Tina Peters, through attorney, backs off formal role in Shasta County elections
Tina Peters, the former Mesa County election clerk convicted of seven felonies related to the theft of voting machine software, said Tuesday through her attorney that she wonβt accept a formal position overseeing elections in Shasta County, Calif.
Last month, Shasta County registrar of voters Clint Curtis said he intended to hire Peters as assistant registrar to help with the 2026 elections, just months after her prison sentence was cut short by a commutation from Democratic Gov. Jared Polis.
Later, in an interview with CyberScoop, Curtis said he intended to hire Peters as an outside consultant without access to sensitive county election systems. He also said Peters hadnβt yet accepted the position.
At the time, Petersβ attorney, Peter Ticktin, pointed CyberScoop to a statement indicating Petersβ interest in helping the county. On Tuesday, he sent a new statement from Peters that backed away from a formal job role.
βLet me be clear: I have not accepted any position with the Shasta County Elections Office,β the statement said. βThere have been discussions about ways I might assist with election integrity and ballot-authenticity efforts, but no formal role has been accepted.β
Peters went on to say her concerns extended beyond Shasta County, to βall 3,114β counties in America and βwhether every citizen can trust that our elections are free, fair and transparent.β
The prospective hiring of Peters sparked a backlash, including from Shasta Countyβs Board of Supervisors, which had just formally censured Curtis for allegedly abusive verbal behavior toward staff, and from Democratic politicians statewide.Β Secretary of State Shirley Weberβs office told CyberScoop it was monitoring the countyβsΒ elections for compliance with state and federal laws.
Peters blamed the media for portraying her as a threat to elections, saying she remains βcommitted to lawful, transparent election integrity efforts that protect the vote of every American citizen.β
βThe media continues to mischaracterize my case with words like βbreaching,β βtampering,β and similar claims,β Peters said. βMy charges were not for changing votes, altering election results, or manipulating any election outcome. Those words are used to create a false impression and distract from the real issue: whether the American people have transparent, verifiable elections they can trust.β
Peters broke into Mesa Countyβs election office to prove voting machines had shifted votes to Democrat Joe Biden, butΒ data instead confirmed the countyβs 2020 vote totals were accurate. Before her release, Peters at one point expressed written regret to the state for her crimes.
Despite that, on Tuesday Peters again endorsed the idea that all electronic voting machines are untrustworthy, and any elections using them as inherently suspect.
Experts have long said that vulnerabilities exist in U.S. voting machines, but certain longstanding practices, like backup paper ballots, post-election, risk-limiting audits, and relying on decentralized equipment and vendors can also manage risks and catch anomalies. According to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, nearly 98% of Americans vote on electronic voting machines with paper backups.
Despite a years-long effort and dozens of court challenges, neither Peters nor other Trump allies have ever provided credible proof that manipulation of U.S. voting machines, voter fraud or other problems impacted the 2020 presidential election.
The post Tina Peters, through attorney, backs off formal role in Shasta County elections appeared first on CyberScoop.