommendation was that Mesa Country’s security cameras would be adequate for later public observation. Tina knew this would not provide the needed resolution to see what was actually happening during the “Trusted Build” software upgrade. Was this a setup to exclude independent and needed subject matter experts?

With Grand Junction’s unanswered election anomalies piling up, the SOS office’s denial of full public transparency, which unnecessarily limited qualified subject matter experts from observing, with knowledge that Jena Griswold’s inadequate instructions were in violation of federal and Colorado statutory laws to preserve all election records, and with Tina’s anticipation of delated QR codes, Tina began the process of securing a qualified expert to do an EMS backup, because her own IT department refused to help. Evidence is growing that Tina’s own IT department did not have the needed skills to do a full EMS server backup.

It was not illegal to do an EMS full system backup from a qualified outside consultant. John Case, Tina’s attorney, had written in Tina’s Motion For A Preliminary Injunction, dated November 27, 2023, that Griswold’s Deputy Secretary of State, Christopher Beall, admitted in testimony in another case that making forensic images was not prohibited by law. But none of that was permitted in Tina’s trial and the District Attorney (DA) Daniel Rubinstein’s investigator signed an affidavit falsely stating, before the judge presiding over Tina’s criminal case, that Tina acted “unlawfully” when she made the forensic image. So, if another county clerk did a full EMS backup before, why was Tina Peters prosecuted for her actions to save election records via a full EMS backup? Should citizens be concerned when a DA or his investigator are so unprofessional or lie?

The full backup of the EMS before and after the “Trusted Build” did not expose personal identification information, did not harm the equipment, but captured, for archived purposes, the 2020 General Election and the April 2021 Grand Junction Municipal Election results as required by federal (52 U.S.C. 20701) and Colorado statutory (CRS 1-7-802) laws.

Neither was it unlawful to have consultants with generic badges labeled “Temp 1” or “Temp 2” in the EMS secure area during none-voting periods, in which the “Trusted Build” occurred, as long as they were supervised. Generic badges were used by temporary help at times. Tina and her staff, per Election Rule 20.5.3(b), supervised their consultant Conan Hayes before, during, and after the “Trusted Build.” While Hayes was not a Mesa County employee, he was a government employee with a security clearance, which required a background investigation, and a subject matter expert with the services Tina needed. Tina fully vetted Conan Hayes, but none of that was admitted during Tina’s trial. Popular media described Hayes as just a surfer because of prosecution lies.

Hayes copied the EMS hard drive before and after the “Trusted Build.” Three subject matter experts, available in the references to be cited, with over 120 years of experience between themselves, did the data analysis on the EMS data saved and caught serious electronic election fraud. (To be addressed later.) Judge Matthew Barrett, prosecuting attorney Robert Shapiro, and DA, Daniel Rubenstein, didn’t want these experts in court to testify. Popular media remained silently ignorant without questions for any of them.

This “Trusted Build” was not the first time Jena Griswold was threatening Tina Peters. Jena tried to motivate a recall effort against Tina earlier, but it failed. Now if the QR codes were deleted, Tina Peters would have been held responsible for breaking both state and federal laws on failure to preserve the election materials, because Tina was the primary person responsible in her county, not Colorado’s SOS, Jena Griswold. Tina was trapped in a contest for survival with Colorado’s SOS, Jena Griswold, again.

Gerald Wood was the first outside computer consultant Tina began to checkout for the needed technical service. He went through the process of becoming a Mesa County employee complete with a background check and getting a security badge, just as Griswold wanted. Please don’t forget, it was a common practice for outside consultants to be admitted into the elections secure area during non-voting periods as the “Trusted Build” timeframe occurred, even with generic unnamed security badges. Griswold’s demand that only Mesa County employees be involved was outside Colorado statutory law and meant that generic name badges couldn’t be used. Why was Griswold so adamant that only county employees attend the “Trusted Build?” Was this a means to restrict needed subject matter experts? Such individuals typically do not work in county clerk and recorder offices.

Somewhere along the process Wood claimed he didn’t have the necessary skills and according to his testimony didn’t remember being in a Signal chat group with Peters and her staff. It was obvious he didn’t want to answer questions either. Rachel Alexander, of The Arizona Sun Times, noted the courtroom Signal chat screenshots showed Wood was part of the plan in some way. It was also apparent that some type of deal between some of Tina’s staff and Wood was made for their immunity from prosecution for their testimonies against Tina. (Article: Colorado Jury Unanimously Finds Tina Peters Guilty on Seven of 10 Counts by Rachel Alexander, August 14, 2024) Tina’s online declaration was that Gerald (Jerry) Wood “voluntarily consented to his badge being used by the consultant.” With his name already submitted to the SOS and time running out to secure a subject matter expert as a temporary Mesa County employee, Conan Hayes, used Wood’s badge to access the secure elections area under constant supervision of Tina and/or her staff per Election Rule 20.5.3(b). Rachel Alexander also reported that Kristi Passarelli, in Maricopa County, was caught on video using her badge to allow employee Brian Ramirez access to an election server room in 2022. Ramirez also used the badge of another employee Charles Cooley. Passarelli was not prosecuted or disciplined.

When I volunteered as a watcher during El Paso County’s June 2024 Primary election, I was admitted to the secure elections room without any badge. I only had to sign in. I already knew I was prohibited from using my cellphone. Yet, those closest to and handling the ballots had no such restrictions and I witnessed two using their phones. One to intercept needed coordination with outside operators bringing in ballots, and another was using his for personal reasons only with it pointed in the direction of the ballots. I wanted to text information to my lead person, so I turned my back to the ballot processing to ensure that I was not capturing any information from the ballots. I was immediately reprimanded to put my phone away. I protested and said others are using their phones. The reply was, “The rules are different for you.” I wondered, was I restricted as a watcher from capturing potential fraudulent actions on my phone by tyrannical Jena Griswold, who mandated this rule? Without such evidence, it would always be my word against them.

