What's REALLY Going on with UFOS & NATIONAL SECURITY? Featuring CONGRESSMAN BURLISON

0:05 Speaker 1: Gait on all the many.

0:13 Speaker 2: I occasionally think how quickly our difference is worldwide would

0:17 Speaker 2: vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside

0:20 Speaker 2: this work. And yet I ask you, it's not an

0:22 Speaker 2: alien force already amongst We must guard against.

0:25 Speaker 3: The acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought by

0:29 Speaker 3: the military industrial contact. The potential or the disastrous rise

0:33 Speaker 3: or misplaced power exists and will persist.

0:57 Speaker 1: Now I am becoming bad or world.

0:59 Speaker 2: In my association with Pricing Group, they're definitely withheld information.

1:10 Speaker 2: We have a look on all going against.

1:14 Speaker 3: You shall be twere or firm the testomony or a

1:17 Speaker 3: barking game of the truth, the whole truth and helping

1:20 Speaker 3: the truth.

1:20 Speaker 2: So help me, guy, do you believe that our government

1:22 Speaker 2: is in possession of the agents?

1:24 Speaker 1: Absolutely? All right, welcome back to Total Disclosure. I am

1:33 Speaker 1: your host, tie and I am the creator of the program.

1:36 Speaker 1: Today we have an absolutely wonderful treat to kick off

1:41 Speaker 1: literally kick off twenty twenty five. Today we are joined

1:46 Speaker 1: by Congressman Eric Burlison. Congressman Burlison is a sixth generation

1:52 Speaker 1: Missourian with twenty years of private sector experience as an

1:57 Speaker 1: investment advisor, and software consultants ninety five. Graduate from Parkview

2:02 Speaker 1: High School in Springfield and received a Bachelor of Arts

2:05 Speaker 1: in philosophy and a Master of Business Administration from Missouri

2:09 Speaker 1: State University. He was elected to represent Missouri's seventh congressional

2:15 Speaker 1: district in twenty twenty two. He is an important person

2:19 Speaker 1: in our field of you know, UFOs, especially lately with

2:24 Speaker 1: the renewed energy that the topic is bringing not just

2:28 Speaker 1: to mainstream media, but it's made its way all the

2:31 Speaker 1: way in to government. And we've had three four multiple hearings,

2:38 Speaker 1: two of which with you know, witnesses on the stand,

2:42 Speaker 1: Eric being part of both of those. So and he's

2:45 Speaker 1: also part of the House Oversight Committee. So with that

2:48 Speaker 1: being said, we want to welcome mister Congressman Berylson. All right, Congressman,

3:03 Speaker 1: thank you for joining us today. Good to be on time,

3:06 Speaker 1: So so thankful for what you've done in not just you,

3:12 Speaker 1: but what you've what the government is doing, holding these hearings,

3:17 Speaker 1: getting more involved with this subject and tap trying to

3:22 Speaker 1: shed away some of this stigma and lieu of the

3:27 Speaker 1: scientific effort to kind of understand more about what's happening

3:32 Speaker 1: in our skies and our reality in general. So again,

3:36 Speaker 1: I just want to say thank you for joining us today.

3:38 Speaker 1: And as a member of the House Oversight Committee, how

3:42 Speaker 1: did your interest in the topic of UFOs and non

3:45 Speaker 1: human intelligence begin?

3:47 Speaker 4: I was, I was watching the news whenever David Grush

3:50 Speaker 4: kind of came out as a whistleblower. He went on

3:53 Speaker 4: national news, and it was making an appeal to Congress.

3:58 Speaker 4: He was, you know, you know, making an assertion that

4:01 Speaker 4: that based on his that he's you know, leaving public

4:05 Speaker 4: office or leaving the government in order to blow the

4:08 Speaker 4: whistle and draw attention to members of Congress that the

4:11 Speaker 4: laws being violated and that there are special access programs

4:14 Speaker 4: that are not briefing members of Congress. And that alarmed me,

4:19 Speaker 4: and so being on the Oversight Committee, I reached out

4:23 Speaker 4: to I reached out to David Grush through the media

4:27 Speaker 4: and was able to get a contact, had a conversation

4:30 Speaker 4: with him, and felt like there was enough merit to

4:32 Speaker 4: continue to do the investigation, and so did Tim Burchett

4:35 Speaker 4: and others who then reached out to Chairman Comer. Now

4:39 Speaker 4: when this happened, I was a brand new you know,

4:42 Speaker 4: still wept behind the ears freshmen. I had been in

4:44 Speaker 4: office for just a few months, so I didn't even

4:47 Speaker 4: know where to begin when it came to investigating. But

4:49 Speaker 4: I'm glad that I'm on the committee, the Oversight Committee,

4:52 Speaker 4: because it's it's the exact committee that's designed for this exactly.

4:58 Speaker 1: I got a chance after the hearing to speak with

5:02 Speaker 1: Nancy Mace and I kind of took a knee and

5:06 Speaker 1: brought Robert Sallas in with me, and he was able

5:11 Speaker 1: to talk to her about the event that happened to

5:13 Speaker 1: him in nineteen sixty seven at Malbomstrom Air Force Base

5:17 Speaker 1: where ten nuclear missiles were taken offline, and it had

5:21 Speaker 1: been mentioned previously by a representative Gallagher and the I

5:28 Speaker 1: don't know if you remember the.

5:28 Speaker 4: First Year hearing twenty twenty one, I can't remember which.

5:32 Speaker 1: Yeah it was. It was the one where they had

5:35 Speaker 1: Scott Bray and Ronald Moultrie testifying to Congress. It was

5:42 Speaker 1: kind of what kicked us off. So he had mentioned

5:45 Speaker 1: the incident and it had it kept coming up, and

5:49 Speaker 1: I was like, okay, you guys, you know you keep

5:53 Speaker 1: hearing about it. Why is no one reached out to

5:56 Speaker 1: Bob yit like he's the one who can who can

5:59 Speaker 1: tell you the whole the entire story. So it was

6:02 Speaker 1: really fun to get to do that. And I'd love

6:05 Speaker 1: to talk about Bob a little bit later, but it's

6:08 Speaker 1: exactly we need more people like you in Congress that

6:12 Speaker 1: are dedicated to trying to figure this out. And you're

6:17 Speaker 1: not afraid of the stigma does it? Does it ever? Like,

6:22 Speaker 1: are you afraid that you know people at home are

6:25 Speaker 1: going to call you a kook or anything like that?

6:28 Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean absolutely. It's one of those things. You

6:31 Speaker 4: don't want this to be the thing that you're labeled

6:33 Speaker 4: as or that you're known for, because you know, I can't.

6:36 Speaker 4: I have a long history. I was a state legislator,

6:38 Speaker 4: of state house member and state senator. Passed a lot

6:42 Speaker 4: of very substantive bills, things that had tremendous impact in Missouri.

6:46 Speaker 4: You know, for example, I I did passed a medical

6:49 Speaker 4: malpractice tort reform. I passed a right to work laws,

6:52 Speaker 4: labor labor related laws that really had significant impact. Passed

6:57 Speaker 4: a lot of Second Amendment laws in Missouri giving giving

7:00 Speaker 4: citizens back their rights, very substantive, massive changes to the

7:07 Speaker 4: federal code. And when you look at the bevy of

7:10 Speaker 4: work that I have on the federal level, there's a

7:11 Speaker 4: lot of significant bills that I'm sponsoring. Many of them

7:16 Speaker 4: are business related, and so I you know, and yet

7:21 Speaker 4: you do all of those things and then the one

7:24 Speaker 4: thing that you start getting labeled as is the UFO guy.

7:27 Speaker 4: And I think that that's a little bit frustrating, but

7:31 Speaker 4: it certainly is something that piques a lot of interest.

7:35 Speaker 4: And so for me, I feel like we have a responsibility.

7:40 Speaker 4: It's you know, we have a responsibility. There's a lot

7:43 Speaker 4: of money being spent, there's you know, we have a

7:45 Speaker 4: national security potential threat that I think we need to

7:49 Speaker 4: investigate and determine exactly what's going on. And so I

7:53 Speaker 4: think that we owe it to the American people to

7:55 Speaker 4: continue to investigate it.

7:57 Speaker 1: Right because now, even if now I kind of want

8:02 Speaker 1: to start with this whole drone thing that's going on,

8:05 Speaker 1: obviously it's not in your district, I mean, not that

8:08 Speaker 1: I know of.

8:10 Speaker 4: It might be.

8:10 Speaker 1: I mean, it seems like it's everywhere.

8:12 Speaker 4: In my district. I have a lot of cousins in

8:15 Speaker 4: Rednecks that would shoot down any drone in.

8:19 Speaker 1: That's amazing. That's why they won't fly over this southern

8:24 Speaker 1: this other area.

8:25 Speaker 4: Right.

8:25 Speaker 1: They know they're gonna get thinken out, But this this

8:30 Speaker 1: drone thing in New Jersey is really really sparking people's interests.

8:36 Speaker 1: It's it's in the media every single day. These things

8:41 Speaker 1: are are seemingly breaching our most sensitive air space and

8:49 Speaker 1: we don't know where they're coming from. We don't know

8:52 Speaker 1: who's flying them. These things are supposed to be you know,

8:57 Speaker 1: some of them are alleged to be s u V sizes.

9:01 Speaker 1: I mean, what is what's going on, Congressman, If you

9:05 Speaker 1: can share your insight.

9:08 Speaker 4: I don't know, but I do know, like, we do

9:09 Speaker 4: have drones, even in commercial use, that are pretty large.

9:13 Speaker 4: I mean, I was at a at a demonstration to

9:15 Speaker 4: see the instead of having planes do crop dusting, there

9:20 Speaker 4: are drones that are that are big enough and large

9:22 Speaker 4: enough to actually fulfill that role. And I've seen them

9:26 Speaker 4: firsthand and they're pretty large. So I think that we

9:29 Speaker 4: underestimate how far the private sector has gone when it

9:33 Speaker 4: comes to these drones. But I will say the fact

9:35 Speaker 4: that that these things are appearing in the sky with

9:39 Speaker 4: the same bleaking lights that a drone has is probably

9:43 Speaker 4: the first clue that they're that it's not something that's extraterrestrial.

9:49 Speaker 1: I agree, and and a lot of the I think

9:53 Speaker 1: a lot of it. You'll you'll notice that anytime something

9:58 Speaker 1: like this happens, everyone starts looking to the sky and

10:02 Speaker 1: then they just start, you know, reporting everything they see.

10:06 Speaker 1: Ninety nine percent misidentification or prosaic explanation. However, there is

10:14 Speaker 1: that remaining one percent right and over the East Coast.

10:19 Speaker 1: I mean, at least the drones that I know of,

10:23 Speaker 1: that there's a function that's built into these things usually

10:26 Speaker 1: that if it does hit a restricted airspace and either

10:31 Speaker 1: lands right there or returns to sender. So I guess,

10:37 Speaker 1: I guess what where we're armed going with it? Is?

10:40 Speaker 1: How seriously does the government view these incidents in terms

10:44 Speaker 1: of national security threats that they're able to fly over

10:49 Speaker 1: you know, sensitive facilities? Is the White House in the Pentagon?

10:54 Speaker 1: They say they don't know what they are, but they're

10:57 Speaker 1: not a threat.

11:00 Speaker 4: Yeah, I don't know. I'm not on the committees that

11:02 Speaker 4: would be able to get access to that information whether

11:05 Speaker 4: or not they are a threat, but they I've not

11:08 Speaker 4: been briefed by I'm not an Armed Services Committee or Intel.

11:12 Speaker 4: So I think that the information that I have is

11:16 Speaker 4: the same information that the public has, right and so

11:19 Speaker 4: I think that and I think it's just you know,

11:22 Speaker 4: common sense that these are probably it's it's either private

11:29 Speaker 4: commercial use where they're going awry. The most nefarious case

11:33 Speaker 4: would be that it's it's espionage. I do think that China.

11:37 Speaker 4: Some of the briefings I've been in have indicated that

11:41 Speaker 4: the level of espionage that China's involved in in the

11:44 Speaker 4: United States, everything from you know, drones to you know,

11:49 Speaker 4: they're they're embedding, you know, students in our universities, or

11:53 Speaker 4: to steal intellectual property. There's a there's a level that

11:57 Speaker 4: I would say, when people ask me, what, what's surprised

12:00 Speaker 4: to you in the two years you've been in office?

