December 5th, 2024 • 3h 16m
Shownotes
Every new episode of No Agenda is accompanied by a comprehensive list of shownotes curated by Adam while preparing for the show. Clips played by the hosts during the show can also be found here.
United Healthcare CEO
The Gen Z thinks he's an Icon - went to Starbucks, this is a new Batman - took down an Elite
Defend Depose Deny
The phrase "defend, depose, and deny" often emerges in contexts related to legal and rhetorical strategies, particularly in scenarios where individuals or groups are protecting themselves against accusations or challenges. Here’s an exploration of its origins and uses:
Possible Sources:
Legal Terminology:
The phrase may be associated with courtroom procedures:
Defend: To protect or justify a position, often in a legal sense.
Depose: To provide sworn testimony, either to support a case or discredit an opponent.
Deny: To refute allegations or claims made by the opposing party.
Lawyers might summarize a defensive approach with these terms when preparing witnesses or crafting arguments.
Crisis Management:
In public relations or crisis situations, the phrase could describe a standard sequence for handling accusations:
Defend your actions or reputation.
Depose (provide evidence or counter-narratives).
Deny wrongdoing or liability.
Cultural or Literary Usage:
The trio of actions resonates with dramatic or rhetorical patterns seen in speeches or literature, where repetition and progression heighten impact.
Similar phrases are used to describe strategies in political or social contexts.
Critics blast new VP nominee Tim Walz for 'massive' COVID-19 fraud 'under his watch' - ABC News
Mike Benz Brain Rot
The Sewer Pipe
Mike Benz on Rogan
Boring, perhaps only for Rogan's benefit?
Who does he work for? Foundation no Form 990, no way to donate - doesn't matter
While very informed (Global Engagement Center USAID etc) only talks about censorship, not about propaganda
No mention of Smith Mundt
H.R.5736 - 112th Congress (2011-2012) Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 Congress.gov Library of Congress
Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 - Amends the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 to authorize the Secretary of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors to provide for the preparation and dissemination of information intended for foreign audiences abroad about the United States, including about its people, its history, and the federal government's policies, through press, publications, radio, motion pictures, the Internet, and other information media, including social media, and through information centers and instructors. (Under current law such authority is restricted to information disseminated abroad, with a limited domestic exception.)
Authorizes the Secretary and the Board to make available in the United States motion pictures, films, video, audio, and other materials prepared for dissemination abroad or disseminated abroad pursuant to such Act, the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994, the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act, or the Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act.
Amends the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1986 and 1987 to prohibit funds for the Department of State or the Board from being used to influence public opinion or propagandizing in the United States. (Under current law such provision applies to the United States Information Agency [USIA].)
Applies such prohibition only to programs carried out pursuant to the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948, the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994, the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act, and the Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act.
States that such provision shall: (1) not prohibit the Department or the Board from providing information about its operations, policies, programs, or program material, or making such information available to members of the media, public, or Congress; (2) not be construed to prohibit the Department from engaging in any medium of information on a presumption that a U.S. domestic audience may be exposed to program material; and (3) apply only to the Department and the Board and to no other federal department or agency.
2012 is when it started - Propaganda - Number Nicks
Experimentation - KONY 2012
JCD - Internet made their job easier
Why the Mental Health of Liberal Girls Sank First and Fastest | The Free Press
In September 2020, Zach Goldberg, who was then a graduate student at Georgia State University, discovered something interesting in a dataset made public by Pew Research. Pew surveyed about 12,000 people in March 2020, during the first month of the COVID shutdowns. The survey included this item: “Has a doctor or other healthcare provider EVER told you that you have a mental health condition?” Goldberg graphed the percentage of respondents who said “yes” to that item as a function of their self-placement on the liberal-conservative 5-point scale and found that white liberals were much more likely to say yes than white moderates and conservatives. (His analyses for non-white groups generally found small or inconsistent relationships with politics.)
In conclusion, I believe that Greg Lukianoff was exactly right in the diagnosis he shared with me in 2014. Many young people had suddenly—around 2013—embraced three great untruths:
They came to believe that they were fragile and would be harmed by books, speakers, and words, which they learned were forms of violence (Great Untruth #1).
They came to believe that their emotions—especially their anxieties—were reliable guides to reality (Great Untruth #2).
They came to see society as comprised of victims and oppressors—good people and bad people (Great Untruth #3).