You have seen some of Rubinstein’s lies already. His harassment of Tina didn’t stop. Rubenstein caused Tina’s husband, who was in an assisted living facility, because of Parkinson’s Disease and early onset of dementia, to sign papers removing Tina as the Power of Attorney over her husband. She learned this from a phone call from her husband that he signed a paper and didn’t know what he had signed and asked her to call their attorney for help. Tina called their attorney, but he declined to help them because he had received a warning from Rubenstein. Tina was not permitted to see her husband again. Rubinstein was the catalyst for the FBI raids on Tina’s and other friends’ homes seizing numerous computers, cell phones, removable storage devices, and iPads from everyone. Tina describes these raids as “abusive and had the chilling effect of intimidating individuals who would associate with my effort to question the integrity and transparency of elections and to advocate for reform of election laws.” Gerald Wood’s “failed” memory and hesitant response to answer questions in Tina’s trial seemed connected to this. Rubinstein did everything possible to restrict Tina’s freedom of speech with friends and travel. Tina met a friend in the Dollar store who had recently lost her husband. A former clerk’s office employee happened to walk by. The police called Tina demanding who she was in conversation with and told her attorney they were investigating whether Tina had violated her $25,000 bond by speaking to that lady. Should Colorado citizens be concerned that a Mesa County DA, Dan Rubinstein, was much more concerned with harassing a Gold Star Mom (She lost her son in a military skydiving demonstration.) and election fraud whistleblower, than checking into the major electronic election fraud (still to be reviewed) that Tina accidently caught? Does Rubinstein’s actions even model a professional district attorney or does it seem to be motivated by political connections?

Security cameras for the Mesa County’s elections room must be turned on sixty days before an election and thirty days after. Tina was well inside the legal timeframe to turn off the cameras. She had the cameras turned off because Conan Hayes was concerned about his and his family’s safety and had asked to protect his identity. Only the unusual nature of having the camera turned off came up in Tina’s trial, but the jury didn’t know why. It had the effects of making Tina look suspicious of hiding malfeasance of some kind. Nothing was mentioned during Tina’s trial of Griswold’s staff keeping Mesa County employees away while Griswold’s staff raided Tina’s office in August 2021 while Tina was on travel. Griswold was just beginning to learn of the election analysis being conducted and reported in Mesa County and had her staff raid Tina’s office. The jury didn’t even know to ask, what was Jena Griswold hiding?

The subject matter experts, who analyzed the captured EMS data before and after the “Trusted Build,” discovered that unauthorized databases had been created and not all votes transferred into them. The votes transferred cannot be confirmed to have the voters’ original intentions either. This happened twice. Once for the 2020 General Election and again for the April 2021 Grand Junction Municipal Election. The experts also learned that the “Trusted Build” erased this criminal activity. The “Election Projects” files that were to be saved only contained the unauthorized databases. (Go to tinapeters.us, select the Reports tab and read the two-page Executive summary of report #3. You may also go to CensoredEvidence.org, select the States tab, scan down to the Colorado box to get to the same reports.) Report #1 showed election records were unlawfully deleted. Report #2 showed that 36 wireless devices were discovered with Mesa County’s voting systems. Tina had no idea her efforts to save election records would yield such evidence of election fraud. Nation State Vulnerability Expert, Jeff Lenberg, confirms this as Level 3 Fraud and says it is happening in other states as well. See his link in the Censored Documentaries box on the homepage at CensoredEvidence.org. The free documentary “Let My People Go,” is in the same location and has even more firsthand eyewitnesses’ reports starting at about the 42-minute spot. Mail-returned ballots from phantom voters are used as paper “evidence” of votes the insiders use to manipulate elections. Investigations are needed to determine if this fraudulent voting is executed at post offices or county offices or both. It’s also likely to occur electronically since it can be determined who has and has not voted from registered databases in real time analysis. The speed at which this election manipulation occurs is suggestive that this is computer program algorithmically driven.

During the Colorado 2022 Regular Session, bill SB22-153 titled “Internal Election Security Measures” was passed. Section 11 now makes it illegal to do a Tina-Peters-like full EMS backup when it had always been legal before. While the title “Trusted Build” now seems very suspicious, the title “Internal Election Security Measure” seems to keep Colorado’s SOS election matters very private for Griswold, her staff and other insiders. Does this bill and those who supported it (Stephen Fenberg, Kevin Priola, and Susan Lontine) seem to have the best interest for all Colorado citizens? Does this also match the unrealistic secrecy pattern around the Trusted Build Jena Griswold demanded? Jena Griswold created her own Colorado “statutory” law, without legislative approval, when she demanded that no outside consultant could observe the “Trusted Build” process and that county clerks must report who would be attending the “Trusted Build” one week before the scheduled “Trusted Build” process in their county.

When Jena Griswold learned that Tina Peters was taking the above forensic reports to Mesa County Board of Supervisors, Griswold initiated a press release and lawfare via DA Dan Rubinstein against Peters. Griswold then demanded that Peters recant her public statements about the voting equipment with Election Order 2022-01. Was Griswold abusing Peters’ freedom of speech rights as a whistleblower? Griswold removed Peters from office via DA Rubinstein’s lawfare. Griswold then published a press release on January 18, 2022 stating, “Clerk Peters’ actions constituted one of the nation’s first insider threats where an official, elected to uphold free, fair, and secure selections risked the integrity of the election system in an effort to prove unfounded conspiracy theories.” But did the media think to ask what exactly was Tina’s insider threats? What past elections and/or voting systems were compromised and how? One claim was that Tina had released BIOS passwords, but did the media think to ask specifically how was this exactly done? We will come back to why this is so important. Both DA Rubinstein and Griswold’s claim that the “Election Projects” backups preserved all election records are now demonstrated to be false by the three Mesa County Forensic reports available for all to read at tinapeters.us under the Reports tab.

Note carefully that the phrase “unfounded conspiracy theories” from Griswold is still a popular media decoy that is totally disconnected from the engineering science of computerized voting systems. When subject matter experts show with empirical scientific evidence, we are not talking theories anymore, but repeatable, observable, engineering and scientific facts. Scientific American, November 2018, article titled: The Vulnerabilities of Our Voting Machines, by Jen Schwartz, interviewed J. Alex Halderman who directs the University of Michigan Center for Computing and Society. Professor Halderman was asked, “Over the past decade how has the field of election cybersecurity changed?” He replied, “It has moved away from a position of hubris.“ “Hubris” is defined as excessive pride or over confidence.” (It would be wise if major media drop their mistaken overconfidence too. It’s now obvious to those in the know that major media has not caught up with the cyber security science yet, but this may be intentional.) Halderman continued, “Now that there have been major academic studies there is scientific consensus that there will be vulnerabilities in polling place equipment.” Halderman also warned that “our outmoded and under-tested electronic voting systems are increasingly vulnerable to attacks.” Professor Halderman added, “To my knowledge, no state has done any kind of rigorous forensics on their voting machines to see whether they had been compromised.” Fortunately, Tina Peters’ accidental discovery of vote manipulations now changes this record Halderman cites as documented evidence is available for the public to see at tinapeters.us.

