Open Letters to President Trump and Tina Peters
Outlining the only viable legal path to freedom for Tina Peters
On January 14, the Colorado Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments on the appeal of Tina Peters’ case. If an audio stream is available I’ll be listening and commenting here and/or on X.
I do not expect the appeal to succeed. The appeal, drafted by Flynn-linked attorneys Peter Ticktin, Stefanie Lambert, John Case, likely with the input of Kurt Olsen and others, argues that Tina was acting as a federal agent as a clerk administering a federal election, and therefore the district court she was convicted in doesn’t have jurisdiction - it should have been federal jurisdiction.
As I have reported since the appeal was first filed, this approach is extremely unlikely to succeed, as there is no legal precedent for a local elected official to be treated as a federal agent for the purpose of jurisdiction.
The appeals court is not likely to make a ruling on the 14th. Reporting suggests it could come weeks or even months later, although the court has the power to issue an immediate ruling if it so chooses.
Tina will not have the luxury of a second appeal. If this appeal fails, it’s not the absolute end of her legal chances, but it’s close. In my opinion, her attorneys are covering for themselves, as they have potential liability if it were proven that they gave her legal advice that it was legal and necessary to commit the fraud she was convicted of by getting Conan Hayes into the EMS room under false pretenses.
With that background, here are the letters I have sent to President Trump and Tina Peters. They describe the only approach that can legally #FreeTinaPeters.
December 30, 2025
President Donald J. Trump
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
RE: Tina Peters — A lawful, immediate step to help her (and avoid a federalism/violence trap)
Dear Mr. President,
My name is Scott McMahan. I’m an independent investigative journalist and a Republican county commissioner in Lapeer County, Michigan. In 2024 I published two major investigations involving hostile influence operations inside Republican politics—one involving a self-described intelligence asset tied to the capture and manipulation of Michigan GOP leadership, and another involving a scheme in Arizona to train convention delegates on suspending rules from the floor to force a new presidential nominee. I was told those reports reached you and your team.
My reporting focus remains the same: exposing and neutralizing the foreign and domestic influence operations and “accelerationist” actors inside MAGA that aim to destroy your legacy, bait your administration into unconstitutional action, and hand Democrats a pretext for crackdowns.
I am writing because I believe Tina Peters’ case is being used in exactly that way—and because there is one specific, lawful step you can take that could materially improve Tina’s odds of relief without triggering a constitutional crisis.
The Core Issue
The public narrative that Tina is imprisoned for “preserving election records” is not consistent with the trial record. Tina is in prison because she participated in a scheme that involved deception around access to a secure election-management environment, and because the legal strategy used at sentencing left the court with the impression that she lacked remorse and would repeat the conduct. Whatever one believes about election integrity, the sentencing judge’s rationale was rooted in ordinary sentencing factors—risk, responsibility, and deterrence—not partisan corruption.
Worse, Tina’s imprisonment is now being weaponized by public figures who are openly calling for violence and unconstitutional interventions in her name. Those statements are not helping Tina.
They harden judges, raise the temperature, and pressure you to do something that the Constitution does not allow.
A New and Urgent Fact Pattern
I recently discovered a video in which Patrick Byrne states that he has funded more than $1 million of Tina’s legal defense and that he caused her to fire attorney Doug Richards—who, according to Byrne, was preparing a defense theory that would have shifted focus to how Tina was advised and guided into illegal conduct by attorneys and operatives around her. Mr. Byrne has also publicly claimed—in multiple media appearances—that he was a “Tier 1 CIA asset” and that he “helped set up Trump for Russiagate,” while admitting that he told lies (“I fibbed,” he said).
I cannot independently verify Byrne’s self-characterizations. But his public claims, combined with his stated financial control over Tina’s defense decisions, raise a serious question any court would recognize: whether Tina’s legal strategy has been influenced by interests other than Tina’s freedom.
Why Your Pardon Does Not Solve This
I have read the clemency document. Even assuming the best intentions, presidential clemency is a federal power tied to “Offences against the United States.” It cannot, by itself, vacate a Colorado state conviction. Continued reliance on “the pardon will fix it” narrative risks creating false hope for Tina while feeding a dangerous states’-rights confrontation that will not help her and will be exploited by bad actors to damage your presidency.
The Only Practical, Legal Path I See
If Tina is going to regain her freedom sooner rather than later, the first step is simple and urgent:
Tina must immediately terminate every attorney tied to the current activist/funder network around her case.
Tina must retain conflict‑free, Colorado-based criminal appellate/postconviction counsel with no ties to the funders and media apparatus surrounding her.
That new counsel must evaluate Colorado-law remedies focused on conflicted counsel at sentencing and related postconviction avenues—rather than federalism theater.
I understand Tina has a tight communication circle and is heavily influenced by those around her. That is why I believe your voice is uniquely capable of breaking through.