After examining the evidence, including the fact that the same trends happened at the same time in Britain, Canada, and Australia, Goldberg concluded that “Technology, not politics, was what changed in all these countries around 2012. That was the year that Facebook bought Instagram and the word ‘selfie’ entered the popular lexicon.”
Perhaps Big Pharma behind a lot of this?
Social Media is a sewer pipe pumping straight into your brain (and your kids)
Johanna on Liberal Women
Season of Reveal
Sales of Bibles Are Booming, Fueled by First-Time Buyers and New Versions - WSJ
Publishers attribute a 22% jump in Bible sales this year to rising anxiety, a search for hope, or highly focused marketing and designs
The Pew Research Center found that about 28% of adults in the U.S. now consider themselves religiously unaffiliated. Yet Bible sales rose to 14.2 million in 2023 from 9.7 million in 2019, and hit 13.7 million in the first 10 months of this year. Readers are also stocking up on related titles that provide guidance, insights and context—even sets of stickers to flag particularly meaningful passages.
Publishers say the books are selling well at religious bookstores, but also on Amazon.com and at more mainstream retailers. People buy print copies to make notes in and highlight, but often supplement them with audiobooks as well.
The proliferation of new editions and innovative designs has made this a golden age of Bible publishing. The demand may be driven as much by highly focused marketing efforts as by people seeking answers to difficult questions, said J. Mark Bertrand, founder of Lectio.org, a website about Bible design.
Big Tech AI and the Socials
Biden
Fact Check for Constitutional Lawyer BOTG
Hunter Pardon 5th amendment:
Hey dude!
Yes, that’s always been my understanding. The same thing happens when prosecutors grant immunity to a witness. But don’t take my word for it; here’s how SCOTUS laid it out back when you and I were still teenagers:
The privilege [against self-incrimination] is **inapplicable** only “if the testimony sought cannot possibly be used as a basis for, or in aid of, a criminal prosecution against the witness.” _Brown_ v. _Walker_, 161 U.S. 591, 597 (1896). **It has long been recognized that the court may require a witness to give testimony, including testimony that admits to involvement in a criminal act**, when there is **no possibility of future criminal charges** being brought against the witness. For example, a witness may be compelled to testify concerning his involvement in a crime when he is protected from later prosecution by the Double Jeopardy Clause, see, _e. g., Reina_ v. _United States_, 364 U.S. 507, 513 (1960) (dictum), by the applicable statute of limitations, see, _e. g., United States_ v. _Goodman_, 289 F.2d 256, 259 (CA4 1961), **or by a pardon**, see _Brown_ v. _Walker, supra_, at 599-600.
_Pillsbury Co. v. Conboy_, 459 U.S. 248, 266 n.1 (1983). It also came up in the Clinton years when people like Susan McDougal were pardoned. I suppose Hunter could still refuse to testify, but he’d end up going to jail for contempt until he cracked.
The loud guy on X isn’t making a novel point—lots of people have brought this up. Still, everyone is missing another key point—one that I’m sure you’ve considered: Hunter Biden did not kill himself, not even by overdose.
Transmaoism
SCOTUS Oral Arguments on Minor Sex-Change Ban BOTG
Adam—Yesterday,
SCOTUS conducted a marathon oral argument over Tennessee’s ban on sex
changes—I mean, “gender-affirming care”—on minors. I didn’t listen in
this time (a lot going on over here), but I have attached a short
highlighted summary for your consideration. This report concludes that
the Justices are leaning toward not disturbing the ban. This
would be consistent with the Court’s general approach of taming our
sprawling federal government. Are states’ rights coming off the
ventilator?
This battle involves several constitutional issues—mainly the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause (Clause 1). But I think the Political Question Doctrine
will also make a cameo; this is the concept that the judiciary lacks
jurisdiction to meddle in issues that are the province of the
legislative and executive branches. I also wouldn’t be surprised if the
Tenth Amendment gets a word in.
South Korea
South Korea Marital Law BOTG John Lee
Long time listener, first time caller here.
I'm a South
Korean. I wanted to provide some extra context for the
South Korea martial law situation, in case you want to cover it on the
Dec 5th show.