Griswold’s public press release included accusing Tina of releasing BIOS (Basic Input Output System) passwords. This was brought up again during Tina’s trial by prosecutor Robert Shapiro, but neither he nor Judge Matthew Barrett would permit the computer screenshots to be shown to the jury. Why? The BIOS passwords couldn’t be read. They had been redacted before their online postings. Does this lie constitute a professional complaint against Shapiro? He was aware of this falsehood, pushed by Colorado’s SOS, because he queried Clay Parikh if redacted passwords could be made readable. This was an intentionally vague question to solicit a positive response from Parikh. A hacker like Clay Parikh could likely decode some redacted messages. Someone should have asked, “What was the nature of the redaction associated with Tina’s supposedly released BIOS passwords and could it be deciphered?” Does anyone want this kind of attorney practicing law in their state? Should Judge Matthew Barrett be examined for his political bias of favoring the SOS complaints against Tina and defrauding Tina’s Constitutional freedom of speech, whistleblower, and fair court hearing rights as well?

Now Griswold’s office was just caught releasing 664 BIOS passwords, compromising voting equipment in multiple counties for four to six months from about April to October 2024. Griswold’s response was, “There is no risk posed by this security lapse” and “This was a mistake.” If it doesn’t pose a security risk, why did you (Griswold) accuse Tina of this in just one county? Why did Griswold’s present “fix” to change BIOS passwords didn’t come up when Tina was accused of releasing BIOS passwords for one county? (Once a hacker can get inside a system via a BIOS password, they can leave a backdoor open for them to get back in after BIOS passwords have been changed.) The “This was a mistake” was the same response her office gave when they got caught mailing postcards to approximately 30,000 illegals with reminders to register to vote in 2022. What a massive mistake if true. Should this level of incompetence demand something kind of election change for Colorado citizens?

On the morning of Mesa County’s “Trusted Build,” May 25, 2021, Dominion was already at work by 8 am when Tina arrived. She wanted to capture screen images to show her consultant, Conan Hayes, so he would be fully informed of the actions already in process. Somehow those images got posted, but not by Tina. Griswold, accused Tina of doing this anyway. The “leaked BIOS passwords” never happened, but was the false catalyst sending FBI raids onto Tina, Sherronna Bishop and others’ homes and removing Tina from her elected position. Sherronna’s front door was busted in and both were arrested and electronics taken and not returned. Sherronna was a concerned citizen reporting on voter anomalies to Tina. During Tina’s trial, after Sherronna’s introduction, Sherronna was ready to report on the anomalies she found, but Judge Matthew Barrett quickly shut her down. All that was completely irrelevant, like so much other evidence Tina’s defense team wanted to show the jury. Journalist Rachel Alexander, of the Arizona Sun Times, posted on her X account, dated August 15, 2024, “The judge excluded much of her defense as ‘not relevant.’ Wasn’t allowed to delve into her concerns about the voting machine tabulators. That’s no different than a Stalin show trial where only the prosecution gets to put on a case.” In contrast, prosecution went full speed ahead uninhibited with their accusations. Judge Barrett sentenced Tina to nine years in prison. She has been in prison since October 3, 2024. Should citizens be aware of this kind of judge practicing law in their communities? Actions against him will only occur if citizens demand it and support the legal efforts. Should the liars, Robert Shapiro and Daniel Rubinstein, be permitted to practice law here? Should they also be prosecuted? Should Tina Peters be forgotten and left in jail for nine years?

Interestingly, bill SB22-153 was created during the 2022 Regular Session. Section 11 now prohibits any other county clerk to do a full Tina-Peters-like EMS backup when it was legal before. Should citizens ask, “Why was this change needed?” The bill’s title, “Internal Election Security Measure” suggests that only the SOS and other insiders have access to this information. How democratic is that? Shouldn’t our voting controls be decentralized at the county level and not concentrated with the SOS staff only in Denver? Griwsold’s office recent and major BIOS leak shouts out for decentralization too. Should citizens be apathetically passive and silent on the use of electronic voting machines?

The posted thirteen indictment counts against Tina Peters and Belinda Knisley seem to be so officially legal. The natural response on first reading is to assume, “Surely, Tina and Belinda must have done something wrong.” But let us carefully analyze them. This list of thirteen indictments was reduced to ten for Tina’s August 2024 trial, but we will still review each one posted on tinapeters.us. Now go ahead and read them located under the Reports tab at tinapeters.us.

No, it’s not you, if you are left wondering, “What exactly did Tina and Belinda do?” after you read each one. Tina’s attorney, John Case, references Colorado Supreme Court’s widely understood principle that, “. . . the indictment must clearly state the essential facts which constitute the offense.” This is so the defendant(s) can prepare a defense. (Reference: Plaintiff’s Motion For A Preliminary Injunction And Supporting Memorandum, dated Nov 27, 2023, pg. 24) Yes, DA Daniel Rubinstein left off the details on purpose. So let us add in the details and see who was defrauded – Colorado citizens or Colorado’s Secretary of State, Jena Griswold.

The operating principle Jena Griswold demanded from each Colorado county clerk was that no outside professional would be permitted to witness “The Trusted” build. This is not Colorado statutory law, but the SOS email orders only. They had the effect of isolating needed subject matter experts from supporting each county’s clerk and recorder. Mr. Case correctly pointed out, “Peters’ actions were not intended to deceive, but instead had the practical purpose of avoiding obstacles improperly created by officials who were trying to erase election records while preventing any copy from being preserved.” (Reference: Plaintiff’s Motion For A Preliminary Injunction And Supporting Memorandum, dated Nov 27, 2023, pg. 26)

Count 1 is for ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE A PUBLIC SERVANT. Jessi Romero is the named public servant from Griswold’s office. If Romero saw Conan Hayes wearing Gerold Wood’s badge, he would have naturally thought this is a Mesa County’s employee and would continue with “The Trusted” build process. Griswold’s office staff were keen to be alert for non-county employees. They would immediately go to the next county in “The Trusted” build process if they suspected an outside subject matter expert was observing them. Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 2 is for ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE A PUBLIC SERVANT. David Underwood is the named public servant associated with Mesa County. He was asked to create a security badge for Gerald Wood. Since it is not clear when Wood reported he did not have the needed skill set, it is not clear what the offense is here. If Wood’s lack of skills was known before the badge was created, then it has the same effect of deception as Count 1 above. Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 3 is for ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE A PUBLIC SERVANT. Stephanie Wenholtz is the named public servant associated with Mesa County that Belinda Knisley “influenced.” Apparently, Wenholtz was told that Gerald Wood would be taking her place during “The Trusted” build. Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 4 is for CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT CRIMINAL IMPERSONATION. Mr. Case pointed out that this indictment fails to give the needed details. He speculates that it appears to be related to Hayes’ use of Wood’s access badge. Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 5 is for ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE A PUBLIC SERVANT. Danny Casias is the named public servant from Griswold’s office. If Casias saw Conan Hayes wearing Gerold Wood’s badge, he would have naturally thought this is a Mesa County’s employee and would continue with “The Trusted” build process. Griswold’s office staff were keen to be alert for non-county employees. They would immediately go to the next county in “The Trusted” build process if they suspected an outside subject matter expert was observing them.  Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 6 is for CRIMINAL IMPERSONATION – CAUSE LIABILITY. Mr. Case pointed out that this indictment fails to give the needed details. It is related to Hayes’ use of Wood’s access badge and asks, “What was the liability to Mr. Wood when they were using it only like a hotel key to get inside the election secure area?”  Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 7 is for CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT CRIMINAL IMPERSONATION – CAUSE LIABILITY. This indictment again lacks detail. What was the liability and to whom?  Question: Who was harmed and how?