12:03 Speaker 4: That's probably one of my biggest surprises is the level

12:06 Speaker 4: and the extent at which China is involved in espionage

12:10 Speaker 4: in the United States.

12:12 Speaker 1: Right, and now, can I ask you something like this

12:17 Speaker 1: is going to get a little political. I can't believe

12:19 Speaker 1: I just asked if I could ask you something on

12:20 Speaker 1: a podcast, but I'm super redundant. But if if we

12:27 Speaker 1: if the United States tried to buy land in China

12:32 Speaker 1: or farm you know, farms in China, it wouldn't happen.

12:36 Speaker 1: But to put it simply, how come is it weird

12:41 Speaker 1: to you that like countries like Saudi Arabia and China

12:46 Speaker 1: are continuing to buy up land in the United States.

12:49 Speaker 4: It is it's very disturbing and I think, like, for example,

12:53 Speaker 4: one of the one of the things that the Biden

12:56 Speaker 4: family that with what they were investigated for was them

13:02 Speaker 4: working to create shell companies so that China or others

13:06 Speaker 4: can can purchase either land or other infrastructure, other or

13:11 Speaker 4: other energy related companies in the United States without anyone

13:15 Speaker 4: knowing about it. So you know, there's there's we investigated that.

13:21 Speaker 4: I think that there's no disputing that that that was

13:23 Speaker 4: the case. I think Tony Babolenski admitted that. But basically,

13:27 Speaker 4: there are loopholes that are being exploited that allow for

13:31 Speaker 4: foreign individuals and foreign governments to purchase things in America,

13:34 Speaker 4: and it's something that we need to put a stop to.

13:37 Speaker 1: I couldn't agree more. It's it's it's athenine and not

13:42 Speaker 1: to mention, I mean China's Belt in Road initiative that

13:46 Speaker 1: they're employing in the South America, Africa and other undeveloped

13:55 Speaker 1: you know, third world countries. Uh, they're essentially, you know,

14:00 Speaker 1: dealing with people that the US has said, okay, you

14:03 Speaker 1: know you're not reliable or you have a dictator in charge.

14:07 Speaker 1: You know, we can't do business with you. And China's like,

14:10 Speaker 1: we will, you know, and then they they they build highways,

14:14 Speaker 1: and you know, all they ask is that you know,

14:17 Speaker 1: one day we might need to use them, we might

14:19 Speaker 1: need to land some some planes here and take it

14:22 Speaker 1: over as a military base. Uh. It's it's frightening how

14:26 Speaker 1: close it's getting. And then of course our southern border unfortunately.

14:34 Speaker 1: So do you do you think that do you do

14:41 Speaker 1: you think that the United States has handicapped themselves in

14:45 Speaker 1: certain capacities in dealing with other countries and to help

14:50 Speaker 1: developing nations.

14:54 Speaker 4: That's a good question. I think that our trade policies

14:58 Speaker 4: have handicapped US. You know, we go back all the

15:00 Speaker 4: way to the Marshall Plan after World War Two that

15:04 Speaker 4: allowed for countries like Japan to have trade policies where

15:09 Speaker 4: you know, US car makers can't sell into Japan, but

15:13 Speaker 4: yet they can sell in the United States and as

15:17 Speaker 4: well as Germany. You know, you're not seeing American vehicles

15:20 Speaker 4: being sold in Europe, but yet they're selling their cars

15:24 Speaker 4: here in America. There are structural things that I think

15:27 Speaker 4: that this that you know, the Trump administration, whether you're

15:31 Speaker 4: a Republican or Democrat, I think that it should be

15:35 Speaker 4: bipartisan in agreement that we need to readdress, reevaluate our

15:39 Speaker 4: trade policies and agreements with these foreign countries and determine

15:43 Speaker 4: what's good for the United States.

15:45 Speaker 1: As absolutely, and I couldn't have said it better myself.

15:51 Speaker 1: Switching gears. You you've had a lot of You've done

15:56 Speaker 1: a lot of work in the private sector that led

15:59 Speaker 1: you to, inevitably, I assume, running for office. Can you

16:04 Speaker 1: talk about what you did prior to becoming the congressman.

16:10 Speaker 4: Yeah, I worked in the private sector. First, I was

16:13 Speaker 4: a software engineer. I paid my way through college by

16:16 Speaker 4: building websites back in the early and late nineties, and

16:21 Speaker 4: then just was like studying philosophy and then eventually studying

16:25 Speaker 4: finance in college. And so I graduated and got a

16:29 Speaker 4: job immediately working in a hospital system, developing one of

16:34 Speaker 4: the very first patient portals in the country. So this was, honestly,

16:38 Speaker 4: there were very few, if any patient portals that existed.

16:42 Speaker 4: It was a brand new field, and so we were

16:45 Speaker 4: carving new territory. And so we built that and I

16:50 Speaker 4: was the lead programmer and after it was completed, then

16:56 Speaker 4: we won a national award our hospital system did for

16:59 Speaker 4: the patient portal. A lot of companies ended up using

17:02 Speaker 4: a lot of the intellectual property that we had developed

17:04 Speaker 4: in that and so it gave me tremendous job security.

17:08 Speaker 4: And I continue to consult in healthcare it for twenty years.

17:13 Speaker 4: And then I along the way, I've you know, got

17:16 Speaker 4: my my my license to be an investment advisor and

17:20 Speaker 4: then became became a you know, independent investment advisor.

17:26 Speaker 1: Awesome, awesome. So you so you were part of the

17:31 Speaker 1: you know, the big airnet boom if you, if you will,

17:37 Speaker 1: back in the late eighties early nineties.

17:40 Speaker 4: Yeah, I was a low man on the tonal pool.

17:42 Speaker 1: I wasn't Yeah you heard Elon Musk, right, I get

17:44 Speaker 1: it right.

17:45 Speaker 4: My big mistake was that I didn't I was being

17:48 Speaker 4: paid to program that that application, and it had I

17:52 Speaker 4: done it independently and then sold it, I wouldn't a

17:56 Speaker 4: lot more money.

17:56 Speaker 1: So you you you work in the private secture for

17:59 Speaker 1: two years? You then what makes you decide to run

18:05 Speaker 1: for office?

18:07 Speaker 4: Yeah, that's my personal faith that really kind of drove that.

18:11 Speaker 4: I was a born again Christian and I see that

18:16 Speaker 4: our First Amendment rights are right to worship is really

18:18 Speaker 4: kind of slowly being eroded. And so I really paid

18:24 Speaker 4: attention to who was running for office and wanted to,

18:27 Speaker 4: you know, back people that wanted to protect those rights.

18:31 Speaker 4: And then as I started paying attention to politics, learned

18:35 Speaker 4: that I really think that what's unique about America is

18:39 Speaker 4: that we're a country that was that's based on this

18:44 Speaker 4: bottom up idea that our rights are given to us

18:48 Speaker 4: by you know, either natural law or by our creator,

18:52 Speaker 4: and that government is created by the people. It's not

18:55 Speaker 4: our rights don't come from government. And so that kind

18:58 Speaker 4: of is what really drives me, is to retain what

19:02 Speaker 4: is I think a very precious thing that is a

19:06 Speaker 4: different way of doing things with the United States of

19:09 Speaker 4: America that no country has ever done before. And I

19:12 Speaker 4: want to continue to retain that. And so originally I

19:16 Speaker 4: would just back elected officials or people that were running

19:20 Speaker 4: for office that held those values. I would donate to

19:23 Speaker 4: their campaigns, or I would build them a free website,

19:28 Speaker 4: stuff envelopes, put up signs, whatever I could do. I

19:30 Speaker 4: just was trying to help good people get elected. And

19:34 Speaker 4: then at one point somebody tapped me on the shoulder

19:36 Speaker 4: in the community and said that I have enough credibility

19:40 Speaker 4: that I would make it for a good candidate, and

19:42 Speaker 4: it just kind of worked out in my life. It

19:45 Speaker 4: was the right timing, and so I ran for state

19:47 Speaker 4: representative and won. And the rest is history.

19:51 Speaker 1: I suppose, right, Yeah, the rest now it is literal history.

19:55 Speaker 1: So okay, you come in now you're in office at

20:01 Speaker 1: a pretty pretty tumultuous time, to say the least, and

20:11 Speaker 1: you start going through UH and you know, these hearings

20:16 Speaker 1: are sprung with with the UFO topic u AP topic.

20:23 Speaker 1: How did you first feel about taking part in said

20:29 Speaker 1: hearings and said conversation, given your born again faith, your

20:36 Speaker 1: your Christianity.

20:39 Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, I think that the Christian community, there's

20:42 Speaker 4: there's a lot of people that have concerns about how

20:44 Speaker 4: it's going to affect their worldview. And I think that

20:48 Speaker 4: the more that you, I think, the more confidence that

20:50 Speaker 4: you have in your faith, and the more that you

20:53 Speaker 4: actually study the Bible, that it's not really contradictory to

20:57 Speaker 4: our worldview at all. In fact, it underscores quite a

21:00 Speaker 4: bit of the especially the stories that happen in the

21:03 Speaker 4: Old Testament. And so I don't and I could go

21:08 Speaker 4: into greater detail about that. But I just I think

21:12 Speaker 4: that there's some people that it would challenge their faith,

21:14 Speaker 4: and so because of that they shy away from the

21:16 Speaker 4: discussion or they immediately have a mental block about it.

21:20 Speaker 4: That's not my perspective. I mean, I'm I'm willing to

21:23 Speaker 4: be open to the idea of you know, aliens from

21:28 Speaker 4: another planet or or you know, extra dimensions things like that.

21:32 Speaker 4: I'm willing to be open to them. But I but

21:34 Speaker 4: I continue to remain that we need to be skeptical

21:37 Speaker 4: until we are until we can validate things, because I

21:40 Speaker 4: think that one of the mistakes that we get involved with,

21:43 Speaker 4: you know, scientifically, in you know, humanity has made a

21:49 Speaker 4: lot of mistakes in asserting things that there was no

21:52 Speaker 4: scientific validity for, you know, like the Earth is the

21:55 Speaker 4: center of the Solar system, the you know, the Earth,

21:58 Speaker 4: that the Sun is the center of the universe, or

22:00 Speaker 4: the Earth is the center of universe before validating that

22:03 Speaker 4: scientifically or being open to what what new science is

22:08 Speaker 4: going to reveal to us. So I just think that

22:10 Speaker 4: having a level set, you know, a healthy perspective on

22:15 Speaker 4: things and understanding that we don't know everything but until

22:19 Speaker 4: we until we can validate things. It's uh, it's not

22:23 Speaker 4: really smart to make a bold statements.

22:27 Speaker 1: Right, like like absolute statements that you know, I know

22:31 Speaker 1: this right? Is it ever? But because I've asked Tim

22:35 Speaker 1: Birch at this as well, do you ever fear that

22:42 Speaker 1: there's faction in government that is maybe a little bit

22:46 Speaker 1: too Maybe they they put the religious lens on this

22:53 Speaker 1: too hard, and they think that, you know, if if

22:56 Speaker 1: we start talking about it, then we're talking about or

22:59 Speaker 1: or invoking demons and you know stuff like that. Does

23:04 Speaker 1: that ever worry you that the line between religion and

23:09 Speaker 1: government is blurring?

23:14 Speaker 4: I I've heard that claim. I'm not so sure that

23:16 Speaker 4: that's the case. I think that I think it's more about,

23:21 Speaker 4: you know, there's power in having access to things that

23:24 Speaker 4: other people do not have access to. And so to

23:28 Speaker 4: me that that power is something that is what there's

23:33 Speaker 4: a lot of the you know, special access programs or

23:35 Speaker 4: individuals that do have access, they don't want to give

23:39 Speaker 4: that up. The moment that they do, than they than

23:41 Speaker 4: they lose power. And there's one thing that is a

23:43 Speaker 4: commodity in Washington, d C. And that is power.

23:47 Speaker 1: Yes, I uh, that is saying it lately with you

23:53 Speaker 1: with the with Grush specifically, I want to I want

23:56 Speaker 1: to kind of talk about what happened with Grush, you guys,

24:04 Speaker 1: not you guys, but you know what I mean. You

24:07 Speaker 1: had the hearing, there was a lot that he could

24:10 Speaker 1: not talk about publicly, and then you guys were alleged

24:16 Speaker 1: or trying to get him inside a skiff. Yeah, ultimately

24:22 Speaker 1: that has not happened to date as so far as

24:24 Speaker 1: we know, why has that happened or how did that happen?

