David Grusch- Former Intelligence Speaks With Rogan on Crash Retrievals, Alien Life and More

0:01 Speaker 1: Joe Roman podcast. Check it out the Joe Logan Experience Train, My Day, Joe.

0:07 Speaker 2: Rogan podcast, by Night All Day.

0:12 Speaker 1: So wine Man, Hey, good, good, thanks for coming here. Appreciate it. Yeah, yeah, no, it's a pleasure.

0:18 Speaker 2: You've been on a whirlwind sort of tour. I guess we should start from the beginning. Yeah, So, first of all, lay out to people what your job was with the military and how this all started for you.

0:34 Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, So I was an intel officer in the Air Force for fourteen years, seven active, seven reserve. Then I kind of had like a parallel tract in the civilian intel world when I became a reservist, and ultimately I got brought back in in civil service in a government way at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency a couple of years ago at a senior level. So I was a major you're in the Air Force, and a GS fifteen at NNGA, which is like a fulbird Kernel equivalent civilian employee. You know, I'm very humbled that I was able to kind of get that kind of job.

1:10 Speaker 1: But my career mostly I didn't even really think about this topic. UFOs were not on my radar. I wasn't really a believer. I was agnostic about it. Most of my career, I did a lot of you know, behind the door special access program technical type activities. I was kind of a space intelligence expert, a cyber intel expert.

1:35 Speaker 2: And.

1:37 Speaker 1: Like I said, this was not on my radar at all. You know, I would joke with my buddies because I used to handle the presidential Daily brief for the National Connaissance Office Director in my military capacity as a reservist, and I was well clear to hundreds and hundreds of Compartment of programs, and you know, the joke was like, when are we going to get the read on for the crazy shit? And that never happened. And I do remember that the day that I really can remember that, I was like, huh, what's what this UFO stuff?

2:10 Speaker 1: I was briefing a senior person at the CIA into a couple hundred special access programs. So I was at the headquarters at the agency, and you know, after the indoctrination I was giving to the senior person, this person who worked with louel Azando previously, was like, yeah, Dave, have you ever heard of this guy louel Azando. He's running some UFO program at the Pentagon we all think he's crazy. And I'm like, I don't know who this guy, louil Azando is, and I don't know of any kind of UFO program, so that sounds nuts to me.

2:46 Speaker 1: But lo and behold, And that was like early twenty seventeen, and lo and beholds. In December twenty seventeen, that New York Times article came up with that named the a TIP program and the awse AT programs Advance Aerospace Weapons Systems Application Program and the Advance Aerospace Threat Identification Program being the other acronym, and I was like, holy shit, wait, that's that guy louel Azando that I heard about. Oh you know what, I think I have heard of OSAPP. When I was a lieutenant, I used to read these reports from the Defense Intelligence Agency on black holes and stuff, and I was like, Oh, that's like stupid.

3:22 Speaker 1: Why is the DIA looking into black holes time warps? It just didn't make any sense to me back in like eight oh nine when I was a lieutenant, and all of a sudden, I'm like, well, maybe there's something to this UFO thing. I'm not saying I was like a believer either way on the subject, but this was a topic of concern apparently for the Pentagon. And in twenty eighteen I started doing kind of min what I call my open source literature review, like let me spin myself up on this topic, watching Chris Mellan, Luis Asando, Leslie Keane all these people talk about the subject, and then you know, just trying to understan and so what is this with UFOs?

4:02 Speaker 1: Has this been going on for a while? The answer is yes, like food fighters, sightings of weird stuff in antiquity, et cetera, which we can get intil later. But and so early twenty nineteen comes along and my boss at the Nashal Reconnaissance Office and kind of my Air Force major capacity forwarded me an email from the what became a stood up in like I guess it was twenty eighteen, which was the Unidentified while was aerial now anonymous Anomalous Phenomena task Force UAP task Force. So the UAP task Force director sent my boss an email saying, Hey, we're looking for a rep to the task force.

4:39 Speaker 1: And as like any good officer, I was like, well, I'll put it on my performance report. Hey I was on a task force, and you know that would look good and I had, being well cleared and also a bachelor's degree in physics, master's in intelligence analysis. I'm like, you know what, I'll figure out what the shit is. It's either going to be weather shit. Maybe it's an avisarial pro Maybe it's like a US program people are misidentifying on rare occasions. So fucking I'll I'll go see where the data takes me.

5:11 Speaker 1: And you know, early twenty nineteen or so, I joined u AP Task Force and then I started, you know, interviewing pilots, flag officers, you know general officer equivalent type Navy folks, and you know, they were seeing some really crazy shit and like a you know event that I talked about previously publicly in a YouTube video on the Yes Theory channel. You know, there was this one thirty year senior Navy officer that you know, he was going to work sober no predisposition for fantasy, all that kind of stuff.

5:47 Speaker 1: Because I interviewed the individual for a couple hours and he saw this you know, crazy triangle hover over his car going to work at a certain naval facility, and it like blew his mind. He was serious. The paint on his car turned milky white after the incident. So that's to me, that sounds like ionizing radiation, so like ultraviolet, just like how your your headlights get all foggy over time if you park your car out in the sun. Same phenomenon just happened, you know, within twenty four hour period.

6:19 Speaker 1: And I'm like, whoa if this is true? And the oral testimony and you know, crazy radar data that I saw when I was on the task force, you know, stuff making turns that didn't make any sense. Well, holy shit, what is this stuff?

6:33 Speaker 2: Then this anomaly with his paint was is this documented?

6:38 Speaker 1: Is his photographs or yes, I saw photographs.

6:40 Speaker 2: It was documented, Yeah, And what is there a conventional explanation?

6:46 Speaker 1: I mean, based on what he described something to rapidly ionize his paint like that within a day, I don't I can't think of anything off the top of my head in terms of some conventional aerospace tech technology. And this was a certain facility in the continental US. This is not overseas, so it's not like our avisaries flying some spooky thing in US airspace.

7:11 Speaker 2: So this thing hovered over his car for how long?

7:15 Speaker 1: A couple of minutes while he was traveling at about sixty miles an hour, so it was pacing how far away from his vehicle, It's probably a couple hundred feet in altitude. It was less than a thousand feet, which is also bad because from an airspace perspective, pilots would know this. Anything under a thousand feet no, unless you get special clearance, and you only do that over controlled airspace like a military test ranges. Right, people fly low and that kind of thing. So is is he on what kind of a highway?

7:45 Speaker 1: Is he on a conventional civilian highs pavilion US?

7:49 Speaker 2: So anyone could have been on it. Yes, it just happened to be this guy. Did he have any other experiences with this thing?

7:57 Speaker 1: No, this was like a once in a lifetime thing. He kept it to himself for a couple of years, but then he ask force his name. I don't know what he's that individual still on this.

8:12 Speaker 2: Bob didn't say to him, Hey, Bob, what the fuck happened to your car?

8:16 Speaker 1: You know, that's a good question. I don't remember if people asked him about his car. So he's a pride in his car, so it actually was probably more upsetting to him personally. The kind of car.

8:25 Speaker 2: It was, like a Toyota or something, so okay, Yeah, so all of a sudden as toyotas fucked. Yeah, okay, And so did he have to report this? Is this something that he.

8:37 Speaker 1: Did not report it to my knowledge to anybody. It wasn't until he reported it to us about five years later that it happened.

8:45 Speaker 2: So are those these kind of experiences something that a lot of these pilots are embarrassed about discussing or have apprehension about discussing because it could be ridiculed.

8:57 Speaker 1: Yeah. A lot of people that are on flight status, they don't want to be sent to the psych right. You know, there's a whole aerospace physiology kind of empire in the military that and you know, if you're an operator or you know, a guy miss missile key turner, you're on what they call a personal reliability program. You're taking like you know, Thailand, all you got to report it. If you have a fever, you got to report it because you're, you know, in control nuclear weapons when you're on duty. So yeah, and so this idea of being predisposed to fantasy, that's also something that they sort of talk to these people about or try to get a gauge of.

9:33 Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, these are people that are very sober minded. I mean this individual was early in the morning, go into work, not under the influence of anything. And that person had a similar clearance as mine. No ts c I, so you know we've gone through. Yes, it was a top secret you know, since the Department of Information clearance and you know, just like myself, I've been through multiple polygraphs in my career. So did this individual.

9:59 Speaker 2: So does this have any idea or any theories about why this thing was following him?

10:06 Speaker 1: No, That's what freaked him out the most because he didn't have any experience in his life like this. It like totally blew his mind. When he looked out his moon roof and then looked out the side of his car door and saw this three hundred foot triangle. It was like pre dawn sky, but it was darker than the pre down sky, and it had this like plasma edges, like it was like purplish glowing edges, and these three lights that had like these omni directional like almost like pole lights, you know, how there's you can't really tell where the light sources.

10:39 Speaker 1: And it was totally trippy. And that's just one example of many anecdotal with some evidence, you know, pilot stories, and that's what made me dig deeper and I started, you know, cultivating my network, Like has the government studied this before? This wasn't just asap and a tip and blue book and all this shit in the past. Right, there's this seems serious, So like, certainly the government has looked at this, and you know, I went to search for that program and that's what I ended up whistleblowing on.

11:07 Speaker 2: Right, So when you what was how did you initially discover this program? And like what was your first encounter with the information?

11:17 Speaker 1: A very senior individual in the Intel community came to me when I guess I was asking a lot of questions because I'm a very inquisitive guy, and it was like, hey, we I need to introduce you to somebody. You know. He listed that certain person's academic credentials which were beyond approach, you know, PhD level education clearance resume was insane. I'm like, well, okay, sure, I'll talk to this person. And and I ended up meeting that person in a you know, uh, top secret facility, and you know, he started to discussing like, hey, there was a program.

11:55 Speaker 1: I was on it, and you know, we were verse engineering crash material that we've recovered over the decades, you know, And he's like, I'm not joking, you know, you know, you know what we're telling you because you're you have you guys have to report to the Deputy Secretary of Defense in Congress on this matter, right, And we were we were actively briefing like Secretary Esper, Deputy Secretary nor Quist, you know, other cabinet level folks, right, And it's like, there's a you know, there must be there's an oversight issue because you're the UAP Task Force.

12:31 Speaker 1: You should be read into this stuff because like why spend the taxpayers, you know, dollars looking at stuff that we already have data on, right. So that's and that spooked to me. And that was like fall of twenty nineteen. And you know, I don't take a guy's word for it. I'm like, you know what, myself and might trusted colleagues that had a lot, a lot of special accesses like me. You know, we cultivated our network and we ultimately interviewed about forty people or so, all the way up to multi star generals, directors of agencies, mid level guys that literally touched it, worked inside of it.

13:11 Speaker 1: All the stuff they brought intel reports for me to look at, you know, documents, and a lot of that I could cross verify with other oral sources at my high level colleagues or I talked to and you know, it checked out, especially when I had enough information on and I know who specifically to ask like, hey, well I want read into this, like I'm on the UAP task Force. And we went to those i'll call them gatekeepers for the lack of a better term, and they basically said fuck you to me in my colleagues.

13:48 Speaker 2: H So, why were these other people willing to discuss this with you?

13:54 Speaker 1: Well, they determined I didn't need to know. I was already cleared at such a high level handling presidential material and everything. It's like Dave needs to know. And they felt that coming to us it was a form of a protected disclosure. They felt that they weren't really violating anything because you know, we were the i'll call it the investigatory body for the Department of Defense and the Intelligence community and Congress at the time, and they you know, you are allowed to you know, disclose to a government official in an official capacity, and I you know, did that, and of course I protected those people, and and do know I took those people, a lot of them, and they brought them to the Intelligence Community Inspector General when I found my complaint, because I don't want people to, you know, hear it from a secondhand source, you know, people call hearsay whatever, though I have some firsthand knowledge.