Timeline of events
Dec 3rd: president Yoon gives a state of the union speech on TV
Yoon discusses threats to democracy & accuses the left of destroying the nation
10:28pm: Yoon declares martial law at the end of his speech
10:30pm: 707th Special Mission Group (around 300 in number) raids the National Election Commission building
they confiscate servers and phones, and leave after 3 hours
.... everyone confused ...
12:00am: some soldiers go to the National Assembly building - fewer than 300 in number
they loiter around
don't even block any politicians from going in to Assembly building
opposition party votes to lift martial law
president Yoon lifts martial law after only 6 hoursIt seems like the National Election Commission (NEC) raid was the real goal for the martial law declaration.
President Yoon wasn't just goofing around.
They sent way more cops & soldiers to the NEC than the National Assembly building.
More info about the 707th Special Mission Group in Korea
elite special forces unit
specializes in black ops, counterterrorism, special ops & reconnaissance, high-risk intelligence gatheringThe
left (majority opposition) has been accused of using fake mail-in
ballots and hacking voting machines to win elections, similar to the
left in the US.
Earlier this year (2024), the left wing party surprised everyone with a HUGE victory and won the majority of the seats.
They've been passing laws & cutting budgets to delay trials and exonerate their leader (Lee Jae-Myung)
Lee
is in serious legal troubles for embezzlement and fraud. 6 witnesses
related to his crimes have died in the last 2 years. It's a crazy
situation right now.
Lee received his first guilty sentence 2 weeks ago. Left has been freaking out since.
But since the left has the supermajority, they can do pretty much anything they want.
So they've been doing everything in their power to obstruct justice and delay trials.
If president Yoon has solid evidence of election fraud, this could change EVERYTHING.
This isn't a kraken situation - mainstream news in Korea are starting to talk about the 707th group's raid.
China
Climate Change
Ukraine vs Russia
Tucker going to interview Lavrov
New Boss meet Old Boss
Tucker going to interview Lavrov
Fintech Marc Andreesen story from 12-1 episode BOTG
In the morning!
I wanted to follow up from Sunday's episode regarding the Fintech collapse story you mentioned. I have been listening to the show for a little over a year and a huge part of why I need a massive de-douching and not contributed with my treasure is because most of my savings were lost in this debacle.
To provide some detail regarding this story, my money was deposited in a fintech called "yotta" that "saved" my money at Evolve Bank and Trust out of Arkansas through a brokerage company called "Synapse Technology". In May, Synapse Technology declared bankruptcy and wiped it's server database. This resulted in over 100,000 Americans losing access to their savings. Not only that, but there is an estimated $95 million shortfall that has just gone missing and unaccounted for. Since May, Evolve Bank and Trust has refused to distribute any funds claiming that there is no reliable way of knowing what money belongs to who. Evolve finally completed what they are calling a reconciliation after 6 months of stalling and notified depositors what money they were holding in their name. Personally, I deposited over $7,000.00 and was returned 33 cents. There are multiple stories of individuals with north of 6 figures saved that they will never get back. Evolve will not reveal any backup or information regarding this reconciliation effort due to ongoing litigation.
What Marc Andreesen failed to mention is that he was a board member and A16Z was a major investor of the brokerage company "Synapse" that went bankrupt and is mainly responsible for the loss of these funds. Marc still has an article on A16Z's website calling Synapse the "best in class of financial products" and "the AWS of Banking". So, there's a good reason Marc is blubbering and stuttering like a moron when he claims that the CFPB and government regulation is stifling fintech innovation.
Marc Andreesen and the Synapse board are claiming they do not have funding to facilitate a full reconciliation of the synapse ecosystem so end users are stuck in this regulatory purgatory. Even though Yotta stated our funds were FDIC insured it appears that was false advertising, which the FDIC stated the burden is on the consumer to validate accurate insurance claims. This wouldn't matter anyway since the FDIC's opinion is Evolve Bank and Trust did not "fail". the banking regulators are saying it is a fintech issue, and the fintech regulators such as FINRA are claiming it's a brokerage issue. This ordeal has concluded in Trustee Jelena McWilliams (former chair of the FDIC) wrapping up the hearings in tears claiming there is no way for these Americans to get their money back but to pursue legal action.
I just wanted to share my experience regarding Marc's involvement here as well as the dangers of Fintech. Until there is a course correction this is essentially an unregulated industry that has no benefits of banking regulations or insurance. Buy Bitcoin!
All the best,
Sean