24:30 Speaker 1: And what are we trying to do to fix or

24:34 Speaker 1: remedy that situation.

24:36 Speaker 4: That's a good question. I've tried a lot of things.

24:39 Speaker 4: So one of the things I explored is is trying

24:42 Speaker 4: to bring Grush on as a staff of my team.

24:45 Speaker 4: So and I think David is willing to make nearly

24:49 Speaker 4: nothing if it works. When we explored that, it still

24:55 Speaker 4: wouldn't give us the ability to get him into a

24:59 Speaker 4: skiff and and provide information that we that we needed.

25:03 Speaker 4: So that was kind of, you know, a dead end there.

25:07 Speaker 4: I think that one of the things that I've explored

25:10 Speaker 4: or tried to I've presented to the Speaker and to

25:13 Speaker 4: the Chairman, to Chairman Comber and Chairman Comer is open

25:15 Speaker 4: to it. I haven't heard anything, you know, positive or

25:19 Speaker 4: negative from the Speaker, but to try to create a

25:23 Speaker 4: special subcommittee that has jurisdiction over the UAP topic because

25:29 Speaker 4: and given a need to know, because that's what's necessary

25:34 Speaker 4: in order to get a lot of these clearances. Is that, well,

25:38 Speaker 4: you might, we might. I mean, every member of Congress

25:40 Speaker 4: has the ability to have a clearance that goes all

25:44 Speaker 4: the way to the top. The question is do you

25:46 Speaker 4: have the need to know?

25:48 Speaker 1: Right?

25:49 Speaker 4: And so if we give that, if the Speaker could

25:52 Speaker 4: create a committee and give it the ability to have

25:57 Speaker 4: the need to know, and then then we then I

26:00 Speaker 4: think that we should hire people like David Grush or

26:03 Speaker 4: loue Ela Zondo, people who are former formerly worked in

26:07 Speaker 4: the institutions that know where the bodies are buried, if

26:09 Speaker 4: you you know, either figura figuratively or literally, and and

26:14 Speaker 4: be able to bring them in so that they know

26:16 Speaker 4: where to go to get about the information.

26:19 Speaker 1: Do you ever do you ever wonder or do you

26:24 Speaker 1: ever not wonder that I guess that would be the

26:27 Speaker 1: wrong word for it, But do you ever think that

26:32 Speaker 1: you're tipping your hands like you're for instance, by getting

26:40 Speaker 1: Grush in a skiff ultimately he would be able to

26:43 Speaker 1: give you locations. And you know, people hostile or not.

26:51 Speaker 1: Do you think that they are now onto that fact

26:54 Speaker 1: and they're kind of shell gaming it?

26:58 Speaker 4: Yeah? And I think that they probably are already onto it.

27:02 Speaker 1: I was.

27:02 Speaker 4: I've been told that even if the moment, that already

27:07 Speaker 4: the any objects that that did exist in a facility

27:11 Speaker 4: or probably already moved by this point, just based on

27:15 Speaker 4: the you know, all of the different hearings that we've

27:18 Speaker 4: had in the conversations that they're aware of. Right, So

27:21 Speaker 4: we've and we've been given some facility locations that are

27:26 Speaker 4: potential sites. And and the the irony is I walk

27:33 Speaker 4: out of the out of a skiff, thinking, here's a

27:36 Speaker 4: couple of locations that we need to look at, and

27:39 Speaker 4: yet just the names or the locations are top secret.

27:44 Speaker 4: So how do I even begin to go about investigating

27:48 Speaker 4: that when when that those facilities, those locations, those names

27:51 Speaker 4: are top secret, I can't even tell my staff.

27:54 Speaker 1: Right, and that what to look into. And that's that's

27:59 Speaker 1: a that's a real blow, that's a real blockade. And

28:03 Speaker 1: then there's also people, I don't want to say the names,

28:07 Speaker 1: but there are do you think that there are efforts

28:11 Speaker 1: in Congress by your colleagues, not you know, your colleagues

28:17 Speaker 1: as in Congressman. Do you think that there are there

28:21 Speaker 1: are efforts in on the inside to block essentially any

28:30 Speaker 1: advancement on this.

28:32 Speaker 4: Yeah, no, I don't think I know. I mean, we

28:34 Speaker 4: had language that we've tried to get into into the

28:38 Speaker 4: National Defense Authorization Act. Tim Burchett had language, then Chuck

28:45 Speaker 4: Schumer had language to his benefit. I mean, I don't

28:47 Speaker 4: agree with Chuck Schumer on nearly anything, but I do

28:51 Speaker 4: agree on his efforts to try to provide disclosure and

28:55 Speaker 4: and sadly all of that was blocked by Mike Turner

28:59 Speaker 4: and some other members of the intelligence community and the

29:02 Speaker 4: House of all places. Somehow they had enough clout to

29:07 Speaker 4: stop the President of the Senate or the or Chuck

29:10 Speaker 4: Schumer and the Speaker and or you know, other other

29:16 Speaker 4: members of the House from from getting the language that

29:19 Speaker 4: we're trying to get past.

29:21 Speaker 1: Right.

29:21 Speaker 4: Yes, absolutely, we do have people within our that are

29:24 Speaker 4: elected officials that are trying to stop this information from

29:27 Speaker 4: getting out.

29:28 Speaker 1: Do you think it's at all coincidence that Mike Turner

29:31 Speaker 1: is backed by or or has major contributions from private

29:38 Speaker 1: aerospace and is the person that represents the district that right,

29:43 Speaker 1: Patterson is where many of these things in UFO lore

29:48 Speaker 1: are are considered to be. You know, that's like the

29:51 Speaker 1: home of them.

29:53 Speaker 4: I'm not going to draw any conclusions there. I'm going

29:56 Speaker 4: to give, you know, a colleague the benefit of the doubt.

29:58 Speaker 4: He may he probably has a strongly held belief that

30:02 Speaker 4: there's a that there's a fundamental reason why that shouldn't

30:05 Speaker 4: be publicly disclosed. Uh, I don't want to. I don't

30:09 Speaker 4: want to cast dispersions. You know, No, I understand. So

30:14 Speaker 4: you know, he's somebody I work with. He's probably has

30:17 Speaker 4: his his perspective, and I can't really speak for him

30:20 Speaker 4: and why he's why he doesn't he doesn't agree with

30:24 Speaker 4: some of the amendments that Chuck Schumer or Tim Burds

30:28 Speaker 4: should have tried to put forward.

30:30 Speaker 1: Understood, So I asked Twitter, well, I guess this acts now.

30:36 Speaker 1: I can't get used to that. But I asked if

30:40 Speaker 1: anyone wanted to submit question that I'd pick a couple.

30:45 Speaker 1: There's at the Friar. Eli asked a really good question,

30:51 Speaker 1: and he said, during the most recent UFO hearing, Eric

30:54 Speaker 1: Burla sent you quoted the Liberation Times regarding the alleged

30:59 Speaker 1: trans of a retrieved craft of unknown origin to the

31:04 Speaker 1: aws AP program For Anie who doesn't know that's the

31:08 Speaker 1: Advanced Aerospace Weapons Systems Application Program, so unknown origin to

31:15 Speaker 1: us APP from Lockheed Martin. Has he spoken to sources

31:20 Speaker 1: behind the scenes to confirm the legitimacy of this claim? Sorry,

31:26 Speaker 1: it goes on here. Additionally, what are his and his

31:29 Speaker 1: colleagues plans to follow up on that revelation? Thank you?

31:34 Speaker 4: Yeah, that's a good question. I submitted some questions to

31:38 Speaker 4: lou Elizondo. I'm gonna grab those real quick, please, And

31:43 Speaker 4: these are not I mean, this is not classified information.

31:48 Speaker 4: His responses to the to the emails that I sent

31:52 Speaker 4: in essence verified that there was an attempt to transfer

31:56 Speaker 4: material from Lockheed Martin, who's in possession of some some materials,

32:02 Speaker 4: to Bigelow Airspace and that ASAP was the was the

32:06 Speaker 4: agency that was going to was coordinating that right. There

32:09 Speaker 4: was I think I believe it was twenty two million

32:11 Speaker 4: dollars that was put that was budgeted, that was was

32:15 Speaker 4: going towards a facility in Nevada that Bigelow Airspace was building.

32:21 Speaker 4: And so the fact that there was money dedicated for

32:23 Speaker 4: a facility and work was underway to transfer material, and

32:30 Speaker 4: and that it is it was they testified that the

32:34 Speaker 4: CIA did step in and stop that transfer. It suggests

32:39 Speaker 4: that there that there is probably something that you know,

32:42 Speaker 4: whether it whether it's extraterrestrial or or not, like whatever

32:47 Speaker 4: it is. Yeah, right, there some material that Lockheed Martin

32:50 Speaker 4: is in possession of that the CIA blocked from being

32:54 Speaker 4: transferred over to Bigelow Airspace.

32:57 Speaker 1: Now that is I I have you heard the name

33:02 Speaker 1: Jim Lekatski, I.

33:05 Speaker 4: Believe so you may have to refresh my memory.

33:08 Speaker 1: So he is he was the essentially the top dog

33:15 Speaker 1: of as APP. So he ran as APP. And in

33:21 Speaker 1: an episode of Weaponized, when he was speaking to George

33:25 Speaker 1: Knapp and Jeremy Corbel, he had said that as APP

33:30 Speaker 1: in fact did have a craft and they were able

33:36 Speaker 1: to preach the whole. He later goes on to say

33:40 Speaker 1: that he he would lie to Congress under oath in

33:46 Speaker 1: order to protect national security. So maybe that's something that

33:50 Speaker 1: you can look into.

33:51 Speaker 4: Yeah, we'll have to reach out to him, see if

33:53 Speaker 4: he's willing to talk.

33:55 Speaker 1: I would assume that that that is someone that that

33:59 Speaker 1: so him how put off and Eric Davis, what is

34:05 Speaker 1: stopping the House Oversight Committee or anybody from bringing them

34:11 Speaker 1: in and essentially saying, tell me what you know.

34:15 Speaker 4: And Eric Davis is the one that wrote that ye

34:21 Speaker 4: after interviewing a colonel was it or someone?

34:24 Speaker 1: Yes, Tom Admiral Thomas Wilson.

34:28 Speaker 4: Okay, And I, as far as I know, he's not

34:31 Speaker 4: verified that that report did belong to him or that

34:34 Speaker 4: that was that was accurate? Is that right correct?

34:37 Speaker 1: But even in the document he says that if you

34:42 Speaker 1: betray my trust and this gets out, I will deny

34:46 Speaker 1: that this meeting ever happened. I will not acknowledge it. Yet,

34:51 Speaker 1: you know, assumingly unless he was brought in and like

34:57 Speaker 1: you know, told you know you need to tell us,

35:00 Speaker 1: but you know, YadA YadA.

35:02 Speaker 4: Yeah. My view is that we need to have an

35:04 Speaker 4: ongoing series of hearings that would be open to the public,

35:08 Speaker 4: whether it's done through a sub committee or done independently.

35:13 Speaker 4: You know, members of Congress can hold their own hearings.

35:17 Speaker 4: Now when people come into those hearings, you cannot you

35:20 Speaker 4: cannot subpoena them. They can they cannot be under oath

35:24 Speaker 4: so that they don't have the level of credibility that

35:27 Speaker 4: a that an oversight hearing would have, but it is possible,

35:31 Speaker 4: and it's it's just my view that when you're in

35:35 Speaker 4: these hearings and you only have five minutes to ask questions,

35:39 Speaker 4: it's not enough time and it's not enough time to

35:41 Speaker 4: really break apart the conversation. So I wish that, for example,

35:46 Speaker 4: the five minutes I had, I really wanted that five

35:48 Speaker 4: minutes with lou Alizonda just to be an hour and

35:53 Speaker 4: we could really probably get to a lot of you know, answers. Now,

35:57 Speaker 4: that's why I submitted a lot of questions after the hearing,

36:00 Speaker 4: hoping to get some. But you know, for every question

36:03 Speaker 4: you ask, and just to give your listeners, you know,

36:07 Speaker 4: a perspective of what it's life, what it's like to

36:10 Speaker 4: be in my shoes is imagine you've built up to

36:14 Speaker 4: that moment, like you've you and your team have worked

36:17 Speaker 4: on different questions that you're going to ask, and then

36:19 Speaker 4: you get into that hearing, and especially if you're a

36:23 Speaker 4: freshman like me, you're one of the last people to

36:25 Speaker 4: get to ask questions. So your questions have already been asked,

36:28 Speaker 4: most of the questions have already been asked, and then

36:32 Speaker 4: when you do get a chance to ask questions. It's

36:35 Speaker 4: like writing a bull like in a rodeo. So the gates,

36:39 Speaker 4: you ask one question and the topic the answer could

36:42 Speaker 4: go take you in a different direction than you thought

36:44 Speaker 4: you might be going down, and if you don't catch

36:47 Speaker 4: what the person is saying, then you may miss something. Right.

