Colorado County Clerk TINA PETERS Says Globalists Are Taking Over, Describes Rampant Voting Machine Fraud

In a new interview with Silicon Valley entrepreneur Steve Kirsch, Tina Peters, the Mesa County Clerk & Recorder in Colorado, outlines how Dominion voting machines allow for election tampering. Peters also describes how there is now a “uniparty” in the U.S. government run by globalists with the intent of destroying America’s sovereignty and the Constitution.

In a new interview with Silicon Valley entrepreneur and founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation (VSRF) Steve Kirsch, Mesa County, Colorado Clerk & Recorder Tina Peters describes how the 2020 general and 2021 municipal election vote tallies in her county were altered during a Dominion Voting Systems software update in May of 2021. Peters claims—with election machine server images to back up her story—that the vote tallies changed from before Dominion’s software update (dubbed “The Trusted Build” update) to after. In the new interview, Peters not only outlines how the election fraud was executed, but also her understanding that the U.S. government has been infiltrated by “globalists” such as George Soros, with the intent of destroying America’s sovereignty.

In her interview with Kirsch—immediately above—Peters describes how she stumbled upon the tally shenanigans with the votes from Mesa County. Peters, a former owner of a construction business and mother to a Navy Seal who perished in a skydiving accident in 2017, notes that she uncovered the fact that the vote tallies had been tampered with when Dominion, under the direction of Democrat Secretary of State Jena Griswold, came to the county to perform the system update.

Prior to Griswold and the Dominion reps coming to the county, Peters hired a “top-level government white hat” to record the election machine server images. When Griswold and the Dominion reps came to perform the Trusted Build update—which Griswold has referred to as a “routine update to voting equipment done in every county annually” and deleted a QR code program that, according to Peters, “would’ve made it impossible for [herself] to do an audit”—they began working prior to Peters’ arrival.

“I got there about eight o’ clock and [the Dominion reps] were already there, working fast and furious,” Peters said in a documentary film dubbed Selection Code (available for free here). Because the person she had selected to oversee the update wasn’t present, Peters recorded video of the Dominion reps so she could give it to him after the fact to see if he could “make some sense of what they were doing.”

After the Dominion reps had installed the Trusted Build update, Peters took another server image for comparison. This was done with the accompaniment of private sector software engineer Gerald Wood according to Peters, although Wood has come out and said that he was not present during the upgrade. Rather, Wood says, Peters must’ve given his official government ID to somebody else who assumed his identity and attended the update in his stead.

Using a claim that Peters had leaked passwords used to access the county’s voting system by Dominion and the Secretary of State to the blog The Gateway Pundit, Peters says Secretary of State Griswold, as well as other county officials, obtained a search warrant and came into her elections office. During their time in the elections office, Peters says they wouldn’t let her Chief Deputy observe what was happening, and even papered over windows as she tried to watch and take pictures. After several hours, Griswold, et al. let in the Chief Deputy and claimed that “settings had been changed” on the office’s video surveillance equipment. (Peters says in Selection Code “I can assure you no settings were ever changed.”)

During a subsequent press conference, Griswold claimed that Peters had tampered with the video surveillance records that monitored what happened in the Recorder’s office. “Video surveillance was not continuous and cannot confirm chain of custody of voting equipment, and is inconsistent with my department’s understanding of the normal course of business in Mesa County,” Griswold said in the press conference.

Jena Griswold. Image: Selection Code

Peters points out in Selection Code that she and her staff didn’t even know that Griswold and Dominion reps had secret passwords that allowed them to access the county’s voting system. “Until she revealed that… Dominion and the Secretary of State had secret passwords into the Mesa County equipment, no one knew that.” Peters adds in the documentary that “I thought my office and my clerks were the only ones that had passcodes. And they’re locked up.”

When Peters took to Facebook Live to tell her constituents that the voting machines “needed to be more transparent to the people,” Griswold demanded that she renounce her claims. Peters refused, however, and Griswold subsequently went to a judge, sued Peters, and kicked Peters out of her office “unlawfully” and “labeled [Peters] a criminal.”

As a result, the FBI raided Peters’ home, with the Department of Justice claiming Peters had “raised doubts” about the legitimacy of the 2020 election. “They took every storage device, every thumb drive, every computer I’ve ever owned,” Peters says in the documentary.

Despite the raid, and all of the other punishment directed at Peters, she was still able to have the before-and-after election server machine images analyzed. In Selection Code, IT experts Jeffrey O’Donnell, who’s the chief information officer at Ordros Analytics, and Walter C. Daugherty, a senior lecturer emeritus at the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at Texas A&M University, explain how the vote tallies were altered due to the Trusted Build update.

