Mesa County District Attorney Dan Rubinstein
First, Rubinstein appears to recognize that there is no precedent for the prosecution he wants to undertake, as he expresses a desire that this group of legal minds start writing opinions and issuing guidance documents in the vein of the Colorado Bar Association (CBA) and the Colorado District Attorneys’ Council (CDAC). Without a coherent legal pathway for prosecution, it appears Rubinstein encouraged this course of action to give prosecutors cover.
Second, Rubinstein notes that it is problematic that they have no formal appointments from a government body to lay the groundwork to prosecute Peters.
Third, Rubinstein informs the group of their need to anticipate defending themselves as to why they didn’t seek an opinion on Peter’s case from the Colorado Bar Association Ethics Commission. Rubinstein and his cronies appear to have succeeded in giving their efforts the veneer of legitimacy because three months after this email was sent, Peters was indicted by a grand jury. (https://www.coloradopolitics.com/courts/tina-peters-arraigned-on-10-felony-misdemeanor-charges-in-case-alleging-election-equipment-breach/article_7ad92362-14ff-11ed-8571-7fe4f678dc82.html)
Another glaring piece of evidence that the Tina Peters case was led by the federal government is that if this was ‘only a Colorado issue’, why were US Attorney General Merrick Garland and Christopher Wray participating in initial Mesa County discussions via Webex regarding the findings of Clerk Peters and her actions related to those findings?
We also know that the full force of the federal government was directly applied to those associated with Tina’s situation, in that the FBI raided Tina’s home.
In addition, Tina’s associate, Sherronna Bishop, ’s home also raided by the FBI.