36:51 Speaker 4: So you've got a list of questions in front of you.

36:54 Speaker 4: You're trying to get through your list. But the truth is,

36:57 Speaker 4: after the hearing, there's there's so many moments where where

37:01 Speaker 4: you think to yourself, oh, I wish I had followed

37:03 Speaker 4: up with this question right or asked it in a

37:06 Speaker 4: different way. And so it's it's just really a frustrating endeavor.

37:12 Speaker 4: You try to do the best that you can. But

37:14 Speaker 4: what's frustrating is is that five minute block that that

37:19 Speaker 4: is I don't know, some arbitrary number. The way in

37:21 Speaker 4: which Congress does it. You know in the state legislatures

37:24 Speaker 4: they do not do that. They they in the Missouri House,

37:28 Speaker 4: at least in the Missouri Senate. You let members ask

37:32 Speaker 4: questions as they think of the question. Right. You certainly

37:36 Speaker 4: could begin with like an order of seniority, but after

37:39 Speaker 4: the seniority it's just you know, as people start saying that,

37:43 Speaker 4: witnesses start saying things. It will prompt questions that people

37:47 Speaker 4: had not thought of before, and so and you can

37:51 Speaker 4: ask you know, you can ask one question. You don't

37:53 Speaker 4: have to ask five minutes of questions. You could just

37:56 Speaker 4: ask the one that you want to ask at that

37:57 Speaker 4: moment and then and then move on. I like the

38:01 Speaker 4: state model a lot better. I think it gets to

38:03 Speaker 4: the bottom of the truth of things. I think that

38:07 Speaker 4: the model that we have in Congress is designed for

38:10 Speaker 4: political theater. That's it. It's designed for theater. It's designed

38:15 Speaker 4: so that you get your five minutes that is clipped

38:18 Speaker 4: so that you can so you can throw it on

38:21 Speaker 4: YouTube or social media and you got your five minute clip.

38:25 Speaker 4: Oh my god, that's what it's designed for.

38:28 Speaker 1: Oh my god. I you just blew my mind. You're

38:32 Speaker 1: absolutely right. It's set up for mainstream media clips. It's

38:38 Speaker 1: the five minute right now. So do you think is

38:42 Speaker 1: there a way to chant?

38:44 Speaker 4: God?

38:45 Speaker 1: I didn't even think. That's why. I think conversations like

38:50 Speaker 1: this ultimately are going to be the way forward, These

38:55 Speaker 1: long form conversations. I mean, you look at at Rogan

38:59 Speaker 1: and Donald Trump, right, and then the fact not to

39:03 Speaker 1: go on this, you know, kind of tie rade right now.

39:06 Speaker 1: But he was asked to do Trump was asked to

39:10 Speaker 1: do the show. Did it three hours at his age

39:15 Speaker 1: at you know, seventy something years old, didn't didn't even

39:20 Speaker 1: by the hour three. That's when you really get to

39:23 Speaker 1: know somebody, because you know that that's when the barriers

39:28 Speaker 1: start coming down, right and the talking points start to

39:31 Speaker 1: fall away. And Trump was just on it, on it,

39:34 Speaker 1: on it, the guy is just a machine. And then

39:37 Speaker 1: the fact that the whole fiasco with with with Harris,

39:43 Speaker 1: how she wanted to bring Rogan out to this location,

39:47 Speaker 1: you only do it for an hour under controlled environment.

39:51 Speaker 1: It just clearly said something to the world, to the

39:54 Speaker 1: nation that these are two different people and which one

39:59 Speaker 1: do you want to run the And I think overwhelming

40:02 Speaker 1: at least foke, but that that's just a clear demonstration

40:06 Speaker 1: visually that like the mainstream media, that they're just not

40:12 Speaker 1: what people want anymore. They don't want these sound bites

40:15 Speaker 1: that can be manipulated.

40:17 Speaker 4: Mm hmm.

40:18 Speaker 1: Yeah.

40:18 Speaker 4: I learned a lot from the Joe Rogan interviews with

40:21 Speaker 4: with Grush and Alessando. I learned a lot, especially researching

40:26 Speaker 4: before the hearings, and you you know, they were able

40:30 Speaker 4: to delve into a lot of these topics a lot

40:34 Speaker 4: better than we are in these hearings, for sure.

40:37 Speaker 1: So so just to just to make sure I heard

40:41 Speaker 1: that right, you watched the the Grush episode of Rogan

40:48 Speaker 1: and Alessandro's before their hearings, respectively.

40:54 Speaker 4: I don't know if the Grush hearing, the one with

40:58 Speaker 4: Grush happened after our hearing. I think it happened after it.

41:02 Speaker 1: Did it did? You're right? But you listened to the preparation.

41:07 Speaker 4: Yeah, I listened to. I try to devour as much

41:10 Speaker 4: as I possibly can. Well, that's amazing anytime that Yeah.

41:16 Speaker 1: That that just will you don't know how far that

41:19 Speaker 1: will go to people in the community, uh, that you're

41:23 Speaker 1: actually listening and doing your homework, because I think aside

41:27 Speaker 1: from the thet there's there's a couple of complaints with

41:32 Speaker 1: the hearings, and you know, this is just feedback for

41:35 Speaker 1: me to from the community, see you a congressman, is

41:39 Speaker 1: people really hate hearing? Oh I can't talk about that

41:43 Speaker 1: in an open session, you know, and I think there's

41:46 Speaker 1: no way to get around it. You know, it's it's

41:48 Speaker 1: a complaint, it is what it is. But the second

41:51 Speaker 1: thing is that they feel that not not enough of

41:55 Speaker 1: the members actually do their whole work. But it's that's

42:00 Speaker 1: not the case with you, and that I find out

42:03 Speaker 1: to be very refreshing because that's birch it as well,

42:07 Speaker 1: Luna and and and Gallagher in that first one when

42:11 Speaker 1: he brought up the sixty seven Malmstroam case, you knew

42:14 Speaker 1: that this guy knew what he was talking about.

42:17 Speaker 5: And it's I watched that hearing as well, and I

42:23 Speaker 5: think Gallagher's line of questions about the gap, the historical

42:27 Speaker 5: gap between Project Blue Book and.

42:31 Speaker 4: And the you know, a tip or the offset program,

42:34 Speaker 4: I think it was pretty telling. I think that that's

42:38 Speaker 4: that's an area that the fact that the federal government,

42:41 Speaker 4: I mean, you cannot tell me that they were that

42:43 Speaker 4: there was not some agencies that were involved in investigating

42:47 Speaker 4: these this phenomenon and in that what was it like

42:51 Speaker 4: a forty year period of time or yes, uh, that

42:55 Speaker 4: that nothing was going on. I don't believe that whatsoever.

42:57 Speaker 4: And so, but that seems to be the narrative that

43:00 Speaker 4: they try to spindles. Gall's line question on that was

43:05 Speaker 4: pretty good, right.

43:07 Speaker 1: I know, everyone in the community was like baffled that

43:13 Speaker 1: just because up until that point, it had been kind

43:16 Speaker 1: of like a nothing burger. It was just, you know,

43:19 Speaker 1: no one was asking the right questions, and then all

43:21 Speaker 1: of a sudden he came out just hammering them, and

43:24 Speaker 1: it was like and they both I remember them both

43:26 Speaker 1: looking at each other at one point like, have you

43:29 Speaker 1: heard about the dell Wood Davis Wilson notes they kept

43:33 Speaker 1: saying it wrong.

43:34 Speaker 4: They were so overcurt those guys are so over compartmentalized,

43:37 Speaker 4: they wouldn't know that's fine. One of the things that

43:40 Speaker 4: I think that we've concluded, or I've concluded, is that

43:43 Speaker 4: the it's really an over arching special access program, and

43:47 Speaker 4: it may be called immaculate constellation. That may be what

43:50 Speaker 4: it's called. I don't know, but that certainly was what

43:54 Speaker 4: we heard in the latest hearing, and that it's embedded

43:56 Speaker 4: in the White House. So it's it's under what is

43:59 Speaker 4: the National Security Advisor currently, Jake Sullivan under his authority

44:05 Speaker 4: and uh and and so all of the under outside

44:09 Speaker 4: of that umbrella, they're compartmentalizing all the information or all

44:12 Speaker 4: the you know, whether it's propulsion or other technology, they're

44:18 Speaker 4: they're compartmentalizing it in a different special access programs within

44:21 Speaker 4: different agencies. Of the federal governments, from the Department of

44:24 Speaker 4: Energy to Department of Defense and Department of Intelligence. So

44:27 Speaker 4: you've got any intelligence community, so you've got different you know,

44:32 Speaker 4: you know, they're they're slicing it up and compartmentalizing it.

44:36 Speaker 4: So when you ask a question of these individuals from

44:39 Speaker 4: the Air Force, they're going to know some information, but

44:45 Speaker 4: they're not going to know the overall or overarching information.

44:49 Speaker 4: It gives them plausible deniability.

44:52 Speaker 1: Absolutely, So speaking of that, Uh, this is another question. So,

44:56 Speaker 1: given given the secrecy often associated with UAP investigations, how

45:03 Speaker 1: difficult is it to oversee organizations like the Department of

45:08 Speaker 1: Defense or intelligence agen agencies on this.

45:11 Speaker 4: Matter, how difficult is it to I'm sorry.

45:18 Speaker 1: Oversee organizations like the d O D.

45:21 Speaker 4: So, for example, you've got for all of these agencies,

45:26 Speaker 4: you have offices of inspector General. So you have the

45:29 Speaker 4: Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, you have the

45:32 Speaker 4: intelligence communities Office of Inspector General. And they they both

45:40 Speaker 4: they both validated Grush's claim that there's over compartmentalization and

45:44 Speaker 4: that they are not disclosing what they're what they're doing

45:48 Speaker 4: to Congress. Congress has has a right to have access

45:52 Speaker 4: to the information. I think that the fact that they

45:54 Speaker 4: are holding the over arching information in the in the

45:58 Speaker 4: executive branch, which is, you know, the second Article two

46:02 Speaker 4: of the Constitution under the President, I think that that

46:05 Speaker 4: protects them or gives them some distance from Congress. But

46:08 Speaker 4: at the end of the day, when they're working with

46:10 Speaker 4: government agencies that we fund, Congress has, you know, and

46:14 Speaker 4: so we basically have to work backwards unless we get

46:17 Speaker 4: direct information from the White House.

46:20 Speaker 1: And that that sucks.

46:22 Speaker 4: It does. And the other thing is, like all of

46:25 Speaker 4: these hearings, in order to get these witnesses, especially the

46:29 Speaker 4: ones that have clearance, you have to get approval from

46:35 Speaker 4: I believe they called the four corners of each committee.

46:38 Speaker 4: So when you bring in someone from UH, you have

46:42 Speaker 4: to get the approval of the House Armed Services Committee,

46:47 Speaker 4: you have to get both the rank both the chairman

46:50 Speaker 4: and the ranking member have to prove it. On the

46:52 Speaker 4: House side and on the Senate side, you have to

46:55 Speaker 4: get approval from the Intel Community or committee uhairman and

47:00 Speaker 4: the ranking member before you can even bring these witnesses forward.

47:04 Speaker 4: So that that is another obstacle that you have to

47:07 Speaker 4: You have to go through these hoops just to get

47:10 Speaker 4: bring forward witnesses to testify.

47:13 Speaker 1: Well speak that is actually really good. Uh seg So

47:19 Speaker 1: another user asked, and I'm not at j oh A

47:25 Speaker 1: oh c A R and then a bunch of numbers. Uh.

47:30 Speaker 1: George Knapp claims that testimony from whistleblowers who claim to

47:35 Speaker 1: have first hand knowledge the last hearing was not allowed.

47:40 Speaker 1: Was were you aware of this incident? If so, why

47:45 Speaker 1: was the partition of these alleged complaints not authorized.