“Everything that had been on that drive before [the Trusted Build] update was gone,” O’Donnell says in Selection Code. “The reason we know it was deliberate is because of Tina Peters,” Daugherty adds.

The documentary—as well as three technical forensic reports available on Peters’ website—describes how there are three primary databases involved in Dominion’s voting systems in Mesa County; a tabulation database, an adjudication database, and a master database. Poll workers scan ballots into the system in batches of up to 100, and the Dominion machine makes an image of each ballot, creating an accounting for each batch that’s saved in the tabulation database. Batches are then stored in the adjudication database along with unique ballot ID information about each ballot. It is with these databases that something went awry with the vote tallies.

As O’Donnell explains in the documentary:

“Without the clerks doing anything… Something inside of the machines created new databases for two out of the three. If you look at these two databases as sort of sets of books, new sets of books were created. They were initially empty, and then within the next few minutes, about 20,000 thousand of the 25,000 ballots, the records of them—you know, the actual information—was copied to the new database, leaving 5,500 sitting in the old database. Those 20,000 that were moved to the new database, that were copied to the new database, they went through the system again as if they were new, but the number of adjudications—the number of ballots that it couldn’t read—wasn’t the same. It was off by several hundred. The way that those images were looked at did not represent the same ballots exactly as they had the first time or those numbers would’ve matched.”

O’Donnell, Daugherty, and others go on to discuss a trio of extraordinary security flaws with the Dominion voting machines used for elections in Mesa County—including one blatantly illegal one. The cybersecurity experts say that Mesa County’s Dominion machines had, for example, 36 wireless modemssome as small as a hair according to Peters—which could enable cell phones and other external computers to access the machines and alter the election results. (Which is illegal according to Colorado law.) Dominion’s machines also had unauthorized software on them; specifically, Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio, which the documentary refers to as “an easy button for manipulation of databases.” (Indeed, the brief intro to the program embedded immediately above shows how it is specifically designed to manipulate data on servers wirelessly.)

On top of that O’Donnell says the figures that “actually [say] how many votes are for what candidate exists in one place in the database” of a given Dominion machine. The data, O’ Donnell says, is stored in a single table, and if he “were to go in using the tools that are installed on the server and [change] a number in one of those… say [instead of] four [votes] for Biden [he programmed it to say] 4,000, when they ran the [vote tally] reports, it would show 4,000.” Meaning somebody could go into a Dominion machine wirelessly, adjust the vote tally, and not have to worry about the new tally gelling with other authentication data. This constitutes a single point of attack and a single point of failure” in Dominion’s machines, O’Donnell says.

In the instance of Mesa County’s 2020 general election, O’Donnell says he believes that the 5,500 votes that were left sitting on the old database of one Dominion machine after the covert creation of the new databases “[were] not real.”

Image: Selection Code

“Mesa County is a very, very red county,” O’Donnell says. “In 2016 it went roughly 65-28 [percent] toward Trump. Even when you analyze just the mail-in ballots from Mesa, Trump still won that county handily, even through the mail-in. If you analyze the [5,500 votes left on the original database], they are within a couple votes 50-50 [percent] between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. This is a 65-35 county.”

In essence, O’Donnell claims, this scheme allows whoever is remotely controlling the Dominion machines to “point shave” votes away from one candidate and give them to another one. In the instance of the 2020 general election, O’Donnell shows how, in a very red (Republican) county like Mesa County, votes could’ve been taken away from Trump without changing the outcome of the election in the county. The Trump votes then could’ve been converted to votes for Biden and used to supplement other county votes in the state; ensuring the Democrat candidate would win the state overall for the presidential election. (Which Biden did.)

In her interview with Kirsch, Peters fills in more details about her ongoing saga, noting that she is still very much under attack from state—and federal—authorities. “[T]he [district attorney], all the law enforcement, all the judges in Colorado [who] have basically… been selected, have come down on me,” Peters tells Kirsch. “There’s an indictment, there’s seven felonies, four misdemeanors, ethics violations… they’re using lawfare to attack me daily.” Peters even notes that U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland was “in on [the case] early, early, on” since she and her colleagues saw “inside of the machines.”

When Peters ran in the Republican primary election for Colorado Secretary of State in June of this year—running against who she claims to be a Mark Zuckerberg “puppet” who worked as the secretary for the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), which has received over $350 million from the Facebook CEO—she says the election was stolen from her; once again due to the shenanigans with the Dominion machines in her county. To try and overturn the results Peters paid $256,000 to do a vote recount. Although according to Peters, it was done illegally by Griswold’s office.

