On Tuesday, history was made – and not the good kind. For the first time in 230 years, a former or current American president (Donald J. Trump) was arrested, charged and arraigned on criminal charges. He pled not guilty. The case – a strikingly weak one filed in a Manhattan court by a left-wing district attorney who had campaigned on prosecuting Trump – reflects a sorry day for the country.

Meanwhile, in a stunningly softball interview conducted Friday by 9News anchor Kyle Clark, former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters reiterated, unchallenged, baseless claims about Colorado’s election system while absurdly attempting to compare Trump’s then-pending indictment to her own multi-count indictment. Last year, Peters was indicted in an alleged 2021 election security breach intended to prove claims of a fraudulent election. She was recently found guilty of misdemeanor obstruction in a separate case.

During the interview, Peters claimed the new chairman of the Colorado Republican Party, Dave Williams, offered her the job of executive director. Williams subsequently clarified any official party role would have to do with “election integrity.”

Tina Peters should have no role whatsoever in the Colorado GOP – and her serious indictment is utterly incomparable to the one which Trump faces.

The former president faces 34 felony counts of “falsifying business records in the first degree,” with intent to defraud. However, the sticker-shock of 34 counts isn’t what it seems: These are essentially duplicative counts of the same alleged crime, all related to hush-money payments concerning three stories Trump wanted to suppress in 2016. Each count reflects a separate transaction or business record tied to several reimbursements to his former attorney, Michael Cohen – but for one actual, alleged crime.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg claims Trump’s alleged fraud was intended to conceal another crime – yet neither the indictment nor Bragg’s public statements provide any explanation whatsoever of what the actual underlying crime Trump allegedly tried to hide is. He vaguely spoke about New York election law as well as federal election laws relating to contribution limits, even though state prosecutors cannot pursue federal crimes. Moreover, the feds already passed on these matters before Bragg brought his case to a New York grand jury.

At most, Bragg could and should have limited his charges to a few, if not one, resisting the urge to unnecessarily “overcharge” as federal prosecutors are coached to do. Furthermore, many legal analysts argue Trump’s alleged conduct at best rises to the level of a misdemeanor – for which the statute of limitations expires after two years. Even the felony charges are pushing the five-year limit on New York’s statute of limitations.

Not only is the case weak, but its underlying motivations are suspect. According to a Quinnipiac University poll, 62% of Americans – including 70% of independents and almost a third of Democrats – believe the Manhattan investigation “is politically motivated,” with a mere 32% claiming it “is motivated by the law.”

They aren’t without cause: Bragg – a progressive Democrat who is soft on violent crime and downgraded 52% of felony cases to misdemeanors last year compared with 39% in 2019 – campaigned on prosecuting Trump. Political motivations help explain why he would bring a groundbreaking, precedent-setting indictment against a former president – and current presidential candidate – based on a dubious case at best.

For her part, Peters vainly tries to compare her case to Trump’s. “It’s just like with Donald Trump’s indictments, my indictment has nothing to do with the facts,” she told Clark.

Peters’ charges are nothing like Trump’s. She faces seven distinct felony counts – including three attempts to influence three separate public servants, two counts of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, and counts of criminal impersonation and identity theft concerning a Fruita resident named Gerald “Jerry” Wood – and three misdemeanors.

While Peters’ is presumed innocent, her case is rooted in sound facts and legal reasoning. We know Wood’s identity was used, and by former 1990s pro-surfer named Conan Hayes – a fact Hayes admits. We know that Mesa County election hard drives were copied and leaked in an attempt to prove nonexistent election malfeasance – the fact that started this entire investigation in August 2021 (when I pressed her on her election claims on 710KNUS, Peters could not support them).

Peters argues her case is politically motivated, trying to pin it on Democratic Secretary of State Jena Griswold. Yes, as I’ve shown time and time again, Griswold has a massive record of hyper-partisanship. Yet Griswold has nothing to do with the criminal investigation and charges. That falls to the district attorney, Dan Rubinstein – who, unlike Bragg, is a Republican who never set out to prosecute Peters until after an election security breach was discovered. When Peters launched her bid to challenge Griswold last year, she knew the election breach was already under investigation.

Whether Peters broke the law is up to the jury to decide, but the facts in her case are real and disturbing. Her felony charges are significant and, unlike Trump, not redundant. Honestly, she should have resigned as clerk back in August 2021. Nothing in Trump’s case, on the other hand, seems to justify 34 separate felony counts in a history-shattering indictment that actually reeks of politics.

Tina Peters’ foolish attempt to compare her indictment to the Manhattan case against Donald Trump simply doesn’t hold water – and if the Colorado GOP gives Peters any sort of job, they will be willingly playing with fire.

Jimmy Sengenberger is an investigative journalist, public speaker, and host of “The Jimmy Sengenberger Show” Saturdays from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. on News/Talk 710 KNUS. Reach Jimmy online at JimmySengenberger.com or on Twitter @SengCenter.