47:52 Speaker 4: I was not. I'm not aware of that that there

47:55 Speaker 4: was information that was not allowed in the hearing. I

47:59 Speaker 4: know that there was a little bit of a controversy

48:02 Speaker 4: as far as the document that was released that there

48:05 Speaker 4: was a missing page. Oh, I think that, And I've

48:10 Speaker 4: heard rumors about what that was about, from from what

48:16 Speaker 4: and some of those rumors are that basically is just

48:18 Speaker 4: trying to not put into the public record something that

48:22 Speaker 4: would promote an individual or their social media And so

48:26 Speaker 4: that was the that was the extent of that. But

48:28 Speaker 4: I don't know, I don't know all the details there.

48:31 Speaker 1: So Corbell, and I hate to say this, but because

48:36 Speaker 1: I like Corbell, I met him that day. I think

48:39 Speaker 1: he's a good guy. But he seemed to have access

48:43 Speaker 1: that no one else had. He was coming in and

48:46 Speaker 1: out of the the where the witnesses came in, where

48:50 Speaker 1: you guys were coming in this I mean, if there

48:54 Speaker 1: was a page that was submitted and lost. Now he

49:00 Speaker 1: he's throwing shade at Congress and saying that that that

49:04 Speaker 1: you guys weren't telling the truth. I hate to put

49:08 Speaker 1: you on the spot, but how does that make you feel?

49:11 Speaker 4: I don't know what the details were there, but I

49:14 Speaker 4: would say this is the same thing that is happening

49:19 Speaker 4: there is the same thing that's happening in the federal

49:22 Speaker 4: government where you have, as I mentioned before, people want

49:25 Speaker 4: to control the information. And if you can control the information,

49:29 Speaker 4: you have power. You know, in the federal government, that

49:31 Speaker 4: gives you power over agencies, power over contracts and other

49:36 Speaker 4: things in the in the private sector, if you if

49:39 Speaker 4: you're controlling access to the information, you get you can

49:43 Speaker 4: get book deals, you can get you know, documentaries, whatever

49:47 Speaker 4: it is. And I'm not trying to throw a cast dispersion.

49:49 Speaker 4: I'm just saying that there is always going to be

49:52 Speaker 4: an innate desire for people to hold that information and

49:55 Speaker 4: keep it under their own lock and key, right because

49:59 Speaker 4: it's it's a value the moment you the moment you

50:03 Speaker 4: provide that to the public and make it totally disclosed,

50:06 Speaker 4: you've lost all of your all of your value. And

50:11 Speaker 4: so I'm not I'm not saying ill of anybody. I'm

50:15 Speaker 4: just saying that that that's just that is a dynamic

50:17 Speaker 4: that we have to work with. Is that we know

50:19 Speaker 4: that a lot of the people that are coming forward

50:22 Speaker 4: or that are involved in this space have have, you know,

50:26 Speaker 4: self motivation involved, and that you know, I don't think

50:29 Speaker 4: that's an evil thing or a bad thing. It's just

50:31 Speaker 4: something that we have to keep in mind.

50:33 Speaker 1: Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. And a lot of a

50:37 Speaker 1: lot of people are going to be happy to hear

50:38 Speaker 1: you say that.

50:39 Speaker 4: I will.

50:41 Speaker 1: I can guarantee that because one of the things that

50:46 Speaker 1: I fear is circular reporting. Does that ever warry you

50:51 Speaker 1: that you know, some of this stuff that you think

50:55 Speaker 1: has been corroborated by or as being told to you

50:59 Speaker 1: by ford from people actually just came from the one

51:02 Speaker 1: source telling everybody you know that circular reporting style. Do

51:06 Speaker 1: you ever do you ever wonder if anything that you're

51:08 Speaker 1: hearing or getting is disinformation?

51:10 Speaker 4: Oh? Absolutely, I mean I even asked, I asked Lou

51:14 Speaker 4: Elizondo point blank, you know, I said, I asked him.

51:20 Speaker 4: I said, one of the theories out there is that

51:22 Speaker 4: this is a syop and that you're the you're part

51:24 Speaker 4: of it, that you know, you you worked in the

51:26 Speaker 4: intelligence community. Uh you you know, if if you want

51:31 Speaker 4: to control this information that's coming out, why not why

51:34 Speaker 4: not take control of it and and leak what you

51:38 Speaker 4: want or or one of the one of the and

51:41 Speaker 4: Lou's response to me was, I think if it gave

51:45 Speaker 4: me a little bit more comfort, But the end of

51:48 Speaker 4: the day, I still hold to what I said in

51:50 Speaker 4: that very first hearing, the very first statement I said

51:53 Speaker 4: to David Gresh and others, is that I don't I'm

51:55 Speaker 4: from Missouri, and I do not trust you. I don't

51:58 Speaker 4: trust anybody in this town. And so I cannot. I mean,

52:02 Speaker 4: I'm gonna listen, and I'm gonna and I'm gonna, you know,

52:05 Speaker 4: I'm gonna, you know, absorb. But at the end of

52:07 Speaker 4: the day, you cannot. You cannot be gullible or or

52:14 Speaker 4: and just rely on every what everybody is telling you

52:17 Speaker 4: as the as the gospel truth. And so you've got

52:20 Speaker 4: to you've got to have a little bit of skepticism

52:22 Speaker 4: going in.

52:22 Speaker 1: So there have been claims obviously of biological materials associated

52:27 Speaker 1: with you aps from your position, are there efforts to

52:32 Speaker 1: investigate the authenticity of these claims.

52:35 Speaker 4: I think we're certainly trying to verify these claims.

52:39 Speaker 1: Well.

52:39 Speaker 4: When whenever I was in the hearing and I asked

52:41 Speaker 4: the question of David Grush, I thought his answer was

52:45 Speaker 4: pretty interesting. Which these these these biologics were collected? He was,

52:52 Speaker 4: he was born, So that's pretty interesting. And the other

52:56 Speaker 4: thing that he's alluded to is that while maybe life

53:01 Speaker 4: it's it's in that there he said, keep in mind

53:04 Speaker 4: that there's forms of life that we may not find

53:08 Speaker 4: immediately recognizable, right, so different types of material that that

53:13 Speaker 4: is actually life. So you know, take that where you

53:19 Speaker 4: want to go with it. But it to me, it

53:22 Speaker 4: says that that what what's collected is not a carbon

53:27 Speaker 4: based biological you know, organic being, it's it's something something different.

53:35 Speaker 4: And so with that, if it's the case, you know,

53:42 Speaker 4: then the then it's it seems as though, based on

53:45 Speaker 4: his testimony, that it's something different than something organic or

53:48 Speaker 4: biological in that way.

53:51 Speaker 6: Right, right, wow, wow, Because that's that that's intriguing on

53:59 Speaker 6: so many levels because a lot of people.

54:03 Speaker 1: I'm sure you've heard, you know, from just so much

54:08 Speaker 1: testimony maybe that you've consumed, but that obviously, you know,

54:13 Speaker 1: the archetypal like little gray alien. Mm hm, Well, a

54:20 Speaker 1: lot of people think that they act or that they're

54:23 Speaker 1: very robotic in they like in their movements and YadA, YadA.

54:28 Speaker 1: So could it could it be such something like that

54:32 Speaker 1: that we've collected from you know, a crash uh crash

54:36 Speaker 1: retrieval program.

54:38 Speaker 7: That's very interesting and I don't you know, I don't

54:41 Speaker 7: know what he was referring to, but you know, I've

54:45 Speaker 7: also heard that that postulated that the gray that the

54:50 Speaker 7: that the documented gray aliens are a some kind of

54:55 Speaker 7: robot or a drone or an AI that they there,

55:01 Speaker 7: that they are very simplistically.

55:06 Speaker 4: Create or formed or created. Right, So I don't know,

55:10 Speaker 4: I I've never seen more than obviously, But that's the goal.

55:13 Speaker 4: I mean, at the end of the day, I want

55:15 Speaker 4: to get to a point where if these things do exist,

55:18 Speaker 4: that there's a reason why I say that is that

55:21 Speaker 4: that wasn't created by the federal government, by the United States,

55:25 Speaker 4: should be held in top secret and if it it

55:29 Speaker 4: doesn't belong to the federal government. It belongs to humanity,

55:33 Speaker 4: and if it does exist, we need to put it

55:34 Speaker 4: on display, you know, let let the public see it,

55:38 Speaker 4: feel it, you know, touch it. Right, So I write,

55:43 Speaker 4: that's that's what my ultimate goal is.

55:46 Speaker 1: That would be like if the federal government tried to

55:49 Speaker 1: say that snakes didn't exist, right, It's like, you can't

55:55 Speaker 1: do that. That's not that's not your knowledge to to

55:59 Speaker 1: to cover up. It's part of Ultimately, it's part of nature.

56:05 Speaker 1: It's part of reality. Uh. And I don't think listen

56:09 Speaker 1: and listen. I want to make myself like super clear.

56:14 Speaker 1: I understand that for the same reason we don't allow

56:19 Speaker 1: everyone to have nuclear weapons, that we wouldn't want everyone

56:24 Speaker 1: having access to some of these technologies that are you know,

56:29 Speaker 1: allegedly far superior to our own, and you know, potentially

56:35 Speaker 1: of dual use because with with technology, you know, you

56:39 Speaker 1: can use a hammer to make a house or to

56:43 Speaker 1: kill somebody, right, So I understand that. So, but there

56:48 Speaker 1: is there's gotta be a middle there's if these things

56:52 Speaker 1: are real, if non human intelligence exists, that is not

56:57 Speaker 1: a for profit industry.

57:03 Speaker 4: Right, and it doesn't belong to a particular government. It

57:06 Speaker 4: belongs I mean the discovery of anything you know, scientific

57:12 Speaker 4: doesn't belong to any particular government agency. It belongs to

57:16 Speaker 4: the people of the science behind it belongs to the public.

57:20 Speaker 4: It now weaponizing it and the way in which you

57:23 Speaker 4: do that, I can see how you'd want to make

57:25 Speaker 4: some of that classified. But for example, like nuclear physics

57:30 Speaker 4: is not classified, building a nuclear bomb is right, and

57:36 Speaker 4: there's a distinction.

57:37 Speaker 1: So, and speaking of that, a lot of people have

57:45 Speaker 1: talked lately about the Department of that we might be

57:52 Speaker 1: looking at the wrong thing, or not looking at the

57:56 Speaker 1: wrong thing, but searching in the wrong places, and that

58:00 Speaker 1: it's actually this falls under the guise of the Department

58:04 Speaker 1: of Energy classifications because these things but you know, under

58:11 Speaker 1: the the the Atomic Secrecy Act, anything that produces a

58:17 Speaker 1: radiological signature would therefore fall under that that secrecy. Is

58:25 Speaker 1: that something that you guys are aware of and potentially discussing.

58:33 Speaker 4: Yes, yeah, it's especially after this last hearing where we

58:37 Speaker 4: learned that the Immaculate Constellation program is basically an overarching

58:42 Speaker 4: program over multiple agencies, it including the Department of Energy.

58:47 Speaker 4: It's something that and i'd heard those rumors before. The

58:51 Speaker 4: Energy was one of the was was one that some

58:56 Speaker 4: of the being if this information is being kept, so

59:01 Speaker 4: it certainly is an area that we need to explore.

59:05 Speaker 1: I definitely agree if confirmed. Now this is obviously going

59:14 Speaker 1: into the future, but I mean, if confirmed evidence of

59:19 Speaker 1: a non human intelligence were revealed, what steps should the

59:23 Speaker 1: government take to prepare the public for such a disclosure.