Count 8 – IDENTITY THEFT – USES INFORMATION TO OBTAIN THING OF VALUE. Mr. Case pointed out that the use of Gerald Wood’s badge had noting to do toward securing anything of value for Tina or others as the law referenced in this indictment is stated. Question: Who was harmed by the use of Wood’s badge, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 9 – FIRST DEGREE OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT. What was harm caused to another? What was the unlawful act committed by Tina? What benefitable goal was designed by and for Tina? This accusation again falls on its face, until the prosecutors can state the specific offense.

Count 10 – VIOLATION OF DUTY. Prosecution is silently vague with this indictment. Needs to specifically describe the SOS prescribed duty Tina Peters failed to do. Colorado’s SOS orders required Tina Peters to break Colorado statutory law in preserving election records. The duty Tina failed to perform was the erasing of election records that Colorado’s SOS had designed to be erased via “The Trusted” build. Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 11 – FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF SECRETARY OF STATE. The SOS requirements do not supersede Colorado statutory law. Prosecution is silently vague with this indictment. Needs to specifically describe the SOS prescribed duty Tina Peters failed to do. Colorado’s SOS orders required Tina Peters to break Colorado statutory law in preserving election records. The duty Tina failed to perform was the erasing of election records that Colorado’s SOS had designed to be erased via “The Trusted” build. Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 12 – VIOLATION OF DUTY. Prosecution is silently vague on the specific duty Belinda Knisley failed to perform. The SOS requirements do not supersede Colorado statutory law. Needs to specifically describe the SOS prescribed duty Belinda Knisley failed to do. Colorado’s SOS orders required Belinda Knisley to break Colorado statutory law in preserving election records. The duty Belinda Knisley failed to perform was the erasing of election records that Colorado’s SOS had designed to be erased via “The Trusted” build. Question: Who was harmed, Colorado citizens or SOS, Jena Griswold?

Count 13 – FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS OF SECRETARY OF STATE. Prosecution is silently vague on Colorado’s SOS specific requirements and exactly what Belinda Knisley failed to perform. Does prosecution understand that SOS “requirements” do not supersede Colorado statutory law? Prosecution needs to specify how Colorado citizens were harmed.

Sources: The above story was extracted and integrated from my personal experiences and emails, observing Tina’s trial in Grand Junction, Colorado, and reports readily available from tinapeters.us including the free documentary Selection Code. It includes the three Mesa County forensic reports; March 8, 2022 indictment against Tina Peters; Tina’s declaration; and Tina’s attorney, John Case, November 27, 2023 Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. Its foundation is also built upon scientific information from subject matter experts involved with computers, cybersecurity, and database analysis I have collected and made available at CensoredEvidence.org. Note carefully that both major parties have been cheating electronically in our elections in multiple states.

Final Question: If my favorite candidate can “win” without my vote, did my vote count? Most say no, but one told me, “If that’s what it takes to “win” we’re going to do that, because we know we’re right.” I follow up with just one more question. “Well, if my favorite candidate can “win” without my vote, will they read my letters of concern?”

Tyrants will never take our concerns seriously since there are disagreements inside all parties. A national voting holiday with in person voting, instead of electronic voting, will eliminate phantom voting, questionable signature verifications, and ensure Americans live in freedom and safety again. Let us do everything we can to remain the government of, by, and for the people.

Call to Action:

• Tell others what you know or direct them to truthful sources.
• Petition your state and national representatives, County Board of Supervisors, and County district attorneys for serious voting reform and to free Tina.
• Inform your local media – newspapers, radio and television stations.
• If you live in Colorado, please follow the instructions at the top link in the Colorado box, under the States tab at CensoredEvidence.org. Yes, you can make a difference!
• For those who mistakenly think this is only a Colorado problem, must watch “Let My People Go” and Nation State Vulnerability Expert, Jeff Lenberg in the Censored Documentaries box on homepage at CensoredEvidence.org. Level 3 fraud is in all 50 states.

Reference 1 – Clinton Curtis Testimony:

Go to: tinapeters.us and select free documentary [S]election.com, then scan to the 19 minute and 30 second spot. You may also go to CensoredEvidence.org, select the States tab, then scan down to the Colorado box, then scan down to the free documentary Selection Code and scan to the same time spot.

Reference 2 – Texas Rejects Dominion Voting Systems Letter:

Go to CensoredEvidence.org, select the States tab, then scan to the Texas box, then select the top link.

Or select this link: https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/dominion-d-suite-5.5-a.pdf

Reference 3 – Mark Cook’s commentary of Kyle Clark’s interview with Jena Griswold:

Go to CensoredEvidence.org, select the States tab, then the Colorado box. .

Or select this Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBsPnEu8oT0

Some Thoughts for Christians struggling with Moral Dilemmas.

There may be some who believe it is never OK to deceive another. As a general rule, for most of the time, this is absolutely correct. However, if someone hid you from another who wanted to kill you and lied that you left their house already to spare your life, who would not be so grateful for the lie that saved your life? This is exactly what Rahab did to protect Joshua’s spies in Jericho and she’s listed in the genealogy of Christ – Matthew 1:5.

Tina Peters has given you a gift to protect your vote. The real moral question is: “Will you be responsible to protect your children and others from godless tyranny and free an unjustly sentenced Christian grandmother from prison or will you remain cowardly silent?”

Dear staff,                                                                                                                                                  July 30, 2024

A Christian lady will be put on trial this month, July, simply because she refused to change her story of finding government corruption, as our secretary of state requested. You know we are living at a time when evil is called “good” and good is called “evil,” (Isaiah 5:20), but what will you do about it?

Question 1: Should Christians participate in government?

Question 2: If Christians find corruption, should they honestly report it?

Question 3: If a Christian reports it, should he/she be left alone to fight the government as government officials attempt to change the narrative, to hide their criminality, and put that Christian in jail instead?