14:49 Speaker 1: I eventually talk about someday, I'm trying to get it cleared, but through through security processes, so they could hear it and hear the details, like you who, what, when, where, why, Where the shit is, who's in control of it? What are the cover programs, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So, and that's what deemed my complaint credible and urgent in July twenty twenty two, which is a so that my complaint, yes, was about reprisal too. I filed that separately eventually to the Department of Defense Inspector General, and that's an ongoing investigation.

15:25 Speaker 1: But it was my Congressional Oversight UAP crash retrieval allegations that was deemed credible and urgent. It was sent to the Director National Intelligence, and then it was sent to the Congressional intelligence committees. Around that time, July of twenty twenty two, and I eventually went to Congress in December twenty twenty two. And it's a crazy story why I took so long, fucking nuts, But I provided total about eleven and a half to twelve hours of classified testimony to the congressional staffers and their lawyers for both the House and the Senate, and I went, you know, full open kimono.

16:04 Speaker 1: I mean, I told them as much as I could within my time slide if you will.

16:08 Speaker 2: So this is obviously very compartmentalized where there's only a few people that know about this information and they're not allowed to discuss it with other people. When did this all start? I mean, is this out of roswell? Is it pre date that?

16:26 Speaker 1: Like?

16:27 Speaker 2: When when did they first realize that there are things that cannot be explained or can't be explained through conventional means?

16:35 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean the program goes back aways. The precise beginning of it I can't talk about. But I did the security stuff. But I did talk about publicly the nineteen thirty three retrieval, and I did that tactically, and I ran that through the Security Approval Office because I wanted to show that this is much older, and it's international. It's not like a thing. I mean that the stuff is landing or crashing around the world, and unexpected countries have had this happen. And that's why I pick that because I thought that was an interesting case.

17:12 Speaker 1: And then of course the you know, Pope pi Is the twelfth and the Vatican were involved back channeling it through the OSS which became the CIA later to FDR, and that's how the US knew something weird happened in Italy during well right before World War Two.

17:26 Speaker 2: But so this is thirty three was the first like documented, Ah, that is the earliest one I can talk about. Yeah, this is something that predates that.

17:38 Speaker 1: You could infer that. You could infer that.

17:40 Speaker 2: Yeah, so this thirty three to one you said was in Italy.

17:43 Speaker 1: Yeah, Magenta, So it's I'm bad at geography. I think that's like a Lombardi region. It's like northern northwest Italy. And what's the story behind it? So basically it looked like it crashed, right. The original shape most likely was like a lenticular disc like crafts, you know, with like a two dinner plates, so like two dinner plates, you know, smushed together. Right, the hump and there's like a you know, like a bubble on top of the classic classic like yeah, like that like that, but it looks like when it hits the edges broke off, so it became this like bell or acorn shaped thing and there was nothing in it.

18:27 Speaker 1: It was like just an artifact, you know, there was no biological remnants, if you will. So it's so funny because the Italians were so confused. They actually called up the Germans and they were like, is this one of your vundavaffa? Like what the hell just crashed in northern Italy, Mussolini. And this is all publicly available information because some Italian researchers found all these original documents that some people were sitting on for years in Italy. Uh, you know, they put a gag order on the press, et cetera, and yeah, Selini asked the Germans to come down, and of course the Germans came down and they were like, uh, that is not ours, but let's look at it together.

19:09 Speaker 1: So that's kind of perhaps a tertiary reason the kind of axis powers got together. I'm not saying that's like the reason, but I think the Italians and the Germans were so intrigued with what they found. From like an artifact perspective, there was at least some scientific and military collaboration during the war, the details of which I'm not sure of, but I know people that know that specific event that are currently still INTEL officers within this program in detail.

19:40 Speaker 2: But so, was there witnesses to the crash or some sort of an understanding that something had crash landed and then they discovered it?

19:47 Speaker 1: Yeah, I forget the precise discovery. I don't know if it was like local police officers or local farmers found in the field, something like that. I don't want to misspeak. I'm I assume some of the Italian researchers might have some fact witnesses that can orally say oh, yeah, my great grandfather found it or something like that.

20:07 Speaker 2: But I don't remember. What was the scale of this vehicle.

20:11 Speaker 1: It was probably like like twenty feet by ten feet something like that. Not super huge, but kind of big.

20:17 Speaker 2: Do they think that this was a drone? Do they think that this was occupied?

20:21 Speaker 1: There was nothing in it, So if it was piloted, if you will, by some sentience, I mean, your your guess is as good as mine. So hm, So what happened to that vehicle, so we knew where it was being stored at a particular location after the crash, and then the military came in and we grabbed it towards the end of the war, you know, nineteen forty four, nineteen forty five, because like I said, Popious the twelfth already kind of let FDR know, I had the Pope get involved because well Italy. Well, interestingly enough, there's like a whole history of human intelligence prior to World War Two and old money, the Vatican, the Italian mob, kind of the old country boys did a lot of informal intelligence collection for the US and there's probably some books you can read on it.

21:17 Speaker 1: But it's really interesting. You know, human intelligence collection wasn't really formalized until the Office of Strategic Services the OSS, which became the CIA in nineteen forty seven. You had you Paul Mellen and all these other affluent guys of all these old money families that basically created the CIA. So that's probably the reason why.

21:41 Speaker 2: So this thing that was recovered, this was the first documented one that the United States had access to.

21:51 Speaker 1: I can't get into if it was the first or not, but okay, it was an early one, very early.

21:55 Speaker 2: Yeah, so it's almost one hundred years ago. Yes, And so they take this thing and then they bring.

22:00 Speaker 1: It where.

22:02 Speaker 2: Hey, yeah, I can't I can't get into those can't get into that, Okay, So they bring it somewhere in the United States. And was the attempt to try to back engineer this thing, was the attempt to try to understand what it was.

22:16 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, first of it, obviously, it's understanding the situation, right, what do we have our hands on? And and like I've said in some other videos and stuff, you know that we took the Manhattan Project secrecy and overlaid on this issue because that secrecy worked well for atomic bomb developments and whatnot. And certainly this whole program in a nutshell for to like summarize the ninety plus years of history. It is a reverse engineering program to garner some kind of insight. And of course not a lot of the things that we've learned from it are like directly, you know, ripped off the technology we found, but it has inspired other innovations that made its way into other US classified programs over the year for national defense reasons, you know.

23:04 Speaker 1: And it's a myriad of different things So.

23:07 Speaker 2: The UFO folklore is that this is where fiber optics were discovered.

23:12 Speaker 1: First, Yeah, I'm not going to break the seal on anything we've discovered or anything like that.

23:16 Speaker 2: And yeah, it's I can't are you and what you can discuss and what you can't discuss? And why why do they let you discuss.

23:25 Speaker 1: Any of this? Yeah, So anything sensitive that I want to say, as it relates to like US government activity, whether it be intelligence stuff, military stuff, et cetera, I have to submit it through what they call DOPS or DoD Office of Pre Publication and Security Review. That is something anybody who's been an Intel officer, anybody with like a clearance, has to submit that kind of stuff. Now, obviously, if you're writing a book about gardening, you don't have to, but if you're going to talk about anything military and intelligence related, you have to submit.

23:55 Speaker 1: So it's kind of a catch twenty two for this office. Right, they're only looking at it from a secure already perspective. They're not vouching for it or anything like that. And that's like any author, Right, they could write a book about Navy seals and they're not vouching for the story. They're vouching that you didn't say any nasty code words, you didn't burn a specific ongoing classified program. And for them, I mean, I'm not in their uodle loop, but certainly it's a catch twenty two for them, where if they want to redact and they propose a redaction, they're like, hey, Dave, you can't say these sentences.

24:29 Speaker 1: You can rewrite it and resubmit. You know, we can't necessarily tell you what agency said to redact it, but you're not allowed to say this.

24:40 Speaker 1: They would be basically self certifying. There's a there there. So in my opinion, probably the policy is like, if it has to deal with the subject, we're not saying anything, we're not proposing any reactions. As long as he's not burning a conventional program, we kind of have to allow him to exercise his First Amendment rights. And so I think it's like a catch twenty two for that office is kind of the long or the short of the long answer.

25:06 Speaker 2: So this is essentially one of the very early ones. Nineteen thirty three. How many crash retrieval incidents have there been?

25:16 Speaker 1: It is double digit, these specific numbers. I do know. However, I can't discuss that and I know it sounds like, oh, I'm being koy or whatever, but you know this show any other interviews I do, right, you know, Ford Intelligence Services are watching, and it's like, I'm not here to help Russia in China calibrate their intelligence collection. Like, oh, Dave said, it's this number, we missed a couple. Shit, let's put it out for the KGB, SVR and GRU are now going to hit the streets to try to figure out which ones they miss.

25:49 Speaker 1: So I'm here to protect national security and I'm just trying to put all the general topics out there for public conversation to hold our government accountable. Really so because I'm here as a fact witness because we have a you know, a constitutional oversight issue because this program has not been you know, reported to Congress in the appropriate way, you know. And I can get into a senator I talked to that has died recently, So I can, you know, explain to you why I'm so sure. Besides what I read, which we can get into what intel reports I read, I did get some stuff cleared.

26:33 Speaker 1: So during my investigation, I'm like, you know what, I need to talk to somebody at the highest levels, right, So and this will give you an idea of the kind of people we talked to. And this is the only one I'm going to talk about using their name because they died two years ago. So in spring twenty twenty one, I actually flew with a couple of colleagues of mine to Las Vegas and I met with Senator Harry Reid about nine months before he died. And of course he's a private citizen now, and I wanted to brief him on the topic, and I wanted to get his kind of thought leadership on it, because you know, he was a Gang of eight member, right, you know, which is the top most cleared senators and congressman.

27:14 Speaker 1: He was the majority leader, for God's sake, so the Senate, and I knew, you know, he helped sponsor the ASAPP program that I mentioned and where they looked at Skinwalker ranch and some other things. And I wanted to understand, like what does Harry Reid actually know, Like why did he, you know, give twenty one million dollars to DIA and Bigelow Aerospace for this. So I'm sitting there in Harry Reid's living room, you know, right next to him with some other witnesses that were there with me, and he straight up says, He's like, yeah, I knew we had UFO material.

27:49 Speaker 1: I was denied access for decades. I tried to get access. And then he explained some of his efforts during ASAPP and I was like, holy shit, did the former Majority leader just say did he just confirmed this to me as well? You know, I was already talking to these amazing high level people, but I have Harry Reid literally saying yes, we have material, and you know he knew it was non human. Did Harry Reid have personal experience with this? I don't know if he's had any personal stuff in his personal life.

28:23 Speaker 2: I mean, did he see it?

28:24 Speaker 1: Did he? He said in terms of seeing the material himself, he said he was denied access for years on decades was his term. And he actually told me on behalf of me he was going so he had like a weekly call with President Joe Biden at the time, and he straight up said to me he was going to talk to President Biden about this issue literally, and then what he was telling me about os APP, I was like, holy shit, I have like twenty other people that told me this. Dude, So the real history, what fucking Osapp was because I think there's a lot of people out there that think where they were looking at ghosts Skinwalker Ranch.

29:10 Speaker 1: Yes, they went to the ranch as a secondary and tertiary objective, but the real reason so, like, there's a document that came out a couple of years ago through FOYA from the Defense Intelligence Agency. There was this special access program request that Harry Reid. You might have seen this, I think like George and Napp and company have reported on this that he sent to the Deputy Secretary of Defense, William Lynn, and it was asking for one of the most serious SAPs you can ask for what they call a bigoted waved special access program.

29:45 Speaker 1: So waved means it's limited congressional reporting. That is a class of special access programs, and bigoted means it's like by name, and it's like it was like you can read the FOYA document. It was like, you know, Harry Reid, James Enhoff, Luella's, et cetera. And I'm like, why are you asking for the most serious SAP to be created for a program that ostensibly is looking at Skinwalker Ranch and stuff? And it doesn't make any sense. So what really happened there? And uh, you know Harry me. Harry Reid, God bless his soul, made this disclosure a couple weeks after we met in the New Yorker, and you can look this up.

