A MAGA County’s Top Election Official Wants to Hire Election Denial Superstar Tina Peters
Tina Peters was convicted of seven counts related to election interference in 2024. Now, she’s fielding an offer from a county that’s become a hotbed of voting-related conspiracy theories.
In Shasta County, California, Registrar Clint Curtis is considering hiring former Mesa County election official Tina Peters, despite her 2024 conviction for seven counts of election interference and her subsequent nine-year prison sentence. Peters, a prominent election denial figure, has yet to respond to the offer. Curtis, who has a history of promoting election conspiracy theories, has not specified the nature of Peters' potential duties but has stated that she would not have access to the county's voting system.
If hired, Peters would join Curtis in Shasta County, a deep-red area where election denial conspiracy theories have gained traction. US Senator Alex Padilla has called for the appointment to be stopped immediately. Curtis first drew national attention over 20 years ago for claiming to have created a software program capable of rigging elections without detection.
He made this claim at the request of Florida state lawmaker Tom Feeney, who denied the allegation. In 2025, Curtis applied for the Shasta County Registrar position despite lacking election experience and having no ties to the area. Since his appointment, Curtis has faced allegations of physically threatening, verbally abusing, and retaliating against staff, leading to an internal investigation finding his behavior damaging.
This past June, Curtis lost his bid to retain his position after being defeated by election veteran Joanna Francescut. Curtis has denied the allegations, while the Shasta County Board of Supervisors recently censured him. If Peters were to accept the role, she may be hired as a consultant, which would allow her to work in Colorado and Washington, DC while periodically supervising operations in Shasta County.
Some county officials have raised concerns about the proposal, citing the lack of a formal hiring process and the potential for increased public distrust in the elections.
Written by urgent.news from Wired's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.