U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 24, 2022 09:52 AM UTC

Tina Peters Living Large On Campaign Cash

  • 18 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Tina Peters at Mar-a-Lago.

As Colorado Newsline’s Sara Wilson reports–remember Republican Secretary of State candidate Tina Peters’ trip to Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida earlier this month to watch the premiere of clown-right whacktivist Dinesh D’Souza’s pre-discredited conspiracy theory flick 2000 Mules?

It was a tropical getaway paid for with campaign contributions:

A finance report filed last week indicates Colorado secretary of state candidate Tina Peters used campaign money to fund a trip to Florida to attend a screening of a documentary focused on baseless claims of widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

On May 5, Peters attended a screening of “2000 Mules,” a film by conservative media personality Dinesh D’Souza, at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach. The film falsely implies that rampant voter fraud compromised the 2020 presidential election, costing Trump a second term. Peters, the Mesa County Clerk and Recorder, has built her campaign around such claims of election fraud, which have been repeatedly debunked by experts, courts and election officials from both parties…

Colorado’s campaign and political finance manual states that “money spent on anything for the purpose of expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate is considered an expenditure.” Expenditures typically involve advertising costs, data acquisition, consulting costs or expenses for travel to campaign events around the state or district. Peters did not mention her candidacy when sharing photos of herself from the event on social media.

Newsline reports that Peters’ campaign sprang for 40 tickets to the Mar-a-Lago premiere of 2000 Mules in addition to Peters’ own travel costs. There’s are not many if any votes for Tina Peters in the upcoming June 28th Republican primary for Secretary of State in Florida, and we’d be surprised to learn that Peters’ campaign even has 40 staffers in either location, so we’re not completely sure how this all squares with Colorado campaign finance law.

But again, campaign finance violations are pretty far down on the list of Tina Peters’ problems.

With all of this in mind, one straightforward reason to spend campaign funds on a junket to Mar-a-Lago would be in search of Donald Trump’s endorsement in the Secretary of State race–an endorsement that would seem a no-brainer given Peters’ steadfast loyalty to the “Big Lie.” If Trump does endorse in this race it’s a massive boost for Peters in the Republican primary, but her story is well known enough now among MAGA primary voters that Peters might not need an explicit endorsement to win their support. And that’s good for Peters since Trump may well be hesitant to endorse a candidate facing multiple felony indictments, despite the alleged crimes in question having been committed to help Donald Trump.

Loyalty to Trump, as so many Republicans have learned the hard way, is not a two-way street.

Tweet
Share

Comments

18 thoughts on “Tina Peters Living Large On Campaign Cash”

  1. I strongly encourage every conservative who reads this blog to realize that Colorado Pols is not trying to convince Republicans to make the right decision for our best interests. Democrats believe Tina Peters is the weaker candidate in November against Jena Griswold, so it's their job to pump her campaign. Peters faces multiple felony indictments and she can't win in November.

    Don't be fooled. Whatever Colorado Pols suggests, do the opposite.

    1. Pols isn’t trying to convince you and your ilk to not make the right decisions for your best interests. You all do that pretty well all on you own.

      see: Donald Trump, the Capitol raid, Bobo, stop the steal, anti-vax nonsense, kissing Vlad’s ass, carrying loaded guns to airports, Hiedi, Pizzagate, chumming it up with Kim Jong Un etc. etc. etc.

      1. That's dumb and we know better. Half of Colorado Pol's job is to get in the heads of the GOP. That's the biggest reason I come here is to be the alternative voice that reminds passing conservative readers they are being propagandized.

        1. "that's dumb and we know better." Who is "we?"

          Who appointed you as the "alternative voice?" Considering your continuing worship of Trump, I have difficulty considering you as even a marginal conservative.

    3. You want to chide bloggers on this site for misspellings, and yet you show that your reading comprehension is equivalent to that of a preschooler.

       

      Glass Houses, nutlid?

    4. Speaking as someone left of center who loves my country and my state, I think most of us would prefer a Republican Party that isn't cultish.  I don't want Tina Peters or those of her ilk anywhere near the power positions in the Republican Party.  Tina Peters is dangerous.  I'd prefer to have someone in charge of elections who actually believes in free and fair elections and representative democracy—and that sure as hell isn't Tina Peters. 

      I don't see Coloradopols "pumping up her campaign" but rather shedding light on just how out of the mainstream this woman is.

      Give me a Pam Anderson, whose politics I may not like, but who seems to be a dedicated public servant and whose ethics appear to be above reproach. 

      Frankly, our democracy would be well served if a few of these "old fashioned" conservatives are successful in their campaigns, not just for nomination, but for election, so they can challenge the cultish leaders that have taken over the GOP.

       

    5. Speaking of which, Moderatus….

      I recently left the Democratic Party to register as unaffiliated so I will be voting in the Republican primary in June.

      I have a pretty good idea for whom I will be voting for Secretary of State (hint: it is the woman in the race who has not been indicted) but I'm undecided on some of the other races.

      Who is it that you believe Democrats need to fear the most come November:  Ganahl or Lopez? O'Dea of Hanks?

      2. Speaking just for myself, Ganahl is a submediocrity.  Lopez gets his kicks, literally, kicking pregnant women.  

        O’Dea is as dumb as a box of rocks.  Hanks is an up and coming storm trooper who dreams of burning the Reichstag.

        Vote for Ganahl and O’Dea in the primary.  Stupid is better than evil.

        In the general election, follow Duke’s law and vote Blue no matter who.

        2. Yes, my voting in the GOP primary is solely for the primary. On June 29, I re-register as a Dem.

          And I agree with your reasoning, V. Stupid is preferrable to evil.

      1. Me too but I want to hear from Moderatus as to his favorites. He has one hell of a track record in identifying which Republican will be the most difficult for the Dems to beat in the general election:

        Gessler in 2014

        Keyser in 2016

        Rubio, then Cruz in 2016

        Taller Coffman in 2018

        Gardner in 2020

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

88 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!