30:26 Speaker 1: I think it was like a May twenty twenty one New Yorker story where he says I knew for decades and he made this disclosure, not me, So I'm gonna say the name of the contractor. Harry Reid said this. You know, we knew that lockeed Martin had this material for decades. I tried to get access and I was denied, and specifically with the Lockheed Martin stuff he was talking about during the ASAP program and for the people who are on this program, I submitted this shit. The dopster got this cleared, so don't freak out.

30:54 Speaker 1: But I'm telling the truth here. So Locke Martin wanted to dive vest itself from this material at a specific facility that's known to me that I provided to the Inspector general like street address all that shit, right, And the idea was if they made a catcher's mint, a security catchers mint for this shit at you know, most serious set possible. The contractor and the other government customer which was the Central Intelligence Agency for that specific lockeed material. And it was shit that they recovered from like the fifties and stuff, and it was like bits and pieces of of of like hall structure or shit like that, and so they were going to tech transfer its and the twenty one or twenty two million dollars was actually for Big Low Aerospace to build out, you know, facilities in Las Vegas and material analysis equipment.

31:51 Speaker 1: And I've seen I have. I saw the staff meeting slides, I saw the paperwork, like there's a paperwork trail I've seen on this shit. And I talked to the people involved in this program, and you know, even Jim Lakatski, who ran the program, who's retired DA officer, PhD in engineering, even made this disclosure in his book skin Walkers at the Pentagon, UH, page one fifty three. And he also made a disclosure a couple of weeks ago, I think it was on Weaponized podcast with Jeremy Corbel and George Knapp, where he's like, yeah, we had a whole craft and we broke into the hall and we gained access.

32:30 Speaker 1: And he ran that through the same you know, security process as I did. And so Jim Lakatski, who ran this program, is also going on the record that he is aware personally aware of intact vehicles and everything.

32:44 Speaker 2: But while they gained access, what does that mean by what method did to gain access?

32:49 Speaker 1: The way he wrote it in his book, I can only infer it sounded forcible, so through some kind of you know, means I don't know if it was like CO two laser or something. I don't actually know how they gained access, but imagine it was not permissive access. They like broke into the damn thing.

33:06 Speaker 2: So this thing is essentially sealed, and it's some sort of what was the shape of this thing?

33:15 Speaker 1: The Lkatski didn't disclose the shape on this particular vehicle as far as I what about the dimensions. I don't believe he did in his book, but I think it's like chapter eleven in his new book or something like land Status. But he did make that disclosure on video as well. And I do encourage both the Arrow Office, which is the do d's UAP Task Force successor, and Congress to ask doctor James Lakatski to come in for classified testimony because the disclosure in his one book that he wrote with Colin Keller, her George Knapp, and then the second book, well the guy saying he has close personal knowledge he needs to go to Congress.

33:54 Speaker 1: So you know, I don't know James Lakatski, but I do encourage him to be a fact witness. But going back to that transfer with Lockeed, long story short, can get in all the nuanced details, but basically the CIA said fuck you to DIA and Lockeed and it was totally killed. So Harry Reid's request to get the material transfer to the ASET program was totally killed because of bureaucracy and kind of fiefdom stuff. So they used that money and then they you know, they wrote those Defense Intelligence Reference Documents.

34:31 Speaker 1: The DRDs is a lot of people who's familiar with it listening will know about. And then they did look at Skinwalker Ranch because they thought that studying kind of the more woo woo phenomenon aspects of this. And I've never been to the ranch, so I've never experienced the ranch for myself, but you know, obviously I think we both know a bunch of people that have been to the ranch and have seen some trippy stuff or at least alleged that they thought that would be able to gain currency with the with the program, you know, and in this case CIA to unlock the key for the lockeyed Martin stuff, which actually, I'll tell you right now it's like so weird to say that, but I ran that shit through security.

35:15 Speaker 1: To me, it's like an out of body experience to talk about that kind of detailed sensitivity stuff like that. But basically, they studied the ranch to gain favor, to be like, hey, look at all this stuff for figuring out this paranormal stuff that's somehow connected to the phenomenon on the ranch. But ultimately they never gained favor with the government customer, and then the program kind of died a slow death because of a lot of politics in the Pentagon. So that's kind of the long but short of it.

35:44 Speaker 1: With the ASAPP program that you know, I wanted to make sure the public knew it's not what you think it was. There was some other stuff behind the scenes that you know, I wanted to speak truth to power on.

35:56 Speaker 2: So this particular vehicle that they had covered from the nineteen fifties, what was the source of it? Where do they find it?

36:05 Speaker 1: Those details.

36:08 Speaker 2: I did not get cleared so yeah, so they have in possession this thing, they gain access to this thing, and what do they report once they've gained access to it?

36:18 Speaker 1: Oh, those details? I do not know that. That's probably a question for doctor Lakatski. I presume he knows those details. I don't know.

36:27 Speaker 2: So this thing is housed somewhere.

36:32 Speaker 1: It is, yes, currently it may still be in the same location that I know about.

36:37 Speaker 2: Yes, And how many people have access to this and how did they prevent this information from being released?

36:47 Speaker 1: I mean, you know, it goes back to the compartmentation and kind of the ecosystem of secrecy in this community, right, you know, only a limited amount of people, you know, at least at the time, you know, unlockeed Martin's side and Lockie Martin was complaining basically like, look like the secrecy is ridiculous. We can't even bring the right engineers. Like imagine you're like a hot engineer at engineer, No hot shot engineer. It might be hot too, I don't know, but that you know, you're fresh out of grad school, maybe you're like the best PhD electrical engineer.

37:19 Speaker 1: You want to do cul shit, you want to publish an I triple E. You want to like, you know, climb the ladder corporately, you know, and that kind of thing a Locke Martin executive comes to you. Yeah, dude, Uh, you're gonna I can reach into something really crazy, but you're never going to publish papers on it. You're never gonna be able to tell people what you worked on. And it's probably not the most career enhancing. But if you want to work on something cool, but I can't tell you because it's unacknowledged until you sign this piece of paper non disclosure agreement, uh uh, you know.

37:56 Speaker 1: Sorry, but here's the raw deal. And you know a lot of people are like, fuck you no. And it's not like Lucky Martin could broadcast this to universities, like come work for us, You'll work on crazy shits. But that is very akin to a lot of other black programs in the government that are adding knowledge in nature. You don't know what you're signing them for until you get bred in. And I've you know, I've been brief to a lot of that kind of conventional stuff in my career.

38:23 Speaker 2: So that's one of the problems that Bob Bazar and I'd love to get your take on boblozar On. One of the things that he talked about was that science can't really operate in a vacuum when you separate the metallurgists from the propulsions experts from the biological experts, like and they're not allowed to communicate with each other, and they're not allowed to bring in other experts to have different Well.

38:47 Speaker 1: That was the frustration that I had some friends that I've known my entire career, like almost fourteen years, right, I literally know them personally. I had a relationship with them, but they ended up you know, spill in the beans where you know, Look, we're on the program. I'm an engineer for X, Y, and Z. We can't even cross talk across like the cubicles, for God's sakes, Like I can't. I'm looking at material X doing some X ray diffraction testing on it, which is like shooting a stream of electrons and seeing how how it bends and looking at the atomic arrangements.

39:22 Speaker 1: I can't even like cross talk that with another aspect of the program. This is like ridiculous, And that's kind of their frustration. Yeah, I know you're probably gonna ask me about Bulbazar. I know, I figured I figured as much.

39:36 Speaker 2: Why did they do that though, if everybody was already sworn to secrecy, everybody already has NDAs, it seems the most effective way of reverse engineering or at least gaining an understanding of how these things are struggled.

39:47 Speaker 1: Well, that's exactly how Manhattan was right. People working on the fuses for the bomb didn't necessarily know it was going to a nuclear weapon, and so and I've seen this kind of compartmentation is up to secrecy in other programs, and it is the aabilitating for progress. And honestly, as a former fiduciary of the taxpayer dollars, it's not the best modus operendus to do it that way. And very few people kind of had that top down, could look across the silos and see what was going on. It just became very dysfunctional.

40:19 Speaker 1: And they were afraid of people being too cross briefed into the different silos for counter espionage counter intelligence that you know they were. We're going to remember a bulk of this program is done during the Cold War, and you know, we were afraid of Russian spy Soviet moles, and so we made it ultra locked down. But to the detriment of national security. And that was one of the crazy things that got me that I wanted to whistleblow on because I'm like, this is so stupid, Like we should be making more progress on this.

40:49 Speaker 1: Were there any breaches that you're aware of where foreign agents were able to gain access to materials or an understanding of what we know? So I'll tell you about some intel documents I read that kind of obliquely answers that question. So there was sense of human derive foreign intelligence that I read. So I had access to kind of the a tip os app classified archives, and I was like thumbing through everything, and there's some other people were bringing me documents to evaluate, and I'll never forget I had to say stolen by the US an intelligence assessment from a certain foreign adversary discussing the US reverse engineering program, and I was like, and that was actually another like what the fuck?

41:40 Speaker 1: And so I had an adversary also confirmed this program literally because of exl traded intelligence, and so they certainly had a limited knowledge at least fact of that the US had a program like this a particular adversary and actually I was like, well, I want more, like I know who wrote this litter or who got it right on behalf of the United States government. So I went to that certain agency through the approved and official way, and this is kind of part of the Marius reprisals against me. The agency was like, oh, yes, we have what you're looking for, Dave.

42:18 Speaker 1: You're gonna need to sign a one time read into something, you know, Come visit us to you know, go to the vault and read it, write, you know, hard copy. But yes, we have what you're looking for. And ultimately, from what I was told by friends in higher places, my request kind of went up the flagpole at that agency, and all of a sudden, the agency ghosted my boss and I for like two months. And then when I really press them hard to gain access because I'm like, I have a need to know, I need to evaluate this intelligence for fucking Congress, and they debriefed me from all my accesses is over in that other sister agency and made up some bogus excuse like I shouldn't have been brief to anything in the first place, literally, and basically gave me an administrative middle finger like bersona on grata, don't ever fucking ask us about that shit again.

43:16 Speaker 1: And I'm sure, the person who made the oops that told me they had what I was looking for probably got admonished and slapped on the wrists because I never heard from that person again, even though it was somebody I actually used to work on occasion with. So that was also another way I knew I was you know, there was a lot of smoke and fire because I, you know, had stuff like that happened to me.

43:42 Speaker 2: So this but knowing that our adversaries were aware of this reverse engineering program, are we aware of their reverse engineering programs? Yeah? Which countries are?

43:58 Speaker 1: Uh, you could probably guess and you wouldn't be Uh, it won't be too shocking, Okay, but I won't acknowledge what the US may know.

44:06 Speaker 2: Right, So are we aware of numbers in terms of like at least a rough estimate of how many are available to these other Yeah?

44:18 Speaker 1: How many?

44:18 Speaker 2: Uh that's like super more than one. Yeah, you can read into that can read into Yeah, And has anyone made any progress?

44:28 Speaker 1: Yeah? I can't get into if we've made progress, if they've made progress, because that's like straight up some national security stuff. But like I want the just to be clear, I want the US populace to learn a lot of this, and this is why, you know, another reason why I went public is like I need to call everybody else. I'm not here to admonish the entire government, mind you, but there is an element of the US government and its clear defense contractor base that you know, we have a three branch of government oversight issue.

45:00 Speaker 1: Like going back to Harry Reid, Harry Reid didn't even get access, and I fucking talked to myself to confirm that, and he said he was going to go talk to Biden because I think there needs to be a disclosure plan And this goes back to what's currently in legislation right now. That's super fucking important because ninety some odd percent of this should be open for public discovery, public analysis, and academia. This should be like at very least true nuclear programs such as nuclear physics you study in the university, nuclear weapons classified because that makes people in the pink mist that's really sensitive.