This is Tina Peters’ story. More details are available from the free documentary “[S]election Code” at TinaPeters.us or freetina.com for court dates and activities planned. You may also see the three Mesa County reports that contain the detailed evidence of election fraud from Tina’s website or mine: CensoredEvidence.org. Go to the “States” tab, then the “Colorado” box.

Question 4: Wouldn’t it be encouraging to Tina, if we joined her in her trial either inside or outside the courtroom? What would Christ’s Golden Rule (Matthew 7:12) command us to do?

Question 5: Wouldn’t it be intimidating to those in power that a growing political constituency was becoming aware of their criminality and those protecting them? How will they know we know if we do not participate in person or letters of protest? Even the wicked Kings Saul and Herod were afraid of the people (1 Samuel 15:23 / Matthew 14:5).

Why am I involved? While working as a technical consultant to the US Space Force, I received a Military and Aerospace advertisement for an upcoming cyber security seminar in April 2021. One class was titled: Why We’ll Never Keep the Bad Guys Out. Yes, our “secure” military computers are being hacked. For over three years I’ve collected evidence from subject matter experts, of both major political parties, who confirm massive electronic election fraud is real. Check out the free documentary “Let My People Go” in the “Censored Documentaries” box on the Home page at CensoredEvidence.org for some shocking findings and what some communities are doing about it. You will find more independent testimonies under the Categories 1 tab. The Epoch Times just published “China Had Persistent Access to US, Allied Networks for Years: White House Official.” This is an independent testimony now coming from Israel Soong, a Biden administration official, that our military computers and other systems are being hacked.

Please don’t miss the point. Godless Republicans and godless Democrats are stealing our elections and becoming tyrants over us with very strong anti-Christian hatred against us and public policies following. Question 6: Do you realize innocent Christians have been in American jails for over three years in violation of their Constitutional rights? The attached essay is a story of how early American ministers opposed tyranny. All eyes across our nation will be watching this historical trial in Grand Junction, Colorado. It will also be a historical test of tyranny and the American Christian response to it for our time. What will be recorded of your involvement? Please pray! God knows who can do more. Since faith without works is dead (James 2:26), isn’t prayer without works also dead?

Question 7: Wouldn’t our silence be confirmation of the popular narrative “evil is ‘good’ and good is ‘evil’”?
Question 8: If you remain silent, while Tina goes to jail, why should any Christian participate in government again?

Sincerely,

Jearell C. Kelley, P.E.
Former Technical Consultant to the U.S. Space Force (retired)
Email: jerry.kelley428@gmail.com   
PO Box 5791, Colorado Springs, CO 80931

A Follow-up Letter to Silent “Pastors”
By Jerry Kelley – A citizen journalist with The Peak News (10/28/2024)

Subject: A Christian lady accidently discovered election fraud on a massive scale. She was unjustly tried by state actors and then sentenced with a 9-year prison term while the American Church remains silent.

So, justice is driven back, and righteousness stands at a distance; truth has stumbled in the streets, honesty cannot enter. Truth is nowhere to be found, and whoever shuns evil becomes a prey. The Lord looked and was displeased that there was no justice. He saw that there was no one, he was appalled that there was no one to intervene. Isaiah 59:14-16a (NIV)

Judge Matthew Barrett censored Tina Peters’ defense and only focused on the state’s charges. Justice was driven back and righteous testimonies were forced to stand silently at a distance. Truth didn’t have a chance to stand in Judge Barrett’s court and popular media censored truth from standing in the streets. Tina Peters, a Christian grandmother and Mesa County clerk and recorder, wanted to shun the evil of erasing QR codes, which are necessary for verifying past elections, but became a prey of a nine-year prison sentence by wicked lawfare from Colorado’s state actors. Why? Tina’s full system backup accidently caught state actors creating unauthorized databases and not transmitting all the votes into them. (It’s the Nation-State Vulnerability Expert, Jeff Lenberg’s Level 3 fraud description no one is talking about and truth falls down again. You can see his link in the Censored Documentaries box at CensoredEvidence.org.)

Colorado’s secretary of state instructions, to do a simple backup, only protected the unauthorized databases and the software upgrade called “Trusted Build” erased the criminal evidence of how they were unlawfully created. This election fraud crime happened twice. Once in the November 2020 General Election and again in the Grand Junction Municipal April 2021 Election. It’s still in place for 2024.

When the sentence for a crime is not quickly carried out, the hearts of the people are filled with schemes to do wrong. Ecclesiastes 8:11 (NIV)

American ministers once spoke against tyranny and motivated Americans to go against the most powerful army and navy in the world for their freedom and independence. Political sermons were once annual pulpit events in many churches with the most popular published for wide distribution. But such truths now stumble in our sanctuaries as ministers proudly say, “We’re not political here.” When does God’s Word not speak on such topics after our Founding Fathers built this nation on biblical principles?

Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; but blessed is he who keeps the law.  Proverbs 29:18 (NIV)

Without this revelation Christians cast off the restraint of being salt and light in this controversial environment. Why shouldn’t chaos reign as “Christians” left the public square and Satan filled it with his folks? Over 30 million “Christians” do not even vote, because of the mistaken belief “God’s in total control,” while they give full energies to make their careers and vacations come true (Amos 5:14-15; 6:1, 4-7).

The Lord looked and was displeased at injustice and was even more appalled by silent ministers who failed to intervene for fair elections and rescue the punished innocent while the guilty go free. The above attached July 30th letter was sent to fifty-one ministers in the Grand Junction area with prompts to support Tina at her trial, but only one came – www.AppletonChristian.org. Colorado county clerks and recorders now say among themselves, “I don’t want to be Tina-Petered.” So, they do as they are told by Colorado’s tyrannical secretary of state, Jena Griswold, and justice is driven back and righteousness stands at a distance. Now with Colorado’s new law SB22-153 via section 11, no county clerk can do a Tina-Peters-like full system backup and catch future fraud by state actors. Justice is driven back again, because truth is hard to find. Anyone may see the archived trial proceedings at westernslopenow.com and filter for “tina peters.” The scientific forensic evidence of fraud is found at tinapeters.us. Select the Reports tab and read the two-page executive summary of Report #3. Correct convictions fail because truth needs to stand up first. Truth is nowhere to be found by those too busy with the cares of this life to simply read this report. America’s 500,000 ministers could help Americans stand for truth, protect freedoms and ensure fair elections in all states, but ignorance and fear (Rev 21:8) of controversy has them bound. If they could only share truth with Christ-like courage as Christ opposed the civic and religious leaders of his day (Luke 13:31-32; Mark 11:27-33). Now look at what Christ said via the Holy Spirit through Peter to New Testament Christians.