“The recount is supposed to compare a random selection of the machines, the Dominion tabulators, and compare it with the actual voter verified ballots that went through that machine[s],” Peters tells Kirsch. “They did not do that. They had Dominion come in and the Secretary of State just said use test ballots, don’t use voter verified ballots. Just run ’em through again. [Which means they] broke the law.” Peters adds that “The law says that this is the way you do a test before a recount. And they did not do it. They did not use voter verified paper ballots in the sample test to test those machines. So they stole $256,000 and did not do [the recount] according to law.”

Peters says that if Dominion and Griswold had done the random selection to check the voter machines as they should’ve, “[the votes] would’ve not matched up.”

As for why the elections are being stolen in Mesa County, Peters says there is a “uniparty” pulling the strings, and “[there] is a marxist takeover of our country.” Peters tells Kirsch “people need to get off this Democrat-Republican thing, ’cause it’s not. They’re using that to keep us embroiled and blaming each other and take the light off of [those who are] really selecting these [candidates].”

When Kirsch asks Peters “Who is doing this? Who is behind [these stolen elections]?” she says that “These are people that do not love our country. These are globalists that want to see a global government. These are people that don’t want to see America retain [its] sovereignty or the Constitution. They want [a] world constitution.” Peters adds that (in effect) anybody who tries to come forward about the voting shenanigans is having their life threatened.

“These are very, very powerful entities,” Peters says, “and they have picked people on both sides, whether they are Democrat or Republican.” She adds that this uniparty does “not want people investigating this” and will even guarantee elections for those who guarantee, in turn, that they won’t investigate any claims of voter fraud.

As for specific members of the uniparty? Peters says “We know for sure that George Soros is involved. We know for sure there’s a lot going on with the CCP [the Chinese Communist Party], we know that these are global people… These are people who do not want you to know their name… They want to control through wars and through money and they want to control the world.” Peters also implicates Bill Gates in the scheme, noting “he wants to reduce the population by what? A third or two-thirds? … He’s been practicing on other countries for a long time with his vaccines and humanitarian air-quotes programs.”

As another example of the Dominion machine shenanigans, Peters brings up an instance in Dekalb county, Georgia, in which then candidate for DeKalb County Commissioner District 2 Michelle Long Spears challenged the voter count tallied by the Dominion machines in her county. After realizing there must’ve been a voting error due to the fact that she earned zero votes in her precinct (despite at least her and her husband voting for herself), she challenged the outcome of her election. Lo and behold, there was a massive discrepancy between the number of votes she supposedly received according to the Dominion machine vote tally and how many votes were actually cast for her. Upon a legitimate hand recount in her race? It turned out she was far and away the frontrunner, and was afterward voted in as County Commissioner for her district.

Worsening Peters’ situation, she tells Kirsch that there was, at one point, a $500,000 cash bond for her due to “[the Secretary of State and District Attorney Dan Rubinstein] accusing [her] of recording… a proceeding that [her] Chief Deputy was at.” Peters says “they interrupted the proceeding and said ‘She’s recording!'” Peters notes, however that “this was a proceeding that was on Webex [and] anybody that was sitting at home watching the Webex could’ve been recording it.” But Peters says they still “singled her out” and the day after the Webex meeting DA Rubinstein and the police handcuffed her in public, threw her in a police car, and then let her go. However, they then issued a warrant for Peters’ arrest and threw her in jail.

Peters says her lawyers were able to get the $500,000 cash bond down to $25,000, but she still had to put her house up for the bond. “Now why would they do that for an accusation for [contempt] of court for recording a procedure that could’ve been recorded by anybody?” Peters asks rhetorically. As part of the bond, Peters also notes that she can’t travel outside of the state of Colorado unless she gets the DA’s permission. (The DA’s permission, Peters notes, “hinges on whether [he approves] of where [she’s] going and what [she’s] going to be doing while [she’s] there.”)

At this point Peters says her political foes are going after a federal indictment against her “to make [her] look even worse [and] to influence the people that [she’s] a criminal.” As for support for her cause? Peters notes many other state candidates in the nation are in the same position as she is. She also says that there are FBI agents who know what’s going on with the voting shenanigans, but “are afraid to speak out.” She does say, however, “[the truth] is coming out now.”

Feature image: Steve Kirsch

(Visited 138 times, 1 visits today)

Accessibility Toolbar