45:44 Speaker 1: We don't need everybody to know how to do that. So I think the stuff that is like legit weapons related stuff that's like straight up national superiority stuff, sure reasonably classify that. But this these programs we need to change. And that's why you saw the Schumer Amendment, right, and I think you might have read that on air or something in a previous episode. I correctly, you know, Chuck Schumer and I knew about the amendment a couple months before I went public, and that's kind of another reason why I did what I did.

46:18 Speaker 1: I'm like, Fuck, I'm like the only guy that kind of has the opportunity to do this. I know what's in the shoot, so to speak, that Chuck Schumer and his staff had with the Schumer Amendment, which is sixty seven pages of literal we want to disclose. And I'm like, I have to spike the football by going public, because you know, I can read the tea leaves on the hill, and I think that they were hesitant to do anything without being able to point to something publicly. And I'm like, oh, I'll be the fucking guy and just send it.

46:50 Speaker 1: And then, of course, a month after I went public, I guess I pushed Chuck Schumer over the ledge. And I do know he talked to the White House about the amendment too, because not like Chuck Schumer is gonna propose groundbreaking legislation like that without talking to the National Security Advisor or President, like I imagine he did so. And you know, so you have the sixty seven page amendments, right, It's called the UAP Disclosure Act of twenty twenty three, known as the Schumer Amendment. Co sponsors were Young jillibrand Rubio Rounds, Yeah and young And you know, kudos for those senators were stepping up to the plate because they know this is real.

47:32 Speaker 1: I know what meetings that they've had with certain other individuals that are you know, even more credible than myself. And so this, this act, which is like super important, is currently in conference as we speak in Capitol Hill. So the amendment is wrapped in something called the Fiscal Year twenty twenty four National Defense Authorization Act, So that is the act that funds the military basically every year. Right, So it's an amendment within this bill, and the act is really long, but the main meat of it is about halfway through the act that talks about a presidential panel or agency which is nine person and a controlled UAP disclosure plan that's six years in length, conceivably from twenty twenty four to twenty thirty.

48:21 Speaker 1: In this panel, and you can read this is a public law. Anybody can read this. They want a scientist, economists, you know, you know, sociologists, et cetera. It's kind of like who you would want to help craft the plan for the president. And this whole bill was actually built off the JFK Records Act, which I know, like they're like, well, they never released all the records, while we put some teeth in the bill, some eminent domain some other stuff that you know, kind of force the issue. Now. Granted, the chief Executive, the president has the final say.

48:52 Speaker 1: The panel can't compel the executive to do it, but like, I hope the president does and I support that. But so the Senate already passed it. They're chill with this. This is like we're good to go, and and but there's pushback in the House right now. That is, you know, part of my language, fucking ridiculous. So they're saying, for one, it's duplicating the DoD Arrow's office activities. They're doing good things. They're looking at up reports, trying to figure out what's balloons and air trash and what's weird stuff.

49:26 Speaker 1: And of course they are doing an historical review to try to understand the US's history on this too. But the problem is with that agency. It it's within the d D and I see not above. So you have an issue reaching into Department of Energy, other you know, cabinet level agencies. So you need a presidential level panel that can declassify stuff, reach into other agencies and tell, you know, certain secretaries, we're coming in. We want your stuff under presidential authority. So what's how opening in the House.

50:01 Speaker 1: From what I'm told from people on the Hill that are working the issue right now, you have the chair of the House Intel Committee, Mike Turner, who's blocking us from Ohio Dateton, Ohio area, right, Pat Weird and Metterson yes, yeah. And Mike Rogers, which I'm kind of surprised from Alabama, who's the chair of the House Armed Services Committee. So I have a problem with Mike and Mike right now. So Mike Turner, now remember I went to his committee in December last year. He wasn't there, but his staff and lawyers were, And of course he goes on Fox Business after the hearing, doesn't use my names like this whistleblower.

50:44 Speaker 1: He has no idea what he's talking about. I'm like, really, tell me, Mike, have you ever been an Intel officer or served in the military. Oh wait, you've been the mayor of Dayton, Ohio. You were voted most corrupt person in Congress a couple years ago. And pull up his pack donors. Who are his biggest donors? Lockeed raytheon Boeing? Okay, So, and first of all, if you thought you needed more information or wanted to talk to me personally, why didn't you call me back when I reported to your committee?

51:17 Speaker 1: So and furthermore, besides blocking the bill, I'm sure you're familiar with like Representative Timbershet of Alabama, and he's been very outspoken on the issue and what we may not agree with everything Tim says about conventional stuff that's you know here, no there. But you know he's been a champion on the Oversight Committee and he was, you know, one of the members that I testified in public under oath regarding this. So like and Mike Turner is looking to fund according to staffers I've talked to last two weeks, an opposition candidate for Tim's reelection in twenty twenty four.

51:54 Speaker 1: So, why is Mike Turner going out of his way to destroy the career of a career you just Tennessee representative on the Oversight Committee, And why are you blocking a bill? And it's not going to cost much couple million a year max, you know for the panel, which is like vaporware and US government speak. Right, If there's nothing to see here, why are Mike Rogers and Mike Turner in the House blocking this bill that is, in my opinion, the most important legislation for in transparency in American history.

52:28 Speaker 1: If there's nothing to see here, if I'm fucking crazy, Multistar generals I talked to are crazy. The Intel docs that I read are incorrect. They're fucking forgeries or passage material or something like that. Good friends of mine that worked on the program are bullshitting me in some consorted operation against me and my colleagues. That it would be totally crazy to even conduct that because I took precautions. Then why don't we just pass this and see what happens? And what do you think the answer?

52:59 Speaker 1: Does special interests want to keep the genie in the bottle even though the toothpaste is coming out of the tube. And I think it's like a death rattle in this industrial complex that doesn't want change. And I'm not here to be psch some total adversary I think there needs to be a truth and reconciliation process on this issue. I'm not here to throw people in jail. I'm not here for big contractors involved to lose money. I think this would be a boon and I think the leadership in these companies need to think about this where if we're open with this, you can hire people, you can push the subject into undergraduate graduates and postdoctoral programs of you know, research to study this in an unclassified just like nuclear physics.

53:46 Speaker 1: And this answers a fundamental question, uh, you know, for humanity, are we alone? Or you know what happens when we die? Well? I don't know about that, but are we alone? Well, the answer is we're not alone. I know that with one hundred percent certainty, which as an intel officer you never say one hundred percent. But all things pointed towards based on the people I talk to, like Harry Reid, and I use him as an example, but I talk to the highest of the high people you could possibly talk to to catch my drift.

54:22 Speaker 1: So unless all them are lying and they're covering up something else, which I don't even know what it would be at this point because the phenomenon is real. It's been going on for thousands of years. People have been seeing strange things and not everybody's mass hallucinating. So that's kind of my long diet tribe about what's happening.

54:40 Speaker 2: What do they think these things? Are the people that you.

54:43 Speaker 1: Talk to, so they specifically the people on the program that handle the material that we're in executive level briefings with Intel community leaders and other folks over the years last twenty years or so, they did use the term extraterrestrial ET or whatever for okay, that is a possible origin. But the Schumer Amendment, if you read it, it specifically uses non human intelligence and HI very deliberately because we want to catch everything, because what if some of this stuff is not ET and they're going to use as an escape clause like, well, this stuff that we don't even know if it's extraterrestrial, so this doesn't apply.

55:23 Speaker 1: So that's why we wanted to be as broad as possible. I mean, besides ET, I mean a lot of it would be my own personal opinion. I think we have a couple conceivable buckets, and I'm using the work of Jacques Valet other people that have thought deeply on the issue on how the phenomenon has changed since saying antiquity showed itself in a different way. Like a good example is like witches sitting on your chest phenomenon with paralysis in medieval and Enlightenment area, you know, era became this alien abduction phenomenon.

56:05 Speaker 1: In the modern area, air rescues me and is it the recipient and their analytical overlay cognitively seeing the phenomenon based on a modern interpretation, you know, inside outs or is the phenomenon This is like Jacquesvlat's book Passport to Magnodia Magnolia, Can I pronounce it right? Nineteen sixty nine where he talks about the phenomenon seems to like masquerade itself as different stuff over the years. But you know we've seen roughly the same stuff. You look at the Foo fighters of World War Two.

56:40 Speaker 1: There are declassified Air Force OSI reports from the fifties. People can google to talk about flying butane tanks with the same measurements approximately what we saw in the two thousand and four tik Tak incident, but they called it flying propane or you know, butane tanks in the fifties. So from a morphology or in the air Force until we call it phys reki visual reconnaissance, like they basically look the same, and we can back asthmth that you know, decades if not hundreds of years in the past.

57:13 Speaker 1: You know, wheels of Execuel. Right, they're seeing these like disc type objects, right, And unless Exekuel is trippin' or this is an allegory or fable in the in the Bible. You know, let's say the event happens just like the in the Vedic text. You have the battles, the blue people in the battles in the sky that sound like nuclear and directed energy weapons. Like, what's going on there? I mean, maybe that's a Graham Hancocker Randall Carlson type thing. They could they know more than I. So there is a real phenomenon that origin undetermined, but it's trippy and sometimes it presents itself in like a non corporeal form too, you know, orbs balls of energy.

57:57 Speaker 1: You know, they don't appear as like some kind of bipe heatal hominid like some people have expoused. So I think that might be call it interdimensional, call it shadow biome, crypto tereshia. I mean, there's a lot of different theories. What are the primary theory?

58:14 Speaker 2: The primary theories are from another planet or from another dimension.

58:19 Speaker 1: I think those are the primary. I mean, there's certainly origins that we probably can't conceptualize as humans because we're just our meat is stuck in three D and we don't understand and our IQs are only so high. So there might be some origins that we.

58:33 Speaker 2: Don't understand in terms of like interdimensional travel.

58:38 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean obviously, you know, if you talk to mainstream physicists, they say, like crossing dimensions physically is kind of a trope of sci fi. And you know, that's why I used an example and that if some physicists don't like me talking about this theory, but it is a theory, you know. Like so the holographic principle, which was originally can see to explain how information is encoded on an event horizon of a black hole, which is a distance away from the singularity of a black hole, where if you cross it, you're fucked because you're gonna get riped the shreds or you're not coming back.

59:14 Speaker 1: And that principle talks about how information basically from higher dimensional space can be encoded in lower dimensional space. And the easiest example is like us casting a shadow on a sidewalk, right, three dimensional objects, two D shadow on a sidewalk. If you lived in two dimensional space flat land, you'd be tripped out what the fuck am I seeing? But they just don't know that it's really just a person in higher dimensional space. So is some of the I mean, obviously we have physical material that's in three dimensional space that we've recovered, but at least maybe some of the phenomenon is really operating in higher spatial dimensions, but it is either being projected or quasi projected into are three D plus time space, which is really trippy to think about, but we literally do it on a day to day basis, like casting shadows.

1:00:07 Speaker 1: So and that might be some of what we're seeing too, But I mean, I presume we know more. The people I talked to did not expouse they had full knowledge either. Like I said that, the normal colloquialism was to say et or extraterrestrial?

1:00:23 Speaker 2: Could you dumb down this concept of inter dimensional like, yeah, what I know in physics they have theorized that there are multiple dimensions other than those that we can currently detect.

1:00:37 Speaker 1: Yeah, and a lot of that is based off of like laj this is my bachelor's degree talking. I know there's gonna be like some physicists who's a PhD's like, ohay if you fuck that up. But basically, you know, from high energy particle collisions and based on the deflection angles and all this stuff, what happens when the particles collide, you know, confirm certain theoretical frameworks about extra spatial dimensions. And you know, I can't speak with any real authority on you know precisely how that works.