59:31 Speaker 4: I think that I don't think that the government's responsibility

59:35 Speaker 4: is to try to prepare everyone's worldview. I mean, we're

59:38 Speaker 4: not living in a safe space, right, this is not

59:43 Speaker 4: I think that government is everyone's parents, so we at

59:47 Speaker 4: the end of the day, the government is owned by

59:49 Speaker 4: the people, which was one of the first things I

59:53 Speaker 4: said in this interview. And if you have that worldviews,

59:56 Speaker 4: as Americans should that we need to be constantly fighting

1:00:00 Speaker 4: to ensure that the government is reminded that that that

1:00:05 Speaker 4: we own them, they don't own us, and that they

1:00:09 Speaker 4: work for us. We're the parent and that and the

1:00:13 Speaker 4: federal government is the child that we created, and so

1:00:16 Speaker 4: we need to make sure that we're in control of

1:00:18 Speaker 4: that information. And you know, if the federal government is

1:00:21 Speaker 4: going to release it, they the fact that they have,

1:00:26 Speaker 4: So I don't think it's going I personally, you know,

1:00:30 Speaker 4: going back to my Christian world view. I one of

1:00:33 Speaker 4: the the reason one of the podcasts that i'm is

1:00:38 Speaker 4: that kind of got me down down the road of

1:00:41 Speaker 4: inquiring is a podcast called The Blurry Creatures and it

1:00:45 Speaker 4: it introduced me to a guy named timoth Mareno who

1:00:49 Speaker 4: I don't know if you're familiar with him, but he's

1:00:50 Speaker 4: got a very fascinating book and a and a theory

1:00:55 Speaker 4: about how this phenomenon fits in with the Christian biblical

1:01:00 Speaker 4: narrative and and really I think underscores a lot of

1:01:07 Speaker 4: the narrative in the Bible. So the fact that people,

1:01:10 Speaker 4: if you really think about the fact that people were

1:01:12 Speaker 4: documenting these things a thousand years ago is is pretty

1:01:19 Speaker 4: fascinating if that's the If that's.

1:01:21 Speaker 1: The case, yeah, it's something that obviously I've talked at

1:01:28 Speaker 1: length with Tim Tim about Burchet and you know, he

1:01:33 Speaker 1: talks about you know, Ezekiel and the wheel, and you

1:01:37 Speaker 1: know how these things have been essentially documented, uh since

1:01:43 Speaker 1: recorded history, So this is nothing new. So it sounds

1:01:49 Speaker 1: like that is one of your beliefs as well.

1:01:55 Speaker 4: I don't know what at this point until I see

1:01:59 Speaker 4: it again, I'm not I'm gonna I do believe that

1:02:06 Speaker 4: what I will say is what I strongly believe is

1:02:08 Speaker 4: that I don't I don't believe that we be created. There.

1:02:15 Speaker 4: To me, there's a lot of philosophical arguments that are

1:02:18 Speaker 4: well defined that, like the ontological argument, I think that

1:02:24 Speaker 4: we were. This universe is clearly has a design that

1:02:30 Speaker 4: from a creator that surpasses ournerstanding. And I think that

1:02:34 Speaker 4: when you look at the history of uh and the

1:02:38 Speaker 4: fact that you look through the the documents of the

1:02:41 Speaker 4: Old Testament and the New Testament, to me, it's a

1:02:45 Speaker 4: there's a very compelling case that the creator of the

1:02:48 Speaker 4: universe is trying to send a message to his creation,

1:02:51 Speaker 4: which is us, through the history and the events that

1:02:56 Speaker 4: happened to a particular people, the people of Israel. And

1:03:00 Speaker 4: so I when you when you when you pull all

1:03:04 Speaker 4: of those storylines together, the fact that they so beautifully

1:03:09 Speaker 4: weave the same narrative over a period of thousands of

1:03:13 Speaker 4: years is to me the most compelling argument for the

1:03:17 Speaker 4: existence of God that there is. And so that being said,

1:03:21 Speaker 4: I mean the Bible in its early chapters talks about

1:03:25 Speaker 4: beings from that are not from this world. So you

1:03:30 Speaker 4: know where it's Genesis six or from the beginning when

1:03:34 Speaker 4: it talks about the fall of one of the angels

1:03:37 Speaker 4: or the group of angels that fell. A third of

1:03:40 Speaker 4: the angels fell. Now, the question what Timothy would say,

1:03:44 Speaker 4: Timothy Alberino, is that angel is just a definition for

1:03:48 Speaker 4: a messenger of God. It's not a it's not a creature.

1:03:51 Speaker 4: It's not a speace or race, a moniker, or a

1:03:59 Speaker 4: title given to anything that's carrying a message from God.

1:04:04 Speaker 4: And so these messagres of God were that they came

1:04:09 Speaker 4: to earth and interacted with humanity in some cases caused disruption,

1:04:16 Speaker 4: cause havoc, and in other in other cases tried to

1:04:21 Speaker 4: convey messages from the Creator too to us. And I

1:04:26 Speaker 4: think that I mean that that does well some people

1:04:29 Speaker 4: would we call them angels, and we think of this ethereal,

1:04:32 Speaker 4: this spiritual thing that it Then whenever you talk about

1:04:38 Speaker 4: what are aliens from another planet or aliens from an interdimension,

1:04:42 Speaker 4: you talk about these other things, it's not you're you're

1:04:46 Speaker 4: speaking the same language in different you're speaking the same

1:04:50 Speaker 4: concepts in a different language. If that makes.

1:04:52 Speaker 1: Sense, No, it absolutely does.

1:04:56 Speaker 4: That's why I don't think that Christians should be worried

1:04:59 Speaker 4: about it. In fact, I think that we need Christians

1:05:01 Speaker 4: need to constantly re evaluating the scripture to determine how

1:05:06 Speaker 4: does you know? And questioning previously help beliefs that may

1:05:11 Speaker 4: not be congruent with scripture, right.

1:05:14 Speaker 1: I I I often think about that and the similarities, uh,

1:05:25 Speaker 1: the similarities from the Bible and other religious text. You know,

1:05:31 Speaker 1: I don't really fall under one, uh religion at this time.

1:05:37 Speaker 1: I definitely believe in in a god. I myself am sober,

1:05:42 Speaker 1: and you know for that to have happened, Uh, there's

1:05:45 Speaker 1: got to be some higher power. Uh. It's just like

1:05:51 Speaker 1: you said, you look around and from the micro all

1:05:54 Speaker 1: the way to the macro, there's intelligence. It's it's you

1:05:59 Speaker 1: look around, it's it's all. I don't know if you've

1:06:02 Speaker 1: seen this, but did you see the the the they

1:06:06 Speaker 1: find that you got a good picture of Like it

1:06:08 Speaker 1: was too I think it was too electra or photons entangled. Uh.

1:06:13 Speaker 1: And it looks almost identical to the yin and yang symbol.

1:06:17 Speaker 1: Oh interesting, yeah, crazy? Right. So it's like you got

1:06:22 Speaker 1: to wonder, like, did did our ancestors did do you

1:06:26 Speaker 1: think that there could be potentially an ancient civilization that

1:06:31 Speaker 1: that add technology.

1:06:38 Speaker 4: I think that we underestimate what ancient humans that the

1:06:42 Speaker 4: intelligence of ancient Yemans. I think that we kind of

1:06:44 Speaker 4: assume that they are Neanderthals, that they that they weren't

1:06:48 Speaker 4: as intelligent as us. But when you look at some

1:06:51 Speaker 4: of the megalithic sites, you know, whether it's Machu Pichu

1:06:55 Speaker 4: or Go Becky Tepley, like, they're just.

1:06:58 Speaker 1: The fact that you're saying this is blowing my mind.

1:07:01 Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean these places are ancient. And the fact

1:07:06 Speaker 4: that they that they carved these massive megatons you know,

1:07:11 Speaker 4: structures and lifted them up mountains. There's a technology that

1:07:17 Speaker 4: we I think that we are underestimating the the the

1:07:22 Speaker 4: intellect and the level of advancement of our of previous civilizations.

1:07:27 Speaker 1: I and a good bridge here is now we look

1:07:34 Speaker 1: at like something like go Beckley Tappy, right, And I

1:07:38 Speaker 1: mean I don't I think they've only really uncovered like

1:07:43 Speaker 1: a small portion of it, uh if I if I'm correct.

1:07:47 Speaker 4: I don't know.

1:07:48 Speaker 1: I don't have a Jamie right now to to just

1:07:51 Speaker 1: bring it up for me like Rogan. But we look

1:07:54 Speaker 1: at these these structures and uh other structures in Turkey,

1:08:00 Speaker 1: specifically lots of underground facilities that seemed like they were

1:08:06 Speaker 1: able to house the whole civilizations or whole societies for law,

1:08:13 Speaker 1: and they were they could sustain them for long periods

1:08:17 Speaker 1: of time, which got me thinking about what would be

1:08:22 Speaker 1: the best place to to shelter yourself from natural disaster

1:08:30 Speaker 1: from everything and that's underground. And something that's been coming

1:08:34 Speaker 1: up a lot in the UFO community is that our

1:08:38 Speaker 1: military has these things. UH has a lot of these

1:08:42 Speaker 1: deep underground military bases or dums. It's something that you

1:08:47 Speaker 1: mentioned to me before we start recording. UH. We know,

1:08:52 Speaker 1: we know that these facilities exist. It's to what degree

1:08:56 Speaker 1: they exist in and to what they're what they're using

1:09:00 Speaker 1: them for. Are are you aware of of of any

1:09:04 Speaker 1: of these installations.

1:09:09 Speaker 4: I have never been to one. I'm aware that they exist.

1:09:12 Speaker 4: I've been told that there's even some that are in

1:09:15 Speaker 4: my area Southwest Missouri. I haven't verified that. It has

1:09:21 Speaker 4: me actually pondering where which facilities that might that people

1:09:26 Speaker 4: might be talking about, But there's some that you know

1:09:29 Speaker 4: in Southwest we're known as the Cave State, and there's

1:09:32 Speaker 4: a lot of underground structure in our area, including a

1:09:37 Speaker 4: place called Springfield Underground, where it's almost an entire city

1:09:41 Speaker 4: that's underground. You can drive semi trucks down multiple lanes

1:09:47 Speaker 4: like in through roads in an underground structure that in

1:09:51 Speaker 4: that structure, you know, it's a place to house data centers,

1:10:00 Speaker 4: a lot of things that you may not want to

1:10:02 Speaker 4: be susceptible to a natural disaster or you want to

1:10:07 Speaker 4: controlled climate, you put it in an underground facility like that.

1:10:12 Speaker 4: There's also a place in Branson called the Mountain that's

1:10:16 Speaker 4: a very highly secure facility that has a lot of

1:10:19 Speaker 4: data centers in it and some other artifacts. I believe

1:10:22 Speaker 4: that that there's artifacts from the Titanic that are stored

1:10:27 Speaker 4: in this underground data center, so in of all places,

1:10:33 Speaker 4: So it certainly is possible. And I think that if

1:10:38 Speaker 4: you're going to try to avoid satellite imagery or avoid

1:10:43 Speaker 4: even really the potential risk of a natural disaster, what

1:10:47 Speaker 4: better place to you know, to store something than underground

1:10:52 Speaker 4: in Southwest Missouri.

1:10:57 Speaker 1: Oh my god, So entire like semi trucks are able

1:11:06 Speaker 1: to drive in and enter this secure facility.

1:11:14 Speaker 4: Yeah, it's a massive facility. It's called Springfield Underground. And

1:11:18 Speaker 4: actually a friend of mine owns the property of the enterprise.

1:11:22 Speaker 4: He made money mining mining it out and then is

1:11:26 Speaker 4: making money leasing the space in this massive underground structure.

1:11:31 Speaker 4: And so yeah, it's was the leasing it too to

1:11:36 Speaker 4: multiple businesses, multiple companies. Some of them are governments and

1:11:41 Speaker 4: some of it is most of it is private sector.

1:11:46 Speaker 1: Okay, Yeah, I don't want to really dig too much

1:11:51 Speaker 1: deep because there's also reports there's a woman and she

1:11:56 Speaker 1: was actually at the hearing in December, uh and in Arizona.

1:12:02 Speaker 1: Her name's Melinda Leslie, and she says that she found

1:12:09 Speaker 1: essentially an entrance to an underground facility is essentially and

1:12:16 Speaker 1: outside there's a Lockheed Martin sign and they they have

1:12:22 Speaker 1: the deed to property all around that area in Arizona.

1:12:28 Speaker 1: And it just it really begs the question, you know,

1:12:33 Speaker 1: because obviously we hear about these places like Area fifty one.

1:12:39 Speaker 1: I can almost guarantee that nothing that would be an

1:12:44 Speaker 1: extra terrestrial or non human is is there anymore? Too

1:12:52 Speaker 1: many people know about it. I mean, it's it's it's

1:12:55 Speaker 1: it's a cultural thing now, like everyone just assumes that

1:12:59 Speaker 1: area of fifty one, right, alien technology. So I mean

1:13:04 Speaker 1: the chances of it actually being in a facility like

1:13:07 Speaker 1: that anymore, I think are very slim. But these deep

1:13:13 Speaker 1: underground military bases, uh, that is a whole different story.