My Request to You
I respectfully ask you to do one of the following—privately, quietly, and lawfully:
Send Tina a message (or have a trusted emissary deliver it) urging her to:
fire her current counsel,
obtain conflict‑free Colorado counsel immediately, and
step away from anyone publicly calling for violence or “military” solutions in her name.
Enclosed is a letter I have drafted to Tina Peters that I have sent directly to her. If you or your staff can help ensure she receives it—or can echo its core message—this could save her and deprive the most dangerous actors in this space of the martyr narrative they are trying to manufacture.
Thank you for your attention and for your excellent service to this country.
Respectfully,
Scott McMahan
Enclosure: Letter to Tina Peters
December 30, 2025
Tina Marie Peters
DOC# 203512
La Vista Correctional Facility
PO Box 3
Pueblo, CO 81002
Dear Tina,
You subscribed to my Substack (BiggerTruthMedia.com) for a month before your sentencing, so you may recall who I am. I’m writing because I want to help you—and because I believe you are being pushed down a path that ends with you staying in prison far longer than necessary.
I’m going to be direct: the people most publicly “advocating” for you are actively damaging your legal position and using your case to inflame the country. If you want a realistic chance at freedom, you must take drastic action: fire every attorney connected to the current network around your case and replace them with independent, conflict‑free Colorado counsel.
You may not realize how your imprisonment is being used for propaganda. Joe Oltmann recently said on his podcast, while wearing a Trump hat, “Violence is the probably only answer at this point... I think it’s going to take somebody doing something very drastic, or a group of people doing something drastic, to let them know that they don’t have any peace.” A couple minutes later he added, “How do we get Tina out? Do we get 20,000 people? Do we surround the house of Jared Polis? Do we literally shake down the walls around him? ... I think Jared Polis should be hung. I think Jenna Griswold should be hung...”
Your attorney, Peter Ticktin, went on Steve Bannon’s War Room and demanded Trump send in the 82nd Airborne to break you out of prison – an act that would most likely lead to kinetic civil war. A few days later, he went on Oltmann’s show to make an implicit threat against the judges who will determine your fate, saying, “I don’t care if you’re a judge. I don’t care what you are. If you’re a traitor to this country, you don’t get excused just because you have a black robe on.”
Tina: those statements are not “help.” They are gasoline on a fire. They put pressure on courts, harden judges, and make you look like the symbol of defiance—not a defendant seeking lawful relief.
The tragedy is that you would likely be free today if your legal strategy had focused on your defense and mitigation instead of serving a political-media narrative. Your posture at sentencing—arguing, justifying, and signaling you’d do it again—made a severe sentence predictable and justifiable.
And now, your current appellate strategy is, in my view, headed for a dead end. I’m not writing this to discourage you; I’m writing this because you still have options, but you cannot access them while you remain inside this legal and media machine.
Here is what you need to understand about the money and the control around your case. Patrick Byrne and Mike Lindell have funded your legal defense. I recently found a video of Byrne admitting (1) that he paid over $1 million for your defense and (2) that you had an attorney, Doug Richards, who was preparing what I believe was your strongest legal line of defense—but Byrne caused you to fire him. That alone raises a question any judge would recognize: were your lawyers representing you, or the people paying them?
Even more alarming: Byrne has now publicly described himself in extraordinary terms. He said on Emerald Robinson’s show and again with Alex Jones that he was a “Tier 1 CIA asset” under Obama. He admitted to telling lies: “I fibbed,” he said. And just a few hours before he went on Emerald’s show he posted on X, “Stay tuned, I’ve gotten permission to release something. Let me just prepare it.” He claimed he has “gone rogue.” But does a rogue CIA asset wait for permission?
The bottom line is this: a man publicly describing himself as an “intelligence asset” who admits he lied should not be steering the strategy that determines whether you live the rest of your life in prison.
I’ve read the pardon Trump issued. Whatever anyone is telling you, a presidential pardon does not erase a state conviction. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution applies to federal offenses. Relying on this as your path home is a setup for disappointment—and it pushes the country toward a dangerous states’-rights conflict that will not help you.
So here is the only path I believe can help you lawfully and quickly:
Fire your entire current legal team. Not one or two—all of them.
Step away from the activist/media network that is calling for “military” solutions and violence in your name.
Retain independent, Colorado-based, conflict-free criminal appellate/postconviction counsel with no ties to Byrne, Lindell, Oltmann, Ticktin, or this broader operation.
Have that counsel evaluate—based strictly on Colorado law and your record—whether there is a viable path through conflicted counsel / ineffective assistance at sentencing, and whether the court should order a limited remand or resentencing with conflict-free counsel.
I am not a lawyer and I’m not giving legal advice. I’m telling you what I believe is the truth: you are being used—and the people using you will not serve your sentence for you.
I pray for you often. You have more friends than you realize—but you will not find them until you break free from the people treating your life like a political weapon.
Respectfully,
Scott McMahan
I do like this Scott. Hopefully she will be able to do something positive for herself. I continue to pray for her.
Well done Scot, praying Tina is able to see the truth and heeds your advice