November 6th • 3h 8m
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.
The Tucker Elon Op
Israel Oct 7th Op - Magaza - Masterplan - Probably didn't go as planned
Kirk Murder helped a lot
AIPC = MIC
The True danger is the MIC as per Eisenhower
Congress is DEFINTELY controlled by AIPAC /MIC
They want and create war
Israel has always been used for US foreign policy - See Michael Hudson
Israel aid is two weeks of SNAP
Who is really America First?
And this Op uses Israel in a new way to oust the bad elements from the Republican AND Democrat party
Notice how Trump excoriated Elon, then the reconciled and Elon's NASA guy is back on for nomination
Tucker was 'NUTS' but not lately!
Lindsay Graham MIC
Several of the top corporate contributors to Senator Lindsey Graham have strong ties to the military-industrial complex, primarily through defense contracting, aerospace manufacturing for military applications, and engineering services for defense projects. Based on campaign finance data and reports, the following from the provided lists are directly connected:
- Lockheed Martin: Major defense contractor involved in weapons systems, aircraft, and military technology.
- GE Aerospace: Provides military jet engines, avionics, and other defense-related products.
- Boeing Co: Leading aerospace and defense firm, producing military aircraft, missiles, and satellites.
- Fluor Corp: Engineering and construction company with significant contracts for military bases, logistics, and defense infrastructure.
That's 4 in total from the career top 20 list. For the recent cycle (2019-2024), Boeing is the primary one connected, while the US Dept of Defense represents contributions from individuals in the military rather than a corporation itself.Several of the top corporate contributors to Senator Lindsey Graham have strong ties to the military-industrial complex, primarily through defense contracting, aerospace manufacturing for military applications, and engineering services for defense projects. Based on campaign finance data and reports, the following from the provided lists are directly connected:
- Lockheed Martin: Major defense contractor involved in weapons systems, aircraft, and military technology.
- GE Aerospace: Provides military jet engines, avionics, and other defense-related products.
- Boeing Co: Leading aerospace and defense firm, producing military aircraft, missiles, and satellites.
- Fluor Corp: Engineering and construction company with significant contracts for military bases, logistics, and defense infrastructure.
That's 4 in total from the career top 20 list. For the recent cycle (2019-2024), Boeing is the primary one connected, while the US Dept of Defense represents contributions from individuals in the military rather than a corporation itself.Several of the top corporate contributors to Senator Lindsey Graham have strong ties to the military-industrial complex, primarily through defense contracting, aerospace manufacturing for military applications, and engineering services for defense projects. Based on campaign finance data and reports, the following from the provided lists are directly connected:
- Lockheed Martin: Major defense contractor involved in weapons systems, aircraft, and military technology.
- GE Aerospace: Provides military jet engines, avionics, and other defense-related products.
- Boeing Co: Leading aerospace and defense firm, producing military aircraft, missiles, and satellites.
- Fluor Corp: Engineering and construction company with significant contracts for military bases, logistics, and defense infrastructure.
That's 4 in total from the career top 20 list. For the recent cycle (2019-2024), Boeing is the primary one connected, while the US Dept of Defense represents contributions from individuals in the military rather than a corporation itself.Several of the top corporate contributors to Senator Lindsey Graham have strong ties to the military-industrial complex, primarily through defense contracting, aerospace manufacturing for military applications, and engineering services for defense projects. Based on campaign finance data and reports, the following from the provided lists are directly connected:
- Lockheed Martin: Major defense contractor involved in weapons systems, aircraft, and military technology.
- GE Aerospace: Provides military jet engines, avionics, and other defense-related products.
- Boeing Co: Leading aerospace and defense firm, producing military aircraft, missiles, and satellites.
- Fluor Corp: Engineering and construction company with significant contracts for military bases, logistics, and defense infrastructure.
That's 4 in total from the career top 20 list. For the recent cycle (2019-2024), Boeing is the primary one connected, while the US Dept of Defense represents contributions from individuals in the military rather than a corporation itself.
SCOTUS Tariffs from RTCL
Terms mentioned
·
“IEEPA”
is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. In peacetime emergencies
declared by the President, IEEPA gives the President the power to “regulate”
“any transactions in foreign exchange” “by means of instructions, licenses, or
otherwise.” 50 U.S.C. § 1702(a)(1). This language is often described as
“capacious.” A big question is how
capacious it can be under the Constitution.
·
“TWEA”
is the Trading with the Enemy Act.
During times of declared war, TWEA gives the President the same
power. 50 U.S.C. § 4305(b)(1). Because we’re not in a declared-war
situation, TWEA doesn’t apply here—but the statutory language received
attention during oral argument.
·
The “Nondelegation”
doctrine says that one branch of government (usually Congress) can’t delegate
its powers to another branch. There are
many exceptions (see our massive administrative state). But that’s what “nondelegation” refers to.
·
The “Major
Questions” doctrine is related to nondelegation. It says that courts won’t read a statute to
empower the President to determine a “major” political or economic questions
unless the statute makes it clear and explicit.
To quote the late Justice Scalia, Congress doesn’t “hide elephants in
mouseholes.”