1:01:08 Speaker 1: But a lot of you, whether it be string theory or quantum mechanics, are based off of higher spatial dimensions. And you know, so that is a mainstream physics theoretical framework that's not like wacky or looney or anything like that. So but that's basically a possibility. But like I said, like we don't really have a good theory if you if you work if you lived in like five D space for example, it's almost like remember the ending of the movie Interstellar, right where where he's pushing the books.

1:01:43 Speaker 1: He's like in a Tessa act, you know, which is like a four to five D structure, but he's trying to interact with three d space, and of course he like leaves that space to come back to his daughter many years later at then in the ending of the movie. Great movie, but so that's a way to concept vitalize it in something you may have watched in film. It's kind of like the ending of Interstellar.

1:02:05 Speaker 2: Oh yeah, yeah, there you go, yeah, which is based on what like what theory. So the physicist Kip Thorn was the very famous guy. He was a big black hole and wormhole guy. I think it's Caltech or somewhere in California. Kip Thorn actually did all the physics equations and everything for Christopher Nolan to make sure that they were conceptualizing and visualizing black holes and wormholes and all that stuff correctly in the movie where you saw like the halo around the black hole when they were coming in with the ship and everything, that's actually based off of real physics models that Kip Thorn did the calculations for, which is pretty cool actually that Christopher Nolan took it to that level.

1:02:50 Speaker 1: You know.

1:02:51 Speaker 2: So this idea that these beings or whatever you want to call them, exist in some other dimension, do we have have I mean, I don't know what you can say about this, Do we have an understanding? Do we have any sort of communication with these beings that give us some sort of an understanding or a map of this?

1:03:15 Speaker 1: Yeah, the interaction stuff, that's a sensitive area. There are multiple very senior people that were concerned about talking about that kind of stuff with me. I mean, that is certainly as nuts as it sounds. That was a real subject of conversation. Even it sounds like something out of like Star Trek first contact.

1:03:34 Speaker 2: But it doesn't if you have vehicles.

1:03:36 Speaker 1: Yeah, so it's like, once you realize the phenomenon's real, then you realize we've recovered artifacts and you know, biologics or you know, dead pilots if you will, Even though it's you know, kind of creepy to even think about that in your worldview, you don't think they were ever, you know, alive. Sometimes too write and you know, I'll leave it at that, because you know that is something you know, the president in his cabin need to disclose this in a controlled manner. Going back to that amendment.

1:04:09 Speaker 1: You know, I'm not here to uh, you know, push the subject in an improper way. And that sounds like why don't you just do it? David? Like there's a lot of secondary and tertiary ramifications socio economically, theologically, our relationship geopolitically with our allies and adversaries. This is not rip off the band aid and it's simple. There's there's a lot of complex stuff behind the scenes that need to happen, and that's why I'm I'm laying out all the general stuff that needs to be talked about during a disclosure process.

1:04:44 Speaker 1: But I should not be the one disclosing, and it would be highly inappropriate because I care about the health of the United States and its people in national security for me to do so. So I know there's people that are like, oh, what doesn't Dave say X, Y and Z. It's like, this is serious. This is not like ha ha. Let me tell you a good story. I'm a serious guy. I ruined my fucking career doing this. I was gonna make lieutenant colonel in the Air Force in this winter. I was on track to be, you know, a flag officer of equivent civilian.

1:05:16 Speaker 1: In my career, I spent eighteen years in uniform if you count the cadet time, right, my whole adult life was serving as an intel officer. But I wanted to see and I'm thirty six, right, older millennial. I wanted to see change. So I'm throwing the flag outs and I'm here to hold the government accountable to do the right thing in a manner that is mature and thorough, because I don't begin to say that I know everything all the different ramifications of saying certain things publicly. I don't know all the answers to that, and that's why I have to be careful because I don't even know.

1:05:54 Speaker 1: I'll call it, you know, collateral damage effects to use kind of a military term. What may happen of certain things in detail that are revealed that I might not know the ramifications thereof because there's something that I'm not privy to. So this is like a serious This is not like a fun situation. This is like a humanity changing, hopefully in a good way. But this is like, you know, quite serious, and I, you know, risked my personal and professional life and personal life because things have happened to me to be public like this, and you know, I swore an oath, but you know, myself and my generation you know, want to see it change.

1:06:36 Speaker 2: Can you discuss the things that have happened to you personally?

1:06:38 Speaker 1: Yeah, so a lot of the stuff I have to be purposely vague because there's an open inspector General Reprisal investigation on my behalf and I'm not here to compromise the investigation by tipping off my antibodies that may be watching right now. But you know, when I really started looking into this, I mean, they came after me so hard to try to revoke my clearance, ruined my career, kicked me out of my agency, and they accused me of everything you could possibly think of with like no evidence. For example, at first, they wanted to say, oh, Dave, you have mental health stuff you didn't report to us.

1:07:23 Speaker 1: We're concerned because we think you might have an ongoing mental health issue. I'm like, what are you talking about. I reported that I had PTSD from Afghanistan and my military service several years ago, and I sought help for that, Like I'm not ashamed of that. You know, I'm high functioning autistic and I didn't know that until my early thirties, and how I processed trauma I didn't really understand until many years later. And you know, I sought help for that, and they were trying to say that like I had some secret mental health problem that I haven't been reporting to.

1:07:59 Speaker 1: So I had to go through this whole process. Three agencies at the same time investigated me for that, which I don't even know if that's like legal. They tried to say that I like mishandled classify all this other stuff. It was insane. Apparently I was under criminal investigation for a couple months and I didn't even know that, and nor did they interview me. But they made a finding with no evidence they tried to use against me that I had to spend money to basically litigate and maintain my employment my clearance, which I did.

1:08:30 Speaker 1: For the record, I maintained my clearance. I resigned with full accesses. You know, I'm just debrief now, but I maintained my top secret eligibility and I left with my own accord and so, and of course they ruined one of my boss's careers in another agency. They walked him out of the building and revoked his clearance and terminated him as a show of force after they were going after me. And I feel sorry for that certain vidual. And they came after coworkers of mine. I can't get into who, what, when, where and why to protect their identities and their own process.

1:09:07 Speaker 1: But so that's what happened to me professionally, and then what happened to me personally was very disturbing. So I have to be very vague about this because ongoing investigation, but I think you'll understand what I'm saying is they showed my wife and I they can touch me at anytime, two times, and it was very disturbing. It was in conjunction with some other people getting a message like that that are to say, publicly well known, some that aren't publicly well known. And of course I immediately reported that to you know, counterintelligence, federal law enforcement, local to me because it you know, it wasn't criminal, but it was like a fuck you to me.

1:09:55 Speaker 1: And this was right before I fouled my whistle blower complaint. Now I don't know who did this, you know, entity who did X, Y and Z to my wife and I Identity unknown, but it fucking happens. And I, you know, provided that documentation to a couple of special agents and I just knew that it was getting serious. And you know as well, First of all, I'm the kind of person. I'm from Pittsburgh, you know, like steal Town I'll take shit from people. And I decided, fuck it, I'm gonna FILET and inspect your general complaint to protect myself.

1:10:34 Speaker 1: I don't I'm in fear for my safety. You know, my wife's an Air Force veteran too, and you know, very strong individual, but you know, as a man, you don't want to put your family at risk. And you know, did certain other measures which I won't talk about, to protect myself, you know, physically, and I could not believe that that was happening to me, no kidding, And I knew I needed to do something internally. And then when I saw the writing on the wall earlier this year, and of course I knew about the Schumer Moendment, like I mentioned earlier, and I knew, I'm like, you know, I got to do this for my own protection because me leaving the federal service, because I resigned my Air Force commission, I totally threw that career away to do what I thought was the right and patriotic thing to whistleblow on this, you know.

1:11:25 Speaker 1: And I, you know, swore my oath eighteen years ago, and that sounds hokey, but I believe, you know, integrity for service, for self and excellence, all we do. That's the Air Force motto. And I'm like, I, this is not going to help me personally. Like I love talking to you, I like spreading this message because it's the right and ethical thing to do, but this is a nightmare for me. I don't want to be public. I've served the country in clandestine and covert operations for fourteen years. I've done technical intelligence for some of the most high profile takedowns in US history.

1:11:59 Speaker 1: I shouldn't even be here, but I am because I want to see change. I saw something unethical and unmoral. I want to make sure I hold that element of the government accountable. And it was the right fucking thing to do. And I get kind of emotional about that because you know, my career has been service and sacrifice, and you know, I had two friends of mine die And I've talked about this publicly before, and I you know, I'm segueing a little bit, but the suffering of the American intelligence officer is something that for their service of their country.

1:12:37 Speaker 1: And I'm not talking about this subject. Obviously, people don't realize the kind of trauma intel professionals go through. So first of all, I had a friend six months after I got back from Afghanistan. His name is Captain Dave Lyon. There's a park in Peterson Space Force Base named after him. I remember seeing his cough and come off the plane stuff, so you know, I saw him die. That that fucked me up for a number of years. And that's what, you know, gave me a lot of my my problems that I ended up dealing with.

1:13:08 Speaker 1: But then I had I remarried and then my best man, Captain Ben Heiney, air Force Intelligence Officer, Air Force Special Operations Command. I've known him for years. He's my closest friend, you know, best man at my wedding, and then twenty eight days later, unfortunately he suffered from depression and it was you know, he as his best friend. He didn't even confide in me. You know, I remember chit chatting him, chit chatting with him on the phone one day about twenty eight days after he was my best man, and he didn't tell me anything was wrong with him.

1:13:41 Speaker 1: And a few hours later he walked in his backyard and shot himself. And you know, I gave his eulogy at is at his funeral, and that really, uh you know, really affected me. And with what Ben experienced, which I can't get into all of the stuff he did obviously, but imagine being the guy that decides that that person is bad fire the hell fire, that person is now pink missed that they're dead. You just played God, let's go back to you know, the wife and kids at the end of your shift, and a lot of that.

1:14:19 Speaker 1: I you know, I did the same kind of thing. I did a lot of stuff overseas involved interrogations and you know ops that you had to decide if a target is bad enough where you're going to affect their life forever and their family's life forever. And that's the silent suffering of intel professionals, especially during the Global War and Terror, which was you know, twenty one years or so, and you know, the trauma and the mental health problems that people get from being an intel professional and operational environment.

1:14:53 Speaker 1: People think like special operators, pilots, et cetera. You know, Ground Army, Marines, ground pounders, and they certainly have their own trauma. But it's this weird, insidious am I in a video game? Is this real trauma that intelligence professionals And I just wanted to highlight that during the show because that was just a near and dear to myself. So people are aware of the service of military intelligence and civilian intelligence professionals, So that's have to make really tough decisions for the country that affect people's lives on the receiving end.

1:15:28 Speaker 1: You know.

1:15:29 Speaker 2: So, was there a concern while you're going through all this that if you didn't come out with this that we would be stuck in this same sort of loop for a long long period of time and no one would ever have access to this stuff, that they would continue.

1:15:45 Speaker 1: Yep, yeah, and that you nailed it on the head is you know, I think my generation wants to change the under forty generation. Their parents went to war, their older brothers went to war. We're fighting two dangerous proxy wars right now, which is extremely stupid. I know, a better way of saying it'd be quite frank, and I give you my own assessment on that if you want. But like, we're in this loop, we're not progressing in a healthy way as a civilization. You know, it's becoming more divisive, whether on the left or the right.

1:16:19 Speaker 1: You know, people aren't even looking up. All they care about is TikTok. You know, we're creating potentially dangerous artificial intelligence. You know, I even saw that in my government service, And I think humanity is kind of stuck right now and we need to change. And this subject is like one of the only unifying ontologically shocking, but I would think generally unifying topics. We're where if announced by you know, the US and other you know, major powers that have knowledge in a controlled manner, that this could change humanity for the better, make us look inside ourselves, become less divisive, and care maybe a little less about superficial things.

1:17:03 Speaker 1: So that's kind of my philosophical motivation to do what I did.

1:17:09 Speaker 2: And you're confronted with one of the biggest mysteries in human history, yeah, which is are we alone? And it seems like at least some people have the answer to.