1:13:18 Speaker 1: I mean they say they they say that under right

1:13:23 Speaker 1: Patterson Air Force Base, there's you know, a whole other

1:13:30 Speaker 1: base essentially like essentially the same size, just underground. Twenty

1:13:36 Speaker 1: stories have has has anyone pointed these to any of

1:13:45 Speaker 1: these locations and said, you know, you know, probably should

1:13:51 Speaker 1: go look there.

1:13:53 Speaker 4: Not not a deep underground military base.

1:13:55 Speaker 1: No.

1:13:55 Speaker 4: I mean, I've not been told in any of these hearings,

1:13:58 Speaker 4: in our in our skiff meeting to go look at

1:14:01 Speaker 4: you know, what you call a dumb or what's been

1:14:04 Speaker 4: called a dumb We We've been given some locations that

1:14:11 Speaker 4: that to go look at. But I again, as I

1:14:14 Speaker 4: said before, just even talking about those would be violating

1:14:20 Speaker 4: the the security clearance that we had. So it's difficult. Yeah,

1:14:27 Speaker 4: now they weren't underground, and it's it's one of the

1:14:30 Speaker 4: they may there may be underground structures underneath these facilities.

1:14:33 Speaker 4: But what I do doubt is that, you know, lot,

1:14:37 Speaker 4: I doubt that Lockheed Martin is keeping the if if

1:14:40 Speaker 4: they do have objects, that they're keeping it under a

1:14:43 Speaker 4: building with the title Lockheed Martin, right, if it would,

1:14:49 Speaker 4: it would be more obvious. I mean, it'd be way

1:14:51 Speaker 4: too obvious. So I would I would imagine that they could.

1:14:55 Speaker 4: They would probably be some other shell company or other

1:14:58 Speaker 4: title that they could that they can put on the

1:15:00 Speaker 4: front of a building.

1:15:02 Speaker 1: Right. So what I know multiple people who have testified

1:15:11 Speaker 1: to a row and their cases involve a the shutdown

1:15:18 Speaker 1: of nuclear weapons, b the test the Atlas test missile

1:15:27 Speaker 1: that you know was being filmed. A UAP comes into frame,

1:15:33 Speaker 1: you know, kind of fires like a laser at it

1:15:36 Speaker 1: and does it all all like a three sixty round

1:15:38 Speaker 1: it shooting LASA. Then the thing comes tumbling out of

1:15:42 Speaker 1: the sky. So the those incidents are the Bob Jacobs,

1:15:48 Speaker 1: is Vandenberg, Robert Sallas Melstrom, then Dave Shindeli of my

1:15:56 Speaker 1: Not Air Force Base nineteen sixty seven where they turned

1:15:59 Speaker 1: the nuclear weapons on not off.

1:16:02 Speaker 6: Uh.

1:16:02 Speaker 1: And then someone like Mario Woods who was a security

1:16:07 Speaker 1: Police office security military police and was dispatched to a

1:16:15 Speaker 1: nuclear silo at oh god Ellsworth and the it was

1:16:20 Speaker 1: code named the launch site was code named November five.

1:16:26 Speaker 1: He was dispatched, They get there, they see a glowing

1:16:30 Speaker 1: this you know, school bus size glowing orb of red

1:16:34 Speaker 1: light is what he says. And then the atmosphere in

1:16:38 Speaker 1: the truck became so thick that they passed out when

1:16:42 Speaker 1: he woke up, their car was a mile away from

1:16:46 Speaker 1: the missile silo, and it was faced at a cliff.

1:16:52 Speaker 1: If there is something now on it on just a

1:16:56 Speaker 1: surface level, if you heard these stories you had any

1:17:01 Speaker 1: vested interest in national security, these would make your heart

1:17:06 Speaker 1: skip a beat. What Arrow has gotten this testimony and

1:17:12 Speaker 1: then released reports saying that they have no credible evidence

1:17:16 Speaker 1: to suggest that anything of any of these UAPs are

1:17:19 Speaker 1: a threat or have extraterrestrial origin. What's going on there?

1:17:27 Speaker 4: I don't know. I think that Arrow, if they don't

1:17:32 Speaker 4: have facts or things that they can continue to investigate,

1:17:37 Speaker 4: then often they end the investigation. So in that event,

1:17:42 Speaker 4: and I'm not sure, I'm not sure what the exact

1:17:45 Speaker 4: scenario is or what the case is, but I can

1:17:47 Speaker 4: imagine that if all they have to go on is

1:17:50 Speaker 4: testimony from an individual or that basically the word of

1:17:54 Speaker 4: mouth of someone, there's not a whole lot for them

1:17:57 Speaker 4: to go to continue. So when we spoke with them,

1:18:01 Speaker 4: they are there's about fifty or so events that they

1:18:06 Speaker 4: do have enough to continue investigating that they do not

1:18:09 Speaker 4: have an answer for. But you know, for them to

1:18:12 Speaker 4: be able to actually investigate, they have to have something

1:18:15 Speaker 4: to investigate. They have to have some kind of you know,

1:18:17 Speaker 4: some kind of facts that they can that are outside

1:18:22 Speaker 4: of a testimony right now.

1:18:26 Speaker 1: Would would you ever consider a hearing in which people

1:18:36 Speaker 1: like Bob Zallas, Bob Jacobs, these are I mean, Bob

1:18:41 Speaker 1: Salas was a captain in the US Air Force. Bob Jacobs.

1:18:45 Speaker 1: I'm not sure what rank he obtained, but very very

1:18:48 Speaker 1: high and credible. And his he he knows that. I mean,

1:18:56 Speaker 1: they filmed, he filmed this thing. He filmed it. They

1:19:01 Speaker 1: called him into the office the next day. The base

1:19:05 Speaker 1: commander was there and then private Eras so I can't

1:19:10 Speaker 1: remember where else, but they were there and showed him

1:19:14 Speaker 1: the footage. So we know the footage exists. It's just

1:19:18 Speaker 1: where is it? Where did it end up? And that

1:19:22 Speaker 1: is I guess what's frustrating. But would you, guys ever,

1:19:27 Speaker 1: you know, put people like that on the on the

1:19:30 Speaker 1: stand like you did with Alizondo?

1:19:33 Speaker 4: I would? I think that we need to continue to

1:19:35 Speaker 4: have hearings, and so I would be willing to put

1:19:39 Speaker 4: anybody that's a credible witness on the stand.

1:19:43 Speaker 1: Arrow deemed them credible enough to take their testimony. Uh,

1:19:48 Speaker 1: these guys, I mean Bob Saalas. If the president called

1:19:53 Speaker 1: and was to order a nuclear strike, he was one

1:19:56 Speaker 1: of the people that would turn the key, you know,

1:19:58 Speaker 1: one of the two people. This guy is the I mean,

1:20:02 Speaker 1: they have to report when they take ibuprofen. You know

1:20:06 Speaker 1: that they are they're held and entrusted with our are

1:20:10 Speaker 1: our most dangerous and you know, chaotic weapons. But ultimately,

1:20:20 Speaker 1: you know, if something can come shut those off just

1:20:24 Speaker 1: like that. I mean, wouldn't you take a guy like

1:20:29 Speaker 1: that at his word?

1:20:33 Speaker 4: Yeah. I think that we've had a lot of really

1:20:35 Speaker 4: credible witnesses come forward, you know, from Galadat to right,

1:20:41 Speaker 4: you know, to the to the pilots that were testifying

1:20:47 Speaker 4: in the in the frank Graves and and others. These

1:20:52 Speaker 4: are very credible witnesses, which is, you know, these are

1:20:56 Speaker 4: not people living in their van down by the river.

1:20:58 Speaker 4: These are people that have have got a great reputation.

1:21:04 Speaker 4: And so I think that whenever in my meeting was

1:21:07 Speaker 4: with Arrow, they acknowledge that the people that are coming

1:21:10 Speaker 4: forward are credible witnesses. They a lot of times they

1:21:15 Speaker 4: and when I asked some point like do you believe

1:21:18 Speaker 4: or do you believe anybody's been lying to you or

1:21:20 Speaker 4: do you believe that what you've been hearing is you

1:21:23 Speaker 4: know that the people you know that it's true. And

1:21:26 Speaker 4: what the response that was given to me is that

1:21:29 Speaker 4: they believe that that most everyone that's ever that's testified

1:21:34 Speaker 4: with them is being earnest and being honest and being truthful.

1:21:40 Speaker 4: That it doesn't necessarily mean that what they saw is

1:21:43 Speaker 4: what you think or what they think they saw right, right,

1:21:48 Speaker 4: And so that's kind of where they fall back on.

1:21:50 Speaker 4: And I can imagine like Arrow, who hasn't received all

1:21:54 Speaker 4: the information they need to complete some of these investigations.

1:21:58 Speaker 4: But when you when you invest again thousands upon thousands

1:22:02 Speaker 4: of reports, and and nearly every time you come to

1:22:07 Speaker 4: a conclusion you're able to disprove it, Eventually you become

1:22:11 Speaker 4: discouraged and you start to believe that there isn't that

1:22:15 Speaker 4: it doesn't exist, right, And so I can understand their

1:22:19 Speaker 4: worldview and their perspective and why they might be discouraged.

1:22:25 Speaker 4: And I think that the reality is that that the

1:22:30 Speaker 4: vast majority, I think almost all but maybe one or

1:22:33 Speaker 4: two events are and I'm still skeptical about those one

1:22:39 Speaker 4: or two events, but I think that they're they're vast

1:22:41 Speaker 4: majority of them are debunked and and are are not

1:22:45 Speaker 4: accurately are not truly a uh you know, an analogs

1:22:54 Speaker 4: some kind of phenomenon that we were not we can't explain.

1:22:58 Speaker 4: So I think that there's only been a handful of

1:23:01 Speaker 4: events that are truly unexplained that we can continue to investigate.

1:23:06 Speaker 4: And and it's there's a potential that of those handful

1:23:09 Speaker 4: of events that one of them might one or two

1:23:12 Speaker 4: that might be might be real.

1:23:14 Speaker 1: Yeah, well, all all that needs to only one needs

1:23:19 Speaker 1: to be real. That's right, that's it, right, just one.

1:23:24 Speaker 1: So what I mean, what do you I'm not going

1:23:27 Speaker 1: to keep you too much longer. You've given me, You've

1:23:29 Speaker 1: been so generous with your time today. What do you

1:23:32 Speaker 1: take of something like the Phoenix lights that essentially a

1:23:37 Speaker 1: whole city and even Governor five Simons and later came

1:23:41 Speaker 1: out and said he saw it as well, even though

1:23:46 Speaker 1: at the time he made a gag of it in

1:23:49 Speaker 1: the in the press conference.

1:23:53 Speaker 4: I'm not aware of what they were. And I've seen

1:23:56 Speaker 4: some large some large balloon structures that could have imitated

1:24:01 Speaker 4: what was seen over Phoenix. I've also I think that

1:24:06 Speaker 4: one of the things that people have to keep in mind,

1:24:08 Speaker 4: you know, these drones that we talked about in New Jersey.

1:24:11 Speaker 4: When you look at these light shows, we're now entering

1:24:14 Speaker 4: an era where we have where you know, people can

1:24:18 Speaker 4: send drones in the sky and create any potential object

1:24:21 Speaker 4: that you might that they might want to make make

1:24:24 Speaker 4: you see, right. So I think we're going to see

1:24:27 Speaker 4: a lot of prank and a lot of things that

1:24:30 Speaker 4: can be created that will make that will make you

1:24:34 Speaker 4: think it's the UFO, right. And so I think that

1:24:37 Speaker 4: we have got to be a lot more skeptical about

1:24:39 Speaker 4: the things that are coming out today. In fact, I

1:24:42 Speaker 4: think that the evidence, the documentation, the photos, the videos,

1:24:46 Speaker 4: or anything that's that we've collected prior to now is

1:24:51 Speaker 4: has more credibility than anything that we're gonna that's going

1:24:53 Speaker 4: to be new going forward, especially with AI. Right, AI

1:24:57 Speaker 4: is going can create something that looks looks real on

1:25:03 Speaker 4: their personal computer.

1:25:05 Speaker 1: That I said that I think in the literally the

1:25:08 Speaker 1: last episode, I said, I think some of the most

1:25:12 Speaker 1: of the documentation and the evidence collected to date is

1:25:17 Speaker 1: now going to be worth more going in going into

1:25:22 Speaker 1: the future because of what you just said. It'll become

1:25:26 Speaker 1: more valuable because the technology wasn't there to do it.

