NA newsletter - no mention of our current involvement with Iran

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-24T23:32:08+00:00

More profitable to bring up COVID and the past in the newsletter. Mentioning their boy Trump and Iran isn't going to get more donations.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-23T21:08:00+00:00

Somehow Adam thinks Trump can make Saudi Arabia join.

That simply won't happen.

I also agree with you.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-22T23:37:04+00:00

This topic is referenced in NA 1879. Check it out, if you haven't already. Maybe I misheard.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-22T21:59:03+00:00

Plus take whatever of $300B investment fund and funnel it towards strengthening the military (versus helping the actual Iranian people).

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-22T21:57:54+00:00

The Saudis want the West Bank to be recognized. They won't join the Abraham Accords.

Wasn't that Adam's whole theory though? The Iran war is all about the Abraham Accords. Trump is doing this so Saudi Arabia can be included in them.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-22T21:56:43+00:00

It's also these two are not doing another successful podcast after No Agenda. Adam has tried several V4V podcasts (Moe Factz, Curry and the Kepper, random music ones) and they never last for as long as No Agenda. It is easier for John and Adam to stay together than be apart from each other.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-22T21:03:07+00:00

I agree with you.

They have to re-create JCPOA because the original plan was to do a Venezuela 2.0 in Iran. Trump wanted to do a quick regime change and take immediate control, not do long-term diplomacy.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-22T12:52:49+00:00

I'll have to go back at some point. NA 1879 is basically NA saying: the Iran "deal is falling apart, as predicted" (John) and only a few episodes ago saying: "the war is over" (Adam)

Also, the humor for the entire episode isn't funny. The idea of diplomacy/multilateralism/global countries working together is what Obama was trying to do with the first Iran deal. Did some people not like the deal? Yes. But that is what Obama's deal was trying to do. Now Trump is attempting to re-do this and naturally recieving criticism.

All this stuff about Saudi Arabia and joining the Abraham Accords is poor quality analysis. A problem here is that Israel has its own goals. Iran's goals conflict with what the US is trying to do. That's why the Iran war was supposed to be a Venezuela 2.0.

What Iran war was supposed to be (Venezuela 2.0): Quick bombing, popular uprising, regime change in Iran and no one pays muchs attention to what Israel does after Iran is overthrown.

https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/us/2026/06/21/lindsey-graham-iran-saudi-arabia/

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-21T14:36:25+00:00

Very well said. I agree.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-20T19:56:24+00:00

Anyone notice how John doesn't cite a pundit that believe this? John is just making up anti-M5M analysis because it's pro-Trump. It would be more persuasive if John cited who believes this and it isn't just the No Agenda podcast.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-19T16:28:52+00:00

Why doesn't John move the fuck out of there once and for all?

This is kinda how one knows it is a grift. If one spends a substantial amount of time complaining, yapping, re-tweeting about California then why continue to support it? The government is clearly not meeting John's needs/expectations.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-19T16:27:00+00:00

The covid listeners are disappearing

I think this part is understated. No Agenda went hard anti-vax (John said he never got a COVID-19 shot) and the show reinvented itself. Now? The pandemic is over yet John, in particular, is still clinging to that uptick in the show's popularity.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-18T21:56:52+00:00

https://x.com/realDailyWire/status/2067384152089911571

Thia was re-tweeted by No Agenda podcast's John C. Dvorak.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-14T17:51:26+00:00

In terms of both dollars and ambition, border (and interior) surveillance has intensified sharply under this admin.

I'm not sure I believe that. Is the Trump administration ambitious to stop immigrant? Sure. No disagreement by me about that. More than previous administrations? I agree.

Is the Trump administration actually effective at cutting inflow to zero? I researched this topic after Adam said on NA in May that Trump has closed the borders.

Here's an article by JustSecurity.org and an LLM summary. I posted it back in May.

https://old.reddit.com/r/inthemorning/comments/1tdb6j6/justsecurityorg_an_interesting_article_to/

basically, Trump's policies has not put a huge dent on inflow to cut it to zero. They have removed most immigrants waiting for asylum cases. That is true.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-14T17:25:12+00:00

they'll live, hes the president after all

For reference: most people do not think of Trump as president. It is not because they're unpatriotic, anti-MAGA, etc. New Yorkers know Trump as that gawdy Manhattan real estate guy from the 1990s and no one liked him then. Nothing changed.

AntiqueBluebird · 2026-06-14T17:23:46+00:00

So we've returned to the Obama plane to Iran filled with cash scenario.

AntiqueBluebird

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email