Tuesday, December 9, 2025

3:30.  Why is the Muslim Brotherhood a threat to American National Security? 

3:36.  It's a profound threat to our national security not so much because it has elements of terrorist networks within it and it supports terrorism.  But an even deeper threat is it's colonizing us.  It's waging a civilizational jihad against us to build population centers, to silence critics, to make themselves indispensable parts of political coalition and to take political power.  So they're looking at playing a very long game in our country, and it's not to come here to become Americans and to assimilate.  It's to impose what they feel like they're morally bound to do, and that is to impose Islamic law over the US Constitution.

4:22.  I knew that a lot of this was happening in Europe.  I mean we see the effects of it throughout the streets of London, Paris, certainly Brussels, but I didn't know it had gotten that bad already in the United States.

4:35.  It's getting there. Europe is already 20 years ahead of us, a generation or two ahead of us.  And it has been going on really since the early mass movements, like the Communist movements, the, you know, the anarchist movements.  They sort of spawn in Europe and then they come over here.  But they're very well embedded in many communities where you can see in places like Minneapolis, or now you've seen in the election of this Mayor [Mamdani] of New York.  They have colonies down in Texas, really in pockets all around the country, large and small, and they're in some of the . . . most of the immigrants are harmless, but if they go to a mosque, that's a Muslim Brotherhood mosque. They're going to get gradually radicalized very softly, almost imperceptibly, not to come out and endorse terrorism or push people out into the streets to support Hamas which some of them do.  But the really long-term civilizational Jihad mosques, run by the Muslim Brotherhood, will just sort of gradually assimilate people, raise their children this way by going to their religious schools, and create a civilization within a civilization that will never assimilate with us.

5:54.  Why do they care about us?  I mean one of the great Muslim Brotherhood ideologues and this was the organization that was founded in Egypt but the Egyptian ideologue site could tub famously came to the United States I can remember.  It was the 40s or the 1950s but he was grossed out just looking at a community church dance and these were you know we're very modest people in a modest dance but he took it as a sign of corruption and rot and lust and all these different things. So why wouldn't they just avoid America why did they feel that it's their need now to take over America?

6:32.  Well, that's the place for everybody to come.  If America is the real threat whether it's American culture as Sayyid Qutb said or whether it's American support for Israel or American support for other countries that are Muslim majority countries they're just not Muslim Brotherhood countries where the greatest power to support everything they hate so they have to colonize us  



"Just Cause" allows the city and state to modify the lease.

Accessory Dwelling Units.  

"Just Cause" allows the city and state to modify the lease.   

"Just Cause" eviction policies require landlords to provide valid reasons for terminating a lease, enhancing tenant stability and preventing arbitrary evictions. These laws can vary by city and state, allowing local jurisdictions to implement their own specific regulations.

Just Cause Evictions.

PAGE 7 OF TINA PETERS PARDON LETTER TO TRUMP: "In the new unit, she was attacked by other prisoners 3 times in different locations where guards had to pull inmates off of her"

Here's a copy of the full letter and request for Tina Peters pardon to President Trump., dated December 7, 2025.


This  9News report suggests that the reason the state is holding onto Peters is that she's got damning information on Democrat polling practices and how fraud is built into their game.  

Flynn has said Peters, 70, should be moved into federal custody because she could be a witness into an investigation of the 2020 election.

DENVER(AP) — A federal magistrate judge on Monday rejected a bid by a former Colorado county clerk to be released from prison while she appeals her state conviction for orchestrating a data breach scheme driven by false claims about voting machine fraud in the 2020 presidential race.  9News.

Peters argued that the magistrate judge should free her because she said the state judge who sentenced her to 9 years behind bars violated her First Amendment rights. Peters claimed he punished her for making allegations about election fraud, but prosecutors argued that the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed judges to consider people’s speech during sentencings if they deem it relevant.  

During Peters’ October 2024 sentencing, Judge Matthew Barrett called the defendant a “charlatan” and said she posed a danger to the community for spreading lies about voting and undermining the democratic process.

Peters was unapologetic and insisted that everything she did was geared toward trying to unroot what she believed was fraud. She claimed her actions were done for the greater good.

Her lawyers argued that Barrett was wrong to call Peters' statements “lies” and said there was no evidence her speech posed a danger.

President Donald Trump and other supporters, including retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the national security adviser during Trump’s first term, have called for Peters to be released. In August, Trump warned he would “take harsh measures” if Peters wasn’t freed, saying she was old and very sick.  

The administration sent a letter to the Colorado prison system in mid-November asking that Peters be transferred to federal custody. One her lawyers said he believed the request was made so Peters could more easily be involved in the investigation into the election.

There is no evidence of any widespread cheating in Colorado elections, which have been staunchly defended by county clerks throughout the state, most of whom are Republican. Peters was prosecuted by an elected Republican district attorney, and the three supervisors in her conservative-leaning county also supported the case and defended the integrity of the state’s elections.

The U.S. Justice Department got involved in Peters’ federal case in March, saying “reasonable concerns” had been raised about her prosecution. It also said the DOJ was reviewing whether the prosecution was “oriented more toward inflicting political pain than toward pursuing actual justice or legitimate governmental objectives,” a line from an executive order entitled “Ending the Weaponization of The Federal Government” that Trump signed shortly after his inauguration.

The state objected to the federal government inserting itself, saying the statement the department filed in the case appeared to be a “naked, political attempt” to intimidate the court or Peters’ prosecutors. It unsuccessfully asked for the court to reject it.

Peters’ lawyers pointed to three cases in which federal judges ordered people convicted of state crimes to be released from prison while they appealed, including one involving free speech. In that 1977 case, a judge freed the late Native American activist Russell Means after he was placed back behind bars because he remained active in the American Indian Movement while free on bond from state custody. The state court had largely barred him from participating in the group. The federal judge ruled that was an unconstitutional limit on his First Amendment rights of speech and association.

TRUMP DID WHAAAAAAAAAT!

SCORECARDS HELP