1:25:31 Speaker 1: Right to fake it. Actually, speaking of that, do you

1:25:37 Speaker 1: ever does it ever scare you to think about how

1:25:44 Speaker 1: fast AI is developing and how more likely a bad

1:25:52 Speaker 1: actor is to do something with it that, you know,

1:25:55 Speaker 1: like like a kind of like a false flag style

1:25:59 Speaker 1: operation carried out by a state actor.

1:26:05 Speaker 4: Yeah. I think that there's going to be there's going

1:26:07 Speaker 4: to be bad things that are going to happen, but

1:26:09 Speaker 4: we can't shy away from it. Right, So the Internet

1:26:12 Speaker 4: brought with it tremendous benefit to society, but also some harm. Right,

1:26:18 Speaker 4: people have been susceptible to fraud, that people have been hacked,

1:26:23 Speaker 4: there's been not everything that's happened on the Internet has

1:26:25 Speaker 4: been good for humanity. But by and large, I don't

1:26:28 Speaker 4: think anyone would say let's let's eliminate the Internet because

1:26:32 Speaker 4: it's because of all the harms. And I think the

1:26:35 Speaker 4: same thing will happen with AI. And I totally dismissed

1:26:38 Speaker 4: this concept that it's going to make humans of no value. Well,

1:26:44 Speaker 4: that that's like saying that the heart of the wheat

1:26:47 Speaker 4: harvester or the cotton gin made made humans of complete

1:26:53 Speaker 4: like not of no value. Whatsoever. Humanity finds a way

1:26:57 Speaker 4: to provide value and and as long as there are

1:27:01 Speaker 4: people there, there will be value, and there will be

1:27:04 Speaker 4: in the work in which they create. And I think

1:27:05 Speaker 4: that and and every and one of these innovations raises

1:27:10 Speaker 4: our standard of living and our lifestyle to the next level.

1:27:14 Speaker 4: So I'm glad that we have combines that harvest. My

1:27:19 Speaker 4: ancestors all worked on a farm, and I'm able to

1:27:22 Speaker 4: be in politics, and my family are all able to

1:27:26 Speaker 4: do other things because because we because we don't have

1:27:29 Speaker 4: to have to work hours and hours of a week

1:27:33 Speaker 4: just to produce the food that we need to eat.

1:27:36 Speaker 1: So right, right, and I can I can absolutely get

1:27:40 Speaker 1: behind behind that absolutely.

1:27:43 Speaker 4: But to your point, I think that there's going to

1:27:45 Speaker 4: be a point in which it's in which people say

1:27:51 Speaker 4: everything prior to now is of the pre AI era,

1:27:55 Speaker 4: whether it's music or movies, or books or or photos

1:28:00 Speaker 4: or whatever it is, it's going to be pre AI

1:28:03 Speaker 4: and then everything after this era is going to be

1:28:06 Speaker 4: the AI you know era, And so it's I think

1:28:10 Speaker 4: that it's going to change. It's going to change the

1:28:12 Speaker 4: way in which we look at things, and I think

1:28:14 Speaker 4: they will probably give more value to authentically made things.

1:28:20 Speaker 1: Right too, he like, because there's people always are going

1:28:25 Speaker 1: to want that human touch right right, and and and

1:28:29 Speaker 1: I I absolutely agree with you. So with that being said, uh,

1:28:36 Speaker 1: with with ai and and the leaps and bounds forward

1:28:40 Speaker 1: that we're about to take. Uh, Honestly, we have a

1:28:47 Speaker 1: new administration coming in obviously, Uh, this is you know,

1:28:51 Speaker 1: the administration, the Trump administration is seemingly trying to do

1:28:57 Speaker 1: things differently than before. And whether that's bringing in someone

1:29:02 Speaker 1: like Elon Musk to run a Department of Government efficiency.

1:29:09 Speaker 1: Should should the president take action and create something like

1:29:18 Speaker 1: that for UAP and maybe hire Elizondo Grush and get

1:29:26 Speaker 1: them in there and and and do what you've been

1:29:28 Speaker 1: talking about and and kind of bring the government from

1:29:32 Speaker 1: this geriatric age up into this new age that is

1:29:36 Speaker 1: changing almost on a daily basis.

1:29:39 Speaker 4: Yeah, Apparently under when Lou was involved with a TIP,

1:29:44 Speaker 4: there was a there was a decision that was made

1:29:47 Speaker 4: by the administration. They were reviewing whether or not to

1:29:50 Speaker 4: release to the public the information what the federal government

1:29:54 Speaker 4: knew about UAPs and the and eventually they decided that

1:29:58 Speaker 4: now is not the time. So I think that the

1:30:01 Speaker 4: Trump administration, he's talked about the JFK files, he's talked

1:30:06 Speaker 4: about releasing some some other information. I think that he

1:30:10 Speaker 4: wants to be the disclosure president, and so I think

1:30:13 Speaker 4: that we need to remind his administration, we need to

1:30:16 Speaker 4: make it top of mind that the public wants that.

1:30:19 Speaker 4: And I think Trump is he's a man of the people.

1:30:21 Speaker 4: He wants to he wants his legacy to be known

1:30:24 Speaker 4: as the as as someone who who represented the people

1:30:28 Speaker 4: and came in to d C. And that he's not

1:30:33 Speaker 4: part of the system, He's one of us. I think

1:30:36 Speaker 4: that because of that, we need to constantly be advocating

1:30:41 Speaker 4: to his administration and to anyone that he might that

1:30:44 Speaker 4: he might be listening to, that that that it's time

1:30:48 Speaker 4: for disclosure and that he could be the president that

1:30:50 Speaker 4: does it.

1:30:51 Speaker 1: In what other way? I mean not not that he

1:30:54 Speaker 1: will not be remembered already because of just the did

1:31:00 Speaker 1: the resilience and taking a bullet, and and then I

1:31:05 Speaker 1: mean what I don't like to get too political on

1:31:08 Speaker 1: the show, but that image of him after being shot

1:31:12 Speaker 1: where God and the only way it was the only

1:31:15 Speaker 1: way that that that photo is possible was because the

1:31:19 Speaker 1: Secret Service was so inept that day and had like

1:31:22 Speaker 1: a like someone my height defending him or being the

1:31:28 Speaker 1: body in front of him, but that picture of him,

1:31:31 Speaker 1: you know, fight if there was at that moment I said,

1:31:35 Speaker 1: I remember saying, he just walked into the white hose.

1:31:39 Speaker 1: I mean, this guy will be remembered. But what other

1:31:42 Speaker 1: way to solidify that then to just at least disclose

1:31:48 Speaker 1: what we know and what we can know. I think

1:31:52 Speaker 1: there's not an American here that will say national security

1:31:57 Speaker 1: should be jeopardized for disclosure. I don't think so. But

1:32:01 Speaker 1: there's a way to do both.

1:32:05 Speaker 4: Yeah, there is, and I think in David Grush and

1:32:08 Speaker 4: I've had conversations about this, and he's provided like a

1:32:10 Speaker 4: framework for how they how he and he worked with

1:32:14 Speaker 4: another individual for how they think that there's a responsible

1:32:18 Speaker 4: way to provide disclosure. And so I'm trying to get

1:32:22 Speaker 4: that in the hands of Mike Waltz, who's one of

1:32:25 Speaker 4: my colleagues. He sits next to me on the Oversight Committee. Yeah,

1:32:28 Speaker 4: and so at the end of the day, he and

1:32:31 Speaker 4: the Trump administration are gonna be the ones that make

1:32:33 Speaker 4: this decision, and so hopefully, so hopefully they'll embrace disclosure.

1:32:39 Speaker 1: Do you think so? Do you.

1:32:44 Speaker 5: Do you.

1:32:46 Speaker 1: In the next four years, do you think that we

1:32:51 Speaker 1: will see or we'll be having a radically different conversation

1:32:58 Speaker 1: based on your view of the Trump administration and what

1:33:02 Speaker 1: their goals seem to be. Are you hopeful for the

1:33:06 Speaker 1: next four years.

1:33:08 Speaker 4: I'm hopeful, but i'm but there's also a part of

1:33:11 Speaker 4: me that, you know, I've been disappointed by my colleagues.

1:33:14 Speaker 4: I think that Trump wants to do the big, bold things.

1:33:18 Speaker 4: There's a lot of my colleagues that don't. And so

1:33:22 Speaker 4: I'm tepidly hopeful.

1:33:25 Speaker 1: I think that's a good way to Yeah, I think

1:33:27 Speaker 1: that's a good way to do it. To look at it,

1:33:31 Speaker 1: I think just a lot of people right now, with

1:33:34 Speaker 1: tensions and the Middle East tensions and Russia and the Ukraine,

1:33:41 Speaker 1: I think there's a lot on his plate. There's a

1:33:45 Speaker 1: lot on his plate walking in and big shoes to fill.

1:33:50 Speaker 1: And that concerns me because I don't think, you know,

1:33:55 Speaker 1: you shouldn't have to inherit something like this. This is

1:33:59 Speaker 1: it's twenty We're in twenty twenty four. How is this

1:34:02 Speaker 1: something that we're you know, it feels primitive almost, Yeah.

1:34:10 Speaker 4: This is you know, I think that we're at a

1:34:13 Speaker 4: place where I think I think that things are moving

1:34:16 Speaker 4: very quickly, you know, to put it in the terms

1:34:18 Speaker 4: of Ferris Bueller. Yeah, and so I think it's only

1:34:21 Speaker 4: going to get quicker.

1:34:24 Speaker 1: And that's what I mean. Every day things are changing.

1:34:28 Speaker 1: So obviously would you you said it earlier. I'm just

1:34:35 Speaker 1: gonna ask it because the last question, but would you

1:34:38 Speaker 1: support more extensive hearings dedicated solely to UAPs in their

1:34:43 Speaker 1: implications for national security and science?

1:34:47 Speaker 4: Absolutely? Absolutely, all the hearings. I think the more that

1:34:53 Speaker 4: we are transparent with the public. Look, the public doesn't

1:34:56 Speaker 4: trust the government. I don't trust the government, So the

1:34:58 Speaker 4: more the information that we can have, the better.

1:35:02 Speaker 1: Right. I couldn't agree more. And you have done an

1:35:06 Speaker 1: excellent job. I really really enjoyed, enjoyed this conversation, and

1:35:13 Speaker 1: thank you so much for giving so much time of

1:35:15 Speaker 1: your day when you didn't have to. I really do

1:35:18 Speaker 1: appreciate that.

1:35:20 Speaker 4: Appreciate it. Ty, keep up the great work. You have

1:35:21 Speaker 4: a great podcast, and I look forward to continue to listen.

1:35:25 Speaker 1: Yeah, and I look forward to uh, you know, like

1:35:27 Speaker 1: like I said, I I want to keep the dialogue open,

1:35:29 Speaker 1: and you damn sure. I'll be at the next hearings,

1:35:32 Speaker 1: and I'm hoping that the next hearings really really you know,

1:35:41 Speaker 1: start the year and start this new administration with the bang.

1:35:45 Speaker 4: Well next time, next time, feel free to come by

1:35:47 Speaker 4: my office either before or after maybe.

1:35:52 Speaker 1: Oh my god, thank you so much that that means

1:35:55 Speaker 1: the world to me, my friend. So, uh, and we're uh,

1:35:59 Speaker 1: we're you're on X, You're on. Uh you have a website.

1:36:04 Speaker 1: How can people that are in your district and in

1:36:08 Speaker 1: in your district, how can they get a hold of

1:36:10 Speaker 1: you and and and follow what you're doing.

1:36:15 Speaker 4: I'm on all the socials. Name is Eric Burlison, so

1:36:19 Speaker 4: just look for burl spell with b U r l

1:36:22 Speaker 4: I s O N.

1:36:23 Speaker 1: So yeah, I'll put all the links in the description

1:36:26 Speaker 1: below as well. Uh for for everything that you got

1:36:29 Speaker 1: going and uh, thank you for everything and for your

1:36:32 Speaker 1: service to this country, my friend, and to everyone out

1:36:35 Speaker 1: there in the podcast sphere. You know what it is. Uh,

1:36:37 Speaker 1: we'll see you next time. Keep your eye to this guy,

1:36:39 Speaker 1: because you never know what might fly by.