CBS Colorado reports that Rep. Lauren Boebert does not think former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters should receive a payout from the federal government’s new $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund.” A judge has temporarily stopped the Justice Department from moving forward with the fund while legal challenges play out, and Vice President JD Vance has said Peters could receive money from it.
Boebert has supported Peters’ release and believes she was unjustly prosecuted, but she draws a line at sending her a federal check. Peters was convicted in 2024 for her role in tampering with election equipment, sentenced to nine years, and is set to be released after Gov. Jared Polis commuted her sentence. Her conviction is now being appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court.
I find myself agreeing more and more with Rep. Boebert, which says something about one or both of us. But on this one, she is right. Voters are tired of being played for chumps, and conservatives should be the first ones saying no when political grievance starts looking like a taxpayer-funded GoFundMe.
The Bullet Point Brief
- The “anti-weaponization fund” is supposed to pay people who say they were unfairly targeted by the Biden administration. Because apparently Washington saw a trust problem and decided the solution was a $1.776 billion resentment vending machine.
- A judge has paused the fund for now while plaintiffs argue it is a collusive agreement between Trump and his own administration. That is the kind of sentence that makes normal taxpayers stare into the middle distance.
- JD Vance says Tina Peters could receive money from the fund. Boebert says hold up, Peters was convicted on state charges, not federal ones. Look at that. A limiting principle. Somebody write it down before D.C. loses it.
- Boebert still thinks Peters was treated unfairly and wanted her pardoned, but she does not think the federal government should cut her a check. That is not betrayal. That is called having a brake pedal.
- Peters’ attorneys are appealing her conviction to the Colorado Supreme Court. Fine. That is the legal lane. But turning every legal fight into a cash claim against taxpayers is how accountability becomes a costume party.
My Bottom Line
The federal government already burns money like a teenager with Dad’s credit card. Creating a political grievance payout fund is exactly how Washington turns bad judgment, legal trouble, political theatrics, and partisan branding into another invoice for people who had nothing to do with any of it.
This is bigger than Tina Peters. The grift instinct is the problem. We have built a political culture where every loss is “rigged,” every consequence is “weaponization,” every courtroom is a stage, and every stage eventually needs donors, lawyers, consultants, merch, and now maybe federal payouts. That is not constitutional conservatism. That is a traveling circus with a Treasury account.
If somebody was truly abused by the federal government, prove it through a lawful, transparent process. But do not blur every state conviction, campaign grievance, and political sob story into one giant federal slush fund. Conservatives used to understand this instinctively: government money is not magical. It comes from taxpayers. Every dollar handed out for political theater is a dollar taken from somebody who went to work, paid the bill, and did not ask to underwrite anyone else’s drama.
So yes, I agree with Boebert here. Support due process. Support appeals. Support accountability for actual government abuse. But do not turn “weaponization” into the new magic word that opens the public vault. Voters are done being treated like the dumbest person in the room. Especially when the room is Washington, D.C.
Source: CBS Colorado
Share your thoughts...