I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles. 2 Peter 3:2 (NIV)

The prophets warned that governments and kings, not founded on God’s laws, are to be resisted (Proverbs 16:12; 25:26; 28:4; Psalms 89:14; 94:16, 20; Jer 5:28-29, 22:16). And Nathan, a godly prophet, took political action for selecting the right king as seen in first Kings chapter one, verse eleven. Even the apostle Paul’s Romans chapter thirteen specified that “the powers that be are ordained of God” were of “rulers [who] are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.” German Christians misread verse one, as many Americans do today, and mistakenly believe anyone in governmental power is God’s choice PERIOD. No wonder Hitler grew in political power and Americans also suffer from godless rulers. If God chose all leaders, Hosea, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, would have never written Hosea 8:4. “You have kings, but not by me.” Americans, initially British citizens, died from British bullets and their homes destroyed by British naval bombardments for over a year under King George III’s tyrannical rule before our Founding Fathers signed the Declaration of Independence. America, with its Constitution and Bill of Rights, would have never come into existence without the ministers who first preached liberty. The British Crown was determined to use its full military power to take away American civic and religious liberties.

Now Americans are on the verge of losing it all due to silent ministers. You can read about it in, The Criminalization of Christianity by Janet L. Folger; Dark Agenda – The War to Destroy Christian America by David Horowitz (a Jew); and Rights and Freedoms in Peril – An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America by Tom Fitton. How does God look at the silent “neutral” American Church?

On the day you stood aloof while strangers carried off his wealth and foreigners entered his gates and cast lots for Jerusalem, you were like one of them. Obadiah 11 (NIV)

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ Matthew 7:21-23

Is anything more evil than remaining silent (Ezek 33) on evangelism, silent on wickedness and ignoring the suffering innocent (Isa 58:6; 59:16a)? Most “Christians” fail the New Testament example of preaching the Word wherever they go (Acts 8:4). If one isn’t obeying Christ, are they even saved? He (Jesus) became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him (Heb 5:9). But try to explain that to people who think they are fully pleasing Christ and heaven bound.  (See The Peak News tab at CensoredEvidence.org.)

The Bias of Judge Matthew Barrett, Tina Peters’ Trial Judge
by Jearell C. Kelley, PE & Former Technical Consultant to the US Space Force (retired)
August 16, 2024

Associated Press writer Colleen Slevin reported that “Judge Matthew Barrett… ruled the defense cannot try to make the case about election integrity or Dominion.” (Note 1) This was obvious to anyone who witnessed his handling of this trial with even the most basic knowledge of cybersecurity issues. Tina’s defense team was immediately and constantly shut down multiple times whenever they got close to these topics with a serious final warning by the judge to defense attorney, Mr. John Case, if he attempted it again.

Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct under Canon 2 states, “A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL THE JUDGE’S ACTIVITIES.” Impropriety is defined as the quality or condition of being improper or incorrectness. Despite the judges’ daily closing instructions to the jury to avoid any social content, it was obvious the judge had already been popular-media programmed or influenced with unscientific conclusions on election integrity or simply biased with incorrectness on this topic as measured against the latest non-partisan scientific research.

Scientific American, November 2018, article titled: The Vulnerabilities of Our Voting Machines, by Jen Schwartz, (Note 2) interviewed J. Alex Halderman who directs the University of Michigan Center for Computing and Society. Professor Halderman was asked, “Over the past decade how has the field of election cybersecurity changed?” He replied, “It has moved away from a position of hubris [“hubris” is defined as excessive pride or over confidence].” (It would be wise if major media drop their mistaken overconfidence too. It’s now obvious to those in the know that major media has not caught up with cyber security science yet. This constant publishing of falsehoods may be intentional. We will later address this.) Halderman continued, “Now that there have been major academic studies there is scientific consensus that [t]here will be vulnerabilities in polling place equipment.” Halderman also warned that “our outmoded and under-tested electronic voting systems are increasingly vulnerable to attacks.”

Professor Halderman added, “To my knowledge, no state has done any kind of rigorous forensics on their voting machines to see whether they had been compromised.” Fortunately, Tina Peters’ accidental discovery of voter manipulation now changes this record Halderman cites. Because Tina did a full backup of the EMS (Election Manage System) before and after Colorado’s Secretary of State “Trusted Build,” Tina discovered vote manipulation. Tina was initially and only concerned with saving QR codes that could potentially be erased. Her backup did not capture how specific voters voted, nor did it capture personal identification information, nor did it expose hacking vulnerabilities as the prosecution tried to convey with their false claim of published “bios passwords.” In truth, as supported by subject matter expert testimonies, no such bios passwords were exposed. And even if they had been, the final instructions of the “Trusted Build” would reset this to new passwords. Why did the prosecution promote such falsehoods? (This too should bring a serious ethics complaint against the prosecution. It was obvious that their deceitful tactics confused the jury.) Dominion is used in 62 of Colorado’s 64 counties. The Colorado Secretary of State’s “Trusted Build” very likely erased this criminal activity of voter manipulation in 61 Colorado counties. Mesa County is the exception because of Tina’s bold action to save election records. Tina’s attorney, John Case, said, “Thank God!” in his closing arguments. But did the jury understand his comment? Answer: Not at all, since all the damning evidence of Colorado Secretary of State’s and Dominion’s criminal actions were completely censored from them by Judge Matthew Barrett.

This connects well to Texas’ decision to prohibit Dominion in their state. The Secretary of State of Texas released a report dated January 24, 2020 signed by Jose A. Esparza, Deputy Secretary of State, explaining why Texas was rejecting Dominion voting machines. The Texas examiner raised concerns of efficiency and accuracy and concluded Dominion was not “safe from fraudulent or unauthorized manipulation.” (Note 3)

Why is Colorado using Dominion? Why did Judge Barrett prohibit the evidence of fraud as reported in the three Mesa County forensic reports directly tied to Tina’s case that showed Colorado’s Secretary of State and/or Dominion creating two sets of election books (databases) and did not transmit all the votes to the second database? (Note 4) So, Tina was judged guilty on Count 10 for disobeying Colorado’s Secretary of State orders by permitting a person from the public to witness the “Trusted Build.” If Tina had obeyed, she would have broken Colorado statutory law of failing to preserve election records for 25 months, because Colorado Secretary of State’s “Trusted Build” erased this data. This absurdity shows Tina Peters is guilty either way if one only looks at the procedural “violations” as defined by Colorado’s Secretary of State’s instructions Judge Barrett only focused on, while Tina would later be discovered at fault if such records were demanded by the public for an audit. Tina, not Colorado Secretary of State, would be the person primarily responsible for the records in her county.

Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct under Canon 3 states, “A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES OF HIS OR HER OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY with section (1) states, “A judge should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it. A judge should be unswayed by partisan interest, public clamor, or the fear of criticism. . .”

Judge Barrett was quick to reprimand defense attorney, Mr. John Case’s use of the word “lying,” but completely ignored prosecuting attorney, Mr. Robert Sapiro’s, use of the same word. Is this what an impartial judge does? For the judge to focus on Tina’s resistance to the Secretary of State’s instructions and ignore Tina’s statutory right to manage and preserve elections in her county, showed Judge Barrett’s partisan interest and bias. This showed up again during Sherronna Bishop’s testimony who was also labeled a “Co-Conspirator” without correction by the judge. Again, unashamed open bias by the judge. It was obvious that Sherronna was ready to report on the election anomalies she found in her canvassing that prompted her visits with Tina Peters, but her testimony was immediately shut down by the judge. So let me testify of my canvassing experience.

In April of 2021 I volunteered with the Election Integrity Plan. Our reference was the El Paso County 2020 Voter Registration Data that is publicly available. In my first hour, I was at a very small apartment complex on Nevada avenue in Colorado Springs. Surprisingly, five units did not even exist. I can imagine one or two tenants forgetting what unit they were in, but would five forget and record the wrong unit? Are these real voters? My relatively new neighborhood still has most of the original homeowners. Again, referencing the 2020 Voter Registration listing and asking my neighbor down the street if a particular “registered” lady lived at his house, he immediately said, “No, she has never lived here!” Then I met a receptionist at a local business who said her mother lived most of her life in Oklahoma, didn’t know if she ever lived in Colorado, and died over twenty years ago. Somehow, she still got her mother’s ballot for the November 2020 election. Would any of these not be classified as election anomalies and should they be brought to the county clerk and recorder’s attention as Sherronna did with her findings to Tina? Since I was finding these issues so quickly in a random search, isn’t that suggestive that the density of this problem is worse than we realize. This isn’t all I found and reported of phantom voters either. Note: Phantom voters create a margin to use in selecting the ‘right” candidate for those on the inside. This censorship of such evidence by Judge Barrett is prohibited by Canon 3, section (1) as reported above, because such censorship favors partisan interest.

By the way, while we were canvassing, the FBI wanted to prohibit our canvassing and attempted to pressure some states to shut us down. We were also lied about in the media that we were intimidating voters. Tell me, would you be intimidated if you were asked if you had any problems while voting? No one asked how anyone voted, which was another lie promoted by major media. We assured all that we would report any issues they had. Some even thanked us for asking. The FBI messed up again when they discovered that the Russians did hack the 2016 election in a few states, but only reported to election officials in Florida. Shouldn’t every election official in all the affected states know about this? One insider attempted to alert others, but she was charged with leaking classified information and sentenced with a five-year prison term. What did the Russian hackers do? They got into poll registration databases and scrambled the data so poll workers could not verify the identity of registered voters. This forced election workers to fall back on manual methods, which created long lines outside voting precincts, since the election workers had not prepared for this. Voters in all parties, who couldn’t wait to vote, were disenfranchised. [Kill Chain – The Cyber War on America’s Elections has the evidence. (Note 6) The FBI, CIA, and DOJ attempted to publish Trump as a Russian asset, but Mueller, Duran’s reports and Nunes’ findings completely debunked the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, initiated by Hillary Clinton and the DNC.]

I invite the reader to ask the following question and record the answers they collect. Question: If my favorite candidate won by cheating did my vote count? Most said, “No” to me. But one person boldly said, “If cheating is what it takes to win, we’re going to do it, because we know we’re right.” (Note 8) With that I followed up with one more question, “Well, if my favorite candidate can ‘win’ without my vote, will he/she read my letters of concern?” (Note: I did not ask this question while canvassing, only with family, friends and sales people at my front door.)

Tyrants have no need to read any letters of concern from anyone, not even from their own party members. Because Colorado’s Secretary of State had her fingers all over the raiding of Tina’s office, including covering Tina’s office windows so Tina’s aids could not see what the Secretary of State’s team were doing, along with the Judge Barrett completely shutting down the defense’s approach to revealing Tina’s and Sherronna’s motivations, has all the stinking smell of partisan interest. Again, in violation of Canon 3, section (1) as stated above.

Since differences of opinion exist in all political parties, it is hoped that the media promoting confusion and lies on this issue wake up and support full open transparency, before they too are stepped on by the tyrants.

Canon 3, section (4) has, “A judge should accord to every person who is legally interested in a proceeding, or his or her lawyer, full right to be heard according to law, . . .”

Tina’s final and only permitted court comment was, “I have reviewed the case, the purpose of my testimony would be to offer evidence, the court has excluded (it), and therefore I decline.” As a witness to Judge Matthew Barrett’s handling of this trial, Tina would not have been permitted to testify of her findings of elections she was responsible for. This is a direct violation to Canon 3, section (4) as cited above. What more evidence must the public have to see that Tina’s trial was completely motivated by partisan interest?

Just in case the reader missed the latest news, Musk said a massive cyber attack delayed his interview with Trump. (Note 5) Professor Halderman already confirmed this in the Scientific American article cited earlier with, “Over the past 10 years cyber warfare went from something that seemed like science fiction to something you read about almost every day in the newspaper.” (Note 2)

The documentary Kill Chain – The Cyber War on America’s Elections, released in March of 2020, showed a DEFCON hacker wirelessly hacking into a nearby voting machine. The camera went up to the guys standing around the hacked voting machine and it was obvious, they were totally confused. This models our county election clerks’ confusion as well. They wouldn’t know what’s happening either. (Note 6) [I have personally heard Colorado’s Secretary of State in testimony at our Capitol claim that election clerks were in fear for their lives. Those in the know about election fraud are not blaming Colorado clerks, but the SOS. Is Gena Griswold pushing a false narrative?] The DEFCON wireless hacker then reported, “A person can drive by voting places, not look at the voting machines, change the vote and not be discovered, because no paper trail is left.” The Mesa County reports, Tina help generated, revealed 36 wireless devices in the election equipment. Do you honestly think our elections are not also being manipulated? If you want to protect your vote, see what other communities are doing in the free documentary “Let My People Go” in the Censored Documentaries box at CensoredEvidence.org. Sheriff Richard Mack’s Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association could also help. (Note 7)

At one point Judge Barrett admitted, “I may not be the brightest person.” Interestingly, we, Tina-trial-observers, had already made that assessment of him that he was in over his head. But it may not be his fault considering major media’s bias and continually bold-face lying on election integrity and Dominion. (Note 8)

Notes/References:

1) Associated Press title, “Colorado Clerk who became hero to election conspiracists wanted to preserve data, lawyer says,” by Colleen Slevin, August 1, 2024.