1:17:21 Speaker 1: That one hundred percent. I mean the people I talked to certainly did, and they had close personal knowledge and the INTEL reports I read, you know, literally indicated that as well, like I talked about earlier, And it just so it's like this cast system I call it. Dudes with SEI clearances do not have an embargo on reality. So it's a caste system of you know, people in government and outside of government in the industrial complex that run this stuff under a little oversight. And you know, I remember some of the people who deny us access.

1:17:55 Speaker 1: They were like, you know, you know, I don't know what you're talking about, but if I did, why would you have a need to know? And I'm like, well, why did you have a need to know? You're just some multistar general. Well, you're a human being. You're a human being. You're not better than me. I mean, who determines need to know on a humanistic question? It's like basic fact of life? Why do you why are we classifying fact of life at this day and age in twenty twenty three. It's insane And the answer to that would be national security.

1:18:30 Speaker 1: Yeah, it's up to national security. Right, So, like why we classify stuff? It's called Executive Order thirteen five twenty six right, section one point four, Sections E and F are why we classify science stuff? Why we classify nuclear stuff? It's like a one liner. It's very vague. And are you saying this is these basic facts should be classified? Are you saying that this fits in this bill? And you know, and you notice a Schumer amendment, if anybody reads it awkwardly calls out the atomic Energy Act in nineteen fifty four, right, and they're basically treating this as nuclear secrets because it gives off a nuclear radiation.

1:19:16 Speaker 1: Because if you look at the ultra vague definition of special nuclear material, which is Section fifty one with the Atomic Energy Act in nineteen fifty four, it says anything that gives off a sizeable amount of atomic energy. Literally, that's what it says. Well, what sizable and what legal gymnastics are you saying this stuff which is obviously not a well who knows, maybe it is a nuclear weapon, and you're saying this is a US nuclear secret. You're trans classifying it into a nuclear secret, which I understand maybe at first why they did that.

1:19:54 Speaker 1: And I'm not admonishing the hard decisions that presidents and other folks did years ago when this was more of an enigma and we wanted to like lock it down, figure it out, and then see what we're gonna do. But there's never been a disclosure plan. I always ask that, like the super senior people I talked to, was there a plan, any kind of plan at all, And they're like, no, never. We tried the money to waters back and there, you know, try to put it out there and test the populace. But you know, there was never any coaching plan.

1:20:27 Speaker 1: I mean, people think the government is like this fine oiled machine they have plans for everything. Well, I guess sort of, but like it's not. I mean, look at the War on terrorism. We left Afghanistan. No general officer Mattis Portrays McCrystal. I call them the failed generals. People lowed them, but really themselves in the Bomba administration, Bush administration except you know Trump whatever, nobody had a coach and plan for success. And we were fighting people who were much less of an adversary than like one of our peers or near peers.

1:21:02 Speaker 1: And we couldn't even win that war. Like what the fuck are we doing? But these protracted, endless wars, let's be real, it's good for the industrial complex, right so, and I'm not like admonishing the whole industrial complex for the record. You know, we need national lethality, we need weapons to kill bad guys because there's evil people in the world. But you've got to control you know, some of it though.

1:21:26 Speaker 2: Well that's a part of the problem with people that have secrets. It's like, once you have secrets and part of your identity is the holder of those secrets. And part of the culture of these these industries is that they are the ones that have the access to that.

1:21:45 Speaker 1: Yeah, and I saw that in conventional really black programs that was a part of my career. It was almost like you got that secret society vibe where it's like, if you're a career government servant, your salary's not that great, but knowledge is your currency, and what makes you special? What rice boll do you control? And I remember getting right into some stuff that like it was like the president and very limited number of people getting read into and I was one of them because I was operating a certain thing for a certain op and oh your part of the club, you know, like early thirty people are cleared or whatever.

1:22:24 Speaker 1: And I'm like, I don't get off on this Shit's it's so weird. But like these like lifers and I hate to, you know, talk some matter of fact about it, but like it's just it's kind of disgusting to me because it's like this like it's weird. It's just like a weird like gnostic cultish thing. And you know, I live that community for fourteen years of my career, and.

1:22:46 Speaker 2: People really do enjoy having information that other people don't have access to.

1:22:49 Speaker 1: I was like, I got a secret, and like that's why I whistle blooded. Okay, so I know this shit's real. I know there were not alone. We have stuff. No shit, am I gonna sit on my ass for thirty forty years. I'm an old man. I look back like, Ah, I had that secret. I knew about it, but I didn't do anything. I didn't change. So I couldn't just keep that secret because I thought it was just perverse and wrong that the people don't even at least get to know the basics. It's insane.

1:23:20 Speaker 2: So when it comes to these I goan to bring it back to these these actual entities.

1:23:25 Speaker 1: Yeah, do we.

1:23:26 Speaker 2: Know or we do have an understanding of how many of them were talking about and the variety of them.

1:23:33 Speaker 1: Well, yeah, there is a variety, and we have a certain number of different things. But the like total numbers of like what's interacting with us on Earth, I mean, nobody knows that and I.

1:23:46 Speaker 2: But there's an understanding of some that they do believe are interacting with us, and there's a variety in terms of there's there's variables.

1:23:53 Speaker 1: Yeah, I talk to people who are familiar with the biological analysis and everything. So we have some idea, not a complete picture, because it's like you know, you know, you're looking at it. It's like, well, I don't even understand the phys physiology at all. It's like, what the heck, it's like way different, right, So.

1:24:12 Speaker 2: We have at least action of this physiology.

1:24:15 Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I was in I was in the room when uh uh, he'd be careful, I don't want to. I was in Washington, d C. With a very number of senior people that work for members of Congress put it that way when I was still in governments, and I brought the people who worked on that stuff to the Hill. I mean, this is why the members were so confident to put out the Schumer Amendment and stuff. And I was like, please explain, and they went into all those details and stuff, and I remember, you know, some of the professional staff members were like whoa, Like they were like in glock, right, because I mean it like a total world bubble.

1:25:05 Speaker 1: Yeah, got burst right there for a lot of people. And so we have some idea. It's not a complete picture. I mean, it's just like, but you're not even bringing in the right the right people, Like I think about my friend and colleague, doctor Gary Nolan, which I started the Soul Foundation nonprofit with. I mean, he's like, you know, Nobel level biologist, virologists, like he's the guy that you would want on it, but he's not on it. So I think we can make a lot of progress in our understanding once again, if if this is more broadly studied in an open environment.

1:25:43 Speaker 2: You aware of the Nixon Jackie Gleason story vaguely.

1:25:48 Speaker 1: I stayed away from ufology because I had these contemporary people that were inside. I could check all their credentials, where they worked, et cetera. But I'm vaguely familiar where what was it? Like Nixon brought Jackie Gleeson into some facility and showed him some stuff or something like that.

1:26:06 Speaker 2: Yeah, supposedly that's the story, and it's very it's very hard to determine the origin of the story, whether or not it's real it came from. There's a story about one article that was supposedly public was it vanity fair? And you can't find the story. But Jackie Gleason, by all accounts, was obsessed with UFOs and even built a home in upstate New York that looked like a flying saucer.

1:26:32 Speaker 1: Oh really, yeah, this is the house.

1:26:35 Speaker 2: He had this house constructed supposedly after he had this meeting with Nixon. So Nixon, supposedly they were drinking. Jackie Leason and Nick Nixon or tying went on, and Nixon's like, you want to see some shit, and they fly to wherever.

1:26:54 Speaker 1: This base is.

1:26:55 Speaker 2: Yeah, and he shows them these frozen biological entities and retrieved vehicle, and then Jackie Gleason becomes a fanatic. Obviously that's crazy.

1:27:06 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean not crazy, but but that's interesting that a president would do that too, like an uncleared celebrity friend of his, like, oh, let me just show you the most sensitive shit our country has. I don't know, it's kind of crazy that people are obsessed with celebrity.

1:27:21 Speaker 2: You know, there's even world leaders, you know, kings and queens of you know, they've always been obsessed with famous people. And Jackie Gleason at the time was incredibly famous and also beloved. Right, so this is my pal and I'm drunk. I want to see some shit, you know, I get it.

1:27:41 Speaker 1: I want to hang out with Nixon. If that's how he was, like, man, probably I bet he was.

1:27:46 Speaker 2: Like that in a lot of ways, you know, I mean Hunter S. Thompson famously recalled his uh yeah, there's a two of them meeting together. H famously called sitting in the backseat of a limo with Nixon talking about football, and he's like, if I didn't think he was a piece of shit, I actually kind.

1:28:02 Speaker 1: Of like him. Oh that's funny. Yeah, we're just talking football.

1:28:05 Speaker 2: You know, Look, nobody in that job, nobody as a president, is going to be loved by everyone. And I'm sure Nixon has positive qualities. And you know, if Jackie Gleeson liked him, I'm a giant Jackie Gleason fan. It's probably probably fun to hang out with. Yeah, and if you're drunk and you know, you're the president. And also we're talking about the nineteen seventies, right, so this is a different world. You know, Like even if you tell anybody, who the fuck is going to believe you, you don't have you can't get on TikTok, Like what are you gonna do?

1:28:35 Speaker 2: How are you gonna get this information out?

1:28:37 Speaker 1: Oh? Exactly, And that's kind of how, you know, in my personal opinion, you know, how the program was protected right for make it crazy? Right, So if anybody leaks anything or you know that has an unauthorized disclosure, yeah, people are gonn think of fucking nuts of course. Yeah.

1:28:53 Speaker 2: Yeah, but there are actual reports that we have have biological remains, yes, oh yes, yes, how many?

1:29:07 Speaker 1: It's up there as well.

1:29:09 Speaker 2: Just like with the area, there's different kinds. Do we have an understanding that you don't have to answer where of where they came from?

1:29:21 Speaker 1: Nobody I talked to expoused any specific origin to me. We may know that, but I'm not aware of anything. So I don't know.

1:29:29 Speaker 2: Are there reports of some kind of interaction with these things where they're giving information or discussing the problems of humanity and possible solutions, or explaining why they're here.

1:29:46 Speaker 1: Interactions was a sensitive subject that my interview subjects did not want to get into. I suppose that there's probably detailed documentation of those interactions that goes into a lot of the stuff you're asking. I truly don't even know the answer to a lot of that.

1:30:04 Speaker 2: So, but is there discussions amongst these people that there have been these sort of.

1:30:10 Speaker 1: There was water cooler talk with some people I talked to on the program. Yeah, they're like, hey, bro, guess what I overheard and some weird meeting, you know. And but that is the problem with that is it's like secondary information and I'm so anal retentive unless that person told me I had close personal I touched it whatever, like cool, well you're coming to the Inspector General or I'm going to at least give them your name because that's what you told me. And then obviously I did that. So those people who physically were there were on the program, did the thing I brought to the Inspector General.

1:30:47 Speaker 2: Are there discussions of interactions with live beings? Uh?

1:30:53 Speaker 1: There was some water cooler talk about that kind of things. But you know, I don't even want to get into it because it's like there was some details provided to me, but it's like it's secondary and I don't know if that's like the telephone game, and I don't know if it was hyperbolized in any way, you know, in the breakroom, so to speak. So I just I'm so anal about making sure what I say is accurate. I don't you know, I don't know.

1:31:18 Speaker 2: Yeah, do we have an understanding, I mean, if if there have been these discussions, do we have an understanding of when they first took place.

1:31:27 Speaker 1: Yeah, some specific events were mentioned to me and I provided that information in a classified setting. And how far back do they go? Pretty far back? It's pretty weird. Yeah.

1:31:38 Speaker 2: So well, one of the stories from Roswell that's fascinating to me is that Eisenhower had the wreckage flown to write Patterson Air Force Base in two separate jets in case one of them crashed.