The main argument
The tariff opponents say that the President can issue “licenses” as long as they don’t involve fees that generate revenue. SCOTUS will spend a lot of time scrubbing this out.
Rob's Opinion
I
don’t like the M5M’s use of the word “skeptical” because it puts too
much weight on the first hour of oral argument, in which SG Sauer was
getting harassed. I agree that the Justices didn’t give him any
breaks. But neither did they give his opponents any breaks. There were
tough questions all around.
The
M5M’s conclusion ignores all the later questions that actually helped
the Administration—such as whether the statute is broad enough to allow
the President to impose tariffs in emergencies, and whether tariffs are
always an Article I Congressional taxing function or instead can be an
Article II Presidential foreign-affairs function. To my ears, this is a
mixed bag.
Another
thought: We lawyers sometimes hear the adage that if judges are
leaning toward one party on a controversial issue, they’ll direct the
toughest questions to that party just to make sure they’re not missing
anything. I’m not saying that’s what’s going on here—maybe yes, maybe
no—but the M5M probably doesn’t appreciate that phenomenon. And again,
my read of Justice Gorsuch’s questions to SG Sauer was that they were
rehabilitative, not an attack.
Overall,
I view the Administration’s odds as “not bad”—a take that’s clearly
different from the M5M’s narrative. I fully expect the Court to scrub
this issue out pretty hard. As you’ll recall from the Chevron Deference
decision, this Court has a keen interest in separation of powers. This
poses a challenge for the Administration. On the other hand, the
President absolutely has the power to deal with foreign countries—let’s
see where they come down on that issue, and on the interpretation of the
statute.
Epstein
Gen Zed
Juice isn't worth the squeeze BOTG
Hey Adam,
I was listening to the Sunday show and just wanted to clarify something you and John were talking about when it comes to Nick Fuentes, the juice not being worth the squeeze is a red pill concept, not an incel concept. Incel has fallen out of favor but the issue that most older men have is that they haven't been in the current dating market so they think things are the way there have always been, you have been married 3 times, John once i believe, the dating market isn't any where close to where it was even 5 years ago, women have roosters of men they date, both men and women ghost each other at the first sign of any trouble, the juice not being worth the squeeze is the simple fact that the vast majority of men are treated like wallets and the upside to dating is so small that most men that don't make a healthy salary, are tall, extremely attractive and in peak physical shape don't have a chance for even an average women. I am a Gen Xer that has been single for the past 5 years, i date extensively but fall victim to the same challenges the Gen Z and millennia's face, a date is a job interview for a man, what do you do, how long have you been there, what degrees do you have, all in the hopes of sussing out how much money i make, and the chance of anything lasting longer than a few weeks is not in the cards. You and john were lucky with your mate choices but for the rest of the men out there its not as easy as it used to be.
You can call me TB if you want to read this but just wanted to give me two cents, sustaining donater here.
Love the show and share it every time i can to anyone i meet.
Cheers,
Late millennial and GenZ BOTG
ITM,
Here is my take aways from my experience with our youth...
My 2 kids could not be more unlike each other. They are 8 years apart. My millennial step son(26) who introduced us all to hypno sissy porn is mentally not doing well. He has held a job for about a year which is great, however he requires that we acknowledge his greatness for holding this job. He literally thinks that we should go to his place of work to witness his greatness in action. His claim is that we no longer show him love and do not support him or take part in his life. From our perspective, he is verbally abusive, brags about every little thing that he does, he's tolerable 1-2 visits a month. He thinks we should be hanging out with him and his friends.
Everyone I know with a kid that is 22-29 is fucked up. Confused about their sexuality, addicted to perverted pornography, unable to create careers, unable to create healthy relationships. These kids all went to therapy and they are worse for it. Our son's therapists have turned him against us and honestly played a big role in his drift into transgender lifestyle, they created shame instead of helping him work through it. These kids needed a pastor not a therapist. They will be remembered as "the loneliest generation."
My 18 year old Gen Z could not be more different. About 3 years ago he was lead to Christ through friends. His entire friend group is from church, church is their social place. When we were kids we used to go to parties and get wasted, they go to church. He met a wonderful church girl that he has been dating. He's attending Liberty University. God has done really amazing things in his life. I am incredibly grateful as the church filled in some parenting pieces that as parents we didn't think of.
He is not alone, a large percentage of the kids around his age are church kids. He got me to attend a couple of times and the number of kids from 15-20 years old was very surprising. Liberty streams the twice weekly convocations. I watch watch the convocations. There is an entire arena filled with college kids worshiping god and have access to amazing guest speakers. They had Boris Johnson a couple of weeks ago. These kids ALL watch Nick Fuentes, they are all anti-DEI, they are all skeptical of Israel, they are skeptical of Erika Kirk, they are anti-abortion. Pornography and phone use are their big issues, they are aware of the issues, however when we were kids we had "don't drink and drive,' and "this is your brain on drugs" campaigns. They need the same to make these issues equally as scary.
Anyway, I think that there is hope for the Gen Z kids. I think the generation ahead of them is totally lost.