 2) Go to CensoredEvidence.org and select the “Categories 1” tab, then the “Independent Testimonies of Election Fraud” box to get access to this Scientific American article.

3) Go to CensoredEvidence.org, select the “States” tab near the top, then scan down to the “Texas” box to get the official Texas report.

 4) Go to TinaPeters.us and select the “Reports/Filing” tab for the three forensic reports performed by cyber security experts with decades of cybersecurity, computer and big data analysis experience. Brief resumes Include:

(A) Doug Gould taught Advanced Forensic Techniques to State Law Enforcement, Military and major corporate customers at the World Institute for Security Enhancement.

(B) Jeffrey O’Donnell has over 40 years of computers, full Stack software, database developer and analyst experience. Had developed numerous “big data” analysis systems and is the President of Qest Development, a full-service software consulting and publishing company, and is Chief Information Officer of Ordros Analytics, which specializes in election analytics of all types.

(C) Dr. Walter C. Daugherity is a computer consultant and also Senior Lecturer Emeritus in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at Texas A&M University. He graduated from Oklahoma Christian University with a degree in mathematics, and then earned master’s and doctor’s degrees from Harvard University, which he attended on a Prize Fellowship from the National Science Foundation. As a computer expert he has consulted for major national and international firms, and for government agencies. He helped develop the national computer keyboard standard and invented integrated user training within computer applications as well as various electronic computer interfaces.

As a computer science and engineering teacher and researcher, he has published 26 research articles from over $2.8 million in funded research projects, plus conference papers and other publications. He taught many areas of computer science and engineering for 37 years (32 years at Texas A&M University), including artificial intelligence, quantum computing, programming and software design, and cyber-ethics. At Harvard he received the Bowdoin Prize and medal for writing, and in 2015 was named a Distinguished Alumnus of Oklahoma Christian University. He is a life member of the Association for Computing Machinery and American MENSA.

5) The Epoch Times article titled: Musk Says Massive Cyberattack Delayed Trump Interview by Jacob Burg, 8/13/2024

6) Go to CensoredEvidence.org, select Categories 1 tab, then the “Independent Testimonies of Election Fraud” box and scan down for the Kill Chain documentary link. This documentary also showed how the Georgia Republican governor, Brian Kemp, with very high probabilities, stole his position in 2018 and then took the voting machine (ES&S – Election System and Software) personnel into his staff. Should we wonder why he “won” again in 2022 with no changes to Georgia’s voting systems?

7) Sheriff Richard Mack – Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association.
Office: 602-268-9268, Cell: 928-432-1879, sheriffmack@hotmail.com, cspoa.org

Sheriff Mack and six other officers won a Supreme Court Case for State Sovereignty (MACK/PRINTZ V. USA) when they were at the same time threatened for arrest if they didn’t go along with the Brady bill. His organization would be great to confiscate fraudulent voting machines. His organization then needs the public’s support.

 8) It seems major media have this same problem of lying, cheating, and censoring. The Trump-Russia collusion hoax was debunked. Fifty-one Intelligent agents said Hunter’s Laptop had the marking of Russian disinformation, but later exposed as true, Wuhan lab leak first denied then exposed, Lockdowns and masks don’t work was finally revealed, the fact that Covid vaccines did not stop the spread of Covid was finally published, Ivermectin, with growing evidence of saving lives from Covid death if used early, was finally reported. Reported deaths from Covid vaccines are slowly coming out. Did you know Pfizer wanted to withhold Covid vaccine safety data for 75 years before releasing it to the public, but was overruled by US District Judge Mark Pittman? Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Pfizer VP with almost 30 years of drug safety experience, believes 500,000 Americans have died because of the Covid vaccine. Have some Americans become so selfish to protect their positions, money and power that they will lie and censor information to protect their private interest at the expense of others?

Colorado’s Tyrannical Secretary of State – Jena Griswold
By Jearell C Kelley, PE & Former technical consultant to the US Space Force (retired)

LINK: Mark Cook’s commentary on the Kyle Clark – Jena Griswold Interview is an eye opener. Is Griswold lying?

Texas’ Secretary of State released a report dated January 24, 2020 and signed by Deputy Secretary of State Jose A Esparza that explained why Texas rejected Dominion voting machines. The reason, “Dominion was not safe from fraudulent or unauthorized manipulation.”

Why is Colorado using Dominion? Answer 1: Our Secretary of State and Dominion needs access for vote manipulation.

Proof: Dominion is used in 62 of Colorado’s 64 counties. Tina Peters, an elected Election Clerk in Mesa County until removed by Colorado’s Secretary of State, did a complete system backup of the EMS (Election Management System) before and after Colorado’s Secretary of State’s “Trusted Build” and discovered accidently via three subject matter experts, with decades of professional experience, of a second unauthorized database created and not all votes transferred to the second database. Those that were transferred are not confirmed to have the same original vote-selections either. The insiders can completely manufacture any election results they desire now. Tina also accidently discovered the SOS’s “Trusted Build” erasing this criminality activity and other election records required by Colorado Statutory Law to be saved for 25 months.

Why is Colorado using Dominion? Answer 2: This fraud has been hidden from the public by a deceived, censoring and lying media for political purposes.

Fraud Evidence:

• Go to TinaPeters.us, click on Reports/Filings tab and see the three Forensic Reports.
• Then Colorado got caught prompting non-citizens to register to vote. See link: “Colorado Caught Trying to Register Illegals to Vote” in the Colorado box under the States tab at CensoredEvidence.org.
• In volunteering with publicly available voter registration data in April 2021, I’ve found phantom voters. A few examples are:

1. In my first hour, I was at a very small apartment complex in Colorado Springs. Surprisingly, five units did not exist. I can imagine one or two tenants forgetting what unit they were in, but would five forget and record the wrong unit? Are these real voters?
2. My relatively new neighborhood still has most of the original homeowners. Referencing the 2020 Voter Registration listing and asking my neighbor if a particular “registered” lady lived at his house, he immediately said, “No, she has never lived here!”
3. Then I met a receptionist at a local business who said her mother lived most of her life in Oklahoma, didn’t know if she ever lived in Colorado, and died over twenty years ago. Somehow, she still got her mother’s ballot for the November 2020 election.

The free documentary “Let My People Go” at CensoredEvidence.org shows how phantom votes are manipulating elections and how some citizens are protecting their votes. Citizens must also demand that electronic voting machines and mailed ballots, except to deployed military and the disabled, be removed from Colorado. Our sheriffs should be prompted to remove voting machines and bipartisan citizens employed to count.