1:31:52 Speaker 1: There has been some public testimony, so general debos. There were some old timers that at least, you know, did some videos in like the nineties like I'm I'm Brigader General Exxon. Here's what I heard. Whatever I mean, that's out there in the open source.

1:32:12 Speaker 2: So yeah, yeah, And there was always a discussion of Hangar eighteen. Right, if you ever Hangar eighteen.

1:32:19 Speaker 1: There's a lot of hangars, that's the one.

1:32:21 Speaker 2: For whatever reason, I think it was maybe a movie.

1:32:23 Speaker 1: Was there a movie? Well, you know, you know, it's funny. Speaking of senators being denied, there's a video in the late eighties of Senator Barry Goldwater of Goldwater nichol Zac famed. Right, he was a two star general in the Air Force Reserve, and like literally this video is like on YouTube. It's like hard to find though, but Jesse Michael's on American Alchemy put together I think a short video yesterday, and there's like a section in there where he actually has that Goldwater interview. But General Goldwater's like, yeah, one day I called Curtis LeMay, who's a very famous Air Force general, and was like, General, I heard that there's this room you you know, have UFOAM material.

1:33:02 Speaker 1: And Barry Goldwater expouses in this interview like yeah, and le May got matter than hell at me and told me never to fucking ask about that again. I might have added the f wort in there just for for fun, but uh yeah, it's bad in the military too long. My wife tells me to be careful of my language all the time around my niece and nephews. But even Barry Goldwater knew that we had UFOAM material. He asked General LeMay when he was in the Air Force, and General May basically told him the fuck off. And that is a literal interview you can google.

1:33:39 Speaker 1: So a lot of this, like people disclosing fact of has really been out in the vernacular for a long time, but nobody really cared because well, everybody was just kind of like desensitized from the whole subject and thought it was wacky. And I'm not the first former government official to confirm that Goldwater and all these other Harry Reid who made the same disclosure to The New Yorker a month after I talked to him in person. Yeah, Melanis said stuff. Uh luel A. Zondo said, uh, you know, he believes we have material on I think it was Tucker Carlson a couple of years ago, So there's certainly been other officials.

1:34:22 Speaker 1: Now I'm just trying to spike the football and take it all the way to the end zone here. And luckily we have a Congress that's mostly motivated, minus Mike Rogers and Mike Turner. You're you're you're getting cool in your stockings. I'm going to make sure your office gets cool. And uh, you know, they they want change too, and they realize it's time for a change. And uh, presumably you know, Chuck Schumer's talked to you know, Jake Sullivan and President Biden. And you know who's in the White House right now is John Podesta.

1:34:55 Speaker 1: He is the green energies are or something like that in the White House. But you know, John Podesta h shout out to John Podesta in the White House. He has an act of grind on this issue too, because he remember he tweeted at the end of obama second term, you know my biggest failure was not to have Obama or release the UFO file, and made the same kind of statement with Clinton. So certainly, if mister Pedesta's listening in the White House, you know, I'm here to help. You know, I hope that you're championing this within the executive office of the President.

1:35:31 Speaker 1: And you know, the other speaking of people like Goldwater who who've made some weird, non sequitor kind of admissions, there's a John Stossel interview of Mike Pompeo, the former CI director, about two years ago or so. You can find it online where Pompeo talks about the JFK file and like dismisses it or something about like there's no boogeyman here. But then he quickly says, oh, I've seen the UFO file two and we have bigger problems. But at least the way it was edited, John Stossel didn't even follow up.

1:36:09 Speaker 1: At least the way the final cut was. I'm like, dude, if I was John Stosslupen, like, what do you mean, Mike Pompeo. You've seen the UFO file and we have bigger problems in UFO file. The way I interpret that is a long existing file or briefing document or something that he had access to. So I think I think the former CIA director, my Pompeo should probably clarify what he said two years ago next to if anybody interviews him next ask Mike that question, what did he mean.

1:36:41 Speaker 2: Yeah, we have bigger problems. Well, we certainly have bigger problems in terms of our current existence, specifically with what you were talking about earlier, the proxy wars and collapse of society as we know it.

1:36:53 Speaker 1: It just seems yeah, I mean the I mean, I feel for the Ukrainian and the Israeli people. You know, I'm not taking any particular side, but certainly people forget US AID and these wars. What's the most expensive thing if you've studied phases of conflict, it's the reconstruction costs after the conflict. So we in it for like triple digit billions, like the war and terror. I mean, certainly the Israeli conflict is a great distraction because you know, like Russia is very tight with Iran right and personal opinion, you know, it's just my own personal opinion, but I you know, I'm sure they commiserated and was like, can you start a two front war because we would like to win in Ukraine and this will distract the US because Israel is a long time you know, Middle East ally, So it's brilliant, it's brilliant public opinion.

1:37:46 Speaker 2: I mean, the virtue signalers on social media have essentially completely forgotten about Ukraine. It's all about Israel and Palace time.

1:37:56 Speaker 1: Yeah, you don't even see it. And I understand, you know, the National Security Council determination was that they've discussed publicly where it's kind of like trying to drain the Russia's you know, military capability and annexation of Ukrainian territory because they don't want Russia's sphere of influence to further enter that caucus region and stuff. But yeah, it's funny, like you said, it's like, you don't even talk about Ukraine. It's all about Israel now, and which is a horrible conflict on both sides.

1:38:27 Speaker 1: Like it's just it's unfortunate.

1:38:30 Speaker 2: So without a doubt, Yeah, it's that it was a very interesting statement though, that we have bigger problems, so even if we do, this seems to be like a

1:38:42 Speaker 2: This is such a human question because it's one of the biggest mysteries. Obviously. You know, there's the Fermi paradox.

1:38:49 Speaker 1: Where are they? Right?

1:38:50 Speaker 2: If you look out and if you look out into the cosmos, if you've ever gone to clear night and you look out and you realize those are all stars, and those stars are all surrounded by planets, and there's literally hundreds of billions of them.

1:39:03 Speaker 1: In the Drake equation, you can calculate what probable sentient life. Yeah, And I've been an amateur astronomer since I've been a kid, and I've never crazy enough. I've never seen anything remarkable. I've seen some stuff that could have been ball lightning and some satellite passes that weren't registered online when you could actually check to see if there's gonna be like an iridium flare or something like that, and maybe that was a satellite pass, maybe not. But I've never seen in my personal life, never seen anything weird.

1:39:36 Speaker 1: And it's funny you mentioned the Fermi paradox, and it's like, well, where are they and okay, well, you know, if you're sentient life, you're certainly going to have sophisticated cover, concealment, and deception techniques. It goes back to like what Jacques Valet's work is, where you know, the phenomenon presenting itself in different ways. But also, I live in the mountains of Colorado, right, so there is a mountain and den about ten miles from my house in Colorado. Literally, you know I am. There are lower predatory sentients, I'm higher predatory sentience, and I'm using this as a device or an analogy for Nhi and us.

1:40:15 Speaker 1: Well, I don't on a day to day basis, I don't care what a mountain lion is doing. I may hike in that area to explore, but day to day I'm afraid of it and I don't care and think about what humans might be. Unfortunately, to some of these higher sentiens where this monkey has a nuke, holy shit, keep them in the cage. We don't want to go anywhere near them. And so people think that there would be some kind of open contact with some higher sentience that is either visiting Earth or from another dimension or whatever the origin is.

1:40:52 Speaker 1: But they probably don't care. They're probably neutral at best and maybe actually fearful of us in some sense, or where the progeny of you know, personal opinion, progeny of some experiments in the it's almost like living in the matrix, but it's not like an actual simulation. It's like, we want the simulation to go. We don't want to intercede because we want to see what, you know, Homo sapi and sapient two dot zho is going to do after the Great Flood or something like that.

1:41:22 Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, Yeah, that's one of the more fascinating ideas is that we're some sort of a product of genetic engineering.

1:41:31 Speaker 1: I honestly would not be surprised. I don't know that to be true.

1:41:35 Speaker 2: But we're so different than everything else is here, so different, so beyond different. I mean, there's not another primate that is even reasonably close. I mean, if there's a speculation amongst primatologists, and there's a not even speculation, they believe that chimpanzees in particular have entered into the Stone Age, so they're at the beginning of the Stone Age. They're using tools, you know, and there's obviously some learned behavior, like there's some footage of orangutans using spears to hunt fish.

1:42:09 Speaker 1: With Interesting have you ever seen that? No, it's cool.

1:42:12 Speaker 2: Shit is a rangutan that's hanging on a branch over a river or body water and he's stabbing at fish with spear. Huh, which is incredible. I mean they're using tools. I mean, we know they use tools to extract you know, termites and the like. Look at that.

1:42:32 Speaker 1: I mean, oh that's crazy.

1:42:33 Speaker 2: How crazy is that? I mean he's clearly hunting. I mean he's going fishing in borneo. I mean that that is, you know, at the very least, a distant cousin of us, some you know, intelligent primate that is, to figure out a way to use tools. How long would it take in a rangutan to become a human being? How many millions of years? Are we talking about a revolution? But it seems to be that process that started.

1:43:02 Speaker 1: Interesting?

1:43:02 Speaker 2: But why are we so fucking different than everything?

1:43:05 Speaker 1: Yeah? Like, are we a product of Darwinian and evolution? Or what is a punctuated equilibrium? Is obviously another theory And I'm not an anthropologist by any means. You know, I watched some Netflix episodes, but but yeah, we seem to be oddly advanced, advanced, and we seem to just possess other skills. I mean it goes back to like the Stargate program, right, you know with declassified by Clinton and sensibly canceled I guess in ninety six, you know, where you had people trained in remote viewing and and like there was feedback loops to confirm what they saw was real, and you know, either satelled imagery or human sources where they sketched out a room of where there's hostages and they got a hostage out and they're like and this is a real story actually, and they're and they're like, did you have a source in that room?

1:43:54 Speaker 1: How do you know where all the corridors were and everything? I was like, no, actually, uh, Pat Price remote viewed you and he's like, what the fuck? So there's something going on there. And that's like Gary Nolan, you know, has studied a lot of this stuff very famously. He's pointed out the caught eight potatum in the brain, right, so this horseshoe shaped thing in the middle of your brain that if he's done MRIs and cat scans, and I hope I'm not butchering his work. Gary, might you know, slap me later, but it lights up people who have those kind of skills.

1:44:28 Speaker 1: They have like an overactive caught a potatum in the brain. And it's like, Okay, well, is it a transceiver of some sort? I'm guessing that's the case.

1:44:37 Speaker 2: Is it an emerging property of human beings have exactly?

1:44:40 Speaker 1: And we're seeing just a few human beings that have this stuff. And then if if it is a transceiver, where's the information? Is it in a higher spatial dimension or how are they extracting? How are they able to basically be non locality? Right, they're able to like project them elves somehow their consciousness to a and it's a declassified example from stargate Russian missile base. Sketch the crane and where the silos are, what the status is, you know, satellite comes over, takes a picture and it's exactly the way they sketched it.

1:45:18 Speaker 1: How'd they do that? Like it's certainly real, real because there is a feedback loop. Now there's a lot of Charlatan's in the psychic space and all that. But like at least that government program and I've talked to you know how put off and people who actually ran that program at SRI for the CIA than DA in the army. And that seems to be in men who's staring at goats? Right. The George Clooney movies, the famous movie based on the Stargate program, seems to be legit as far as we can measure from a feedback perspective.

1:45:50 Speaker 2: What was the explanation for the discontinuation of that program?

1:45:54 Speaker 1: Oh gosh, I'm not a scholar on that. That something Russell tark or how Put or one of those guys could explain if it was just like got caught up in the bureaucracy or what I don't remember.

1:46:09 Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, So the idea of that being an emergent property of human beings as we evolve has always been fascinating to me because there's there's certainly something that goes on with human communication other than we make sounds that represent objects and physical things. Yeah, and that the other person interprets those sounds and understands it. There's communication between human beings that's acoustic communication. Like the symbol rate, if you will, is really slow, like if you were able to consciously communicate you know, aka, you know the hokey term like telepathy, right, And It's funny because that's what a lot of people expouse that have had, you know, alleged contacts, right, And a lot of the people that doctor John Mack at Harvard study over the years where they felt like they were getting hit with like a QR code.

1:47:03 Speaker 2: It was like instant knowledge or they heard like somebody speaking to them nonverbally in some way that they couldn't even conceptualize through you know, acoustic communication or talk if you will. And it's the same thing like book Proof of Heaven by doctor Eben Alexander MD. I remember reading it when I was in Afghanistan and I was like, this is a crazy experience. This medical doctor has an necritizing fasciadis of the brain is a near death experience, and he gets this like crazy, like the feelings of love other stuff.

1:47:35 Speaker 2: It's a really interesting book. It's like a scientific take on a doctor's own near death experience. But when he came back and somehow the fasciitis didn't eat away his brain and he was cognitively normal, he tried to write down what information or facts of the universe he learned during his end, and he couldn't even put it in English.

1:47:58 Speaker 1: It was like crazy. He didn't know how to translate it into our language. It was just there was no like adjectives if you were adverbs, et cetera that could describe the knowledge that he knew like natively when he had that near death experience. It's a really fascinating book, and he talks about the disease he had and his physiological condition at a time. Really interesting.

1:48:21 Speaker 2: What was he able to discern from that? Like what was what was the overall message?

1:48:26 Speaker 1: Yeah, it was like this like the you know, there's the message of love, which that's positive, but it was like this interconnectedness. Everybody is kind of connected in a way that they don't really realize. I mean, you think about this is really trippy. A lot of thoughts with people who are smarter than me. I like to talk to them about this kind of stuff where if you're say, you know, a higher dimensional sentience, right, the act of creation? So act of creation for three D beings is having a baby, right, it's producing another three dimension object.

1:49:01 Speaker 1: Well, if you're in five dimensional space or even I guess four dimensional physical space, what if act of creation is creating other conscious realities in other universes and the act of creation is creating the universe where you me, Jamie, whatever we might be connected to the same, I'll call it universal consciousness or a higher dimensional sentient, life force or life form. I know that sounds like really out there, but when you think about it, there's a lot of other theologies out there that basically expous that.

1:49:39 Speaker 1: I have a very good friend of mine who's PhD level kind of higher up in the Mormon Church, and basically the Mormon theology is kind of like that. The Mormons say you were once with God or like God, but then you were sent down to like a lower plane of existence. And that's literally what I'm talking about right now, but just in a secular sense. So maybe we're all created beings from and this you know, this doesn't like hurt Christian theology whatever. It's actually kind of enforcing the fact there's a creator and we're literally created in the image of a creator, literally, and that's kind of what life really is.

1:50:17 Speaker 1: It's like, think about it's like a weird three D plus time temporal sensory experience for a higher dimensional sentience. You're here to experience time in this weird linear fashion and to experience yourself divorced from yourself, to gain knowledge and to report back is maybe what life is. And that's just kind of my own personal theology as a summation of just during COVID, I was really bored and that's what I was looking at.

1:50:49 Speaker 2: Well, I extrapolate that to the creation of AI, and I think if you think about human beings as something that creates things, I think ultimately we create a new life.

1:51:02 Speaker 1: Well, exactly, what if hire sentience is creating some kind of artificial intelligence you know, call it like a commander data from Star Trek next Gen, right, not even really it's made in the image of the creator in some sense, but it's not even And that's what might get sent into these like long endurance you know missions, And of course you know people are like, well, why would they you know, come here so far to crash, et cetera. Or are they crashing on purpose? Do you know that for a fact? Or are they crashing by accident?

1:51:35 Speaker 1: And what if they're like like von Neumann replicating probes, right, you can google that. But you know what if they're just throwaway which volume and probes are just like throwaway spacecraft, Like yeah, they're just we send it out we don't really care what the mission success is, or they're seating us, or as Jacques Valet says, it's like, you know, here's the key, can you unlock the cage kind.

1:51:58 Speaker 2: Of thing, right, And it seems that it would be a long I mean, if you think about biological evolution, so long, lengthy process, and if ultimately that led us to the creation of a technology that's far superior in terms of its capabilities of understanding and thinking, that seems to be what's happening. And that's one of the reasons why so many people are concerned about the term artificial intelligence is a very strange term because it's not artificial, it's intelligence.

1:52:29 Speaker 1: It's silicon based at a carbon based.

1:52:31 Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, it's just it doesn't have blood and tissue and cells. But it has something that's superior, but also something that's much more scalable, right where we have a very obvious biological limitation in terms of evolution. You know, if you look at evolution and we turn it back to the orangutans that are fishing, they're obviously learning new things, and those new properties for those newse things we assume will be encoded in their genetics and the past to their children.

1:52:58 Speaker 1: Do you have children. I have three dogs. We went the fluffy I'm a fluffy dad.

1:53:04 Speaker 2: Promise dogs don't learn from what they do. But one of the most bizarre things about children is that they have properties that are clearly uh, it's hard to say, right, because my children obviously have the example of my wife and myself, and they obviously see a lot of how we live our life, and you know, discipline and hard work and creativity and all those things. But there's also they seem to have gifts that are they seem to be clearly genetic and artistic, gifts that just seem extraordinary, that are unusual that I had when I was younger, that I was an illustrator.

1:53:47 Speaker 2: I have a young daughter that's just extraordinarily good at.

1:53:50 Speaker 1: Art, really illustrate. Yeah, that's what I wanted to do. I want to be a comic book illustrator. Oh interesting. Interesting.

1:53:58 Speaker 2: But then I have this daughter that's super gifted athletically, like she can learn things really quickly. It's extraordinary, it's and it's weird. And also this drive that she has. I had a drive from poverty and from you know a lot of like stuff that was wrong with my childhood. That seemed to be I had this need to prove myself. She doesn't have any of those problems, but she also has this insane drive. It's weird, it's a weird discipline, it's extraordinary. That seems to be very different than most kids.

1:54:33 Speaker 2: And I just think that's an emerging genetic I think there's something encoded in whatever you are as a human that as you replicate and as you have children, they have that they have some of that, yeah, you know, And I think that is this process, this biological evolutionary process with humans. But it's there's so much chaos, there's so much I mean, you could breed with a dumk person. You can find a hot, dumb person and have a baby with them, not your kids fucked.

1:55:04 Speaker 1: Yeah, and then we see that like this.

1:55:06 Speaker 2: Obviously, some people are just born with brains that just don't work that well. It's just like I'm sure you've met some dull minded people and you try to talk to them about things and there's no one there, right, So Okay, good luck and good luck with whatever children you have and whatever what what what are they going to have?

1:55:23 Speaker 1: We're genetically encoding artificial intelligence Now kind of I think that's where you were going.

1:55:29 Speaker 2: What I'm going with these biological limitations that we have. It's it's very clear that we're essentially dealing with a model T as opposed to a Tesla, which is just insanely superior to these ancient vehicles.

1:55:44 Speaker 1: We we create technology.

1:55:46 Speaker 2: I've always said this, if you looked at the human race, if you were some sort of an outside observer and you stumbled upon this, this thing that occupies this planet, this this apex predator of this planet, he would say, what is this thing doing? What's making technology? All the other things that it does, It does all these other things that also, but what are these things generally motivate? What do they move towards? They move towards the advancement of technology and innovation. That is a constant aspect of human beings.

1:56:16 Speaker 2: If you trace us back to the earliest civilizations to what we have today, things constantly improve unless something goes horribly wrong, unless there's some sort of a natural disaster or some sort of genocide. If something doesn't happen to these creatures, what do they do They consistently make better things. Well that if you extrapolate, if you follow that to its natural progression. Well, what is that going to get to. Well, once they've invented computers, and once they've invented devices, and once they've invented things that enhance their personal understanding of the world around them, which we already have now with phones, we already have with the internet, we already have with our ability to communicate with each other.

1:56:56 Speaker 2: The newest, latest Android phones that are coming out will translate natively on your phone in real time in conversation. So you could be speaking Portuguese to me, I would hear it in English.

1:57:10 Speaker 1: On a phone call, which is fucking war crazy. That's like universal translators.

1:57:14 Speaker 2: Literally, yes, literally literally, Well that is a real thing now without out of it, and to use Google Translate. It's native to the latest Android operating system. You could autumn if you just sit down and said, well, where's that going, Well, it's going to something way more sophisticated and way more capable than we are biologically. With our limitations are monkey bodies. We are the ancestors or the people that emerged from that distant cousin, that orangutane that's using a stick to hunt fish.

1:57:50 Speaker 2: We're going in this direction. What would be the most logical way we would completely accelerate that we create something that does what we do, but does it way better.

1:58:01 Speaker 1: Yeah, it's almost like to permanently harbor our consciousness eventually, right, right.

1:58:05 Speaker 2: And that kind of makes sense, right, it does make sense, And there's a sort of an understanding of that that leads to this fear of our demise that everyone you know, Elon's openly discussed this. Sam Altman and I were talking about it.

1:58:19 Speaker 1: What open ai is doing.

1:58:21 Speaker 2: What chat GPT four versus Chat GPT five, which is going to be insanely superior? Well, what is chat Gibt fifteen going to do?

1:58:30 Speaker 1: You know?

1:58:30 Speaker 2: Is that going to be the president of the world? You know, like, what are we going to bypass government and just say, you know, it's obviously like this administration is incredibly corrupt and flawed and influenced by the military industrial complex. It's not good for the world, it's not good for the environment. We need something that is far superior that doesn't have all these motivations. And what would that be That would be an artificial intelligent creator that we are a creation rather that we.

1:58:57 Speaker 1: Use the government life.

1:58:58 Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean that sounds nuts, but I think that's probably a better solution than humans with all of our fucking flaws and issues and greed and envy and all the things that we have, that that would be a better version of it. But what are we saying then? Are we saying that we're empathy into it? Though you know, probably not, probably not, which is terrifying. But we will become obsolete and or we will merge, and if we merge, it will completely change what we are. And I think that's very likely what's going to take place.

1:59:35 Speaker 2: I think the initial stages will be some sort of merging with technology, and then from that merging, it will essentially realize, well, why we even fucking.

1:59:44 Speaker 1: Around like this?

1:59:45 Speaker 2: This new thing is so superior, and it doesn't have all the pitfalls, it doesn't have all the problems. It's not short sighted. It's not going to drain the ocean of fish so that we can make sushi. It's gonna do something. It's going to be far more, far more aware of all of the different effects of each individual act and how we affect everything around us, and what is net positive and what is net negative, and how to avoid all these things.

2:00:15 Speaker 1: I really firmly believe.

2:00:18 Speaker 2: That we are this biological caterpillar that is making a cocoon to create the electronic butterfly.

2:00:26 Speaker 1: And we don't even know what we're doing while we're doing it. We're just doing it.

2:00:29 Speaker 2: And I think materialism is also baked into that. One of the main problems with human beings in terms of like the ridiculousness of our actions. We're so materialistic. People are constantly wanting to get the newest, latest, greatest thing. What's the motivation behind that other than social status. Well, the motivation is that that's what that's what fuels innovation if you do, like if we all just stopped right now it said, hey, you know what, iPhone fifteen is pretty fucking dope. We don't need to make new iPhones.

2:00:56 Speaker 2: Let's just keep fixing those and just like exist the way we are right now, and let's clean up the air, and let's clean up the ocean. Let's clean up the sea and clean up the rivers and clean up the forests. Like what does this fix the earth?

2:01:08 Speaker 1: Yeah?

2:01:09 Speaker 2: And then no, we don't do that. We know I want iPhone sixteen. You know, when when is the iPhone going to be able to communicate completely just with satellites, so I don't have to worry about cell phones.

2:01:17 Speaker 1: Well, it's almost like a drug addiction, right That did studies where people receiving in text messages is the dopamine rush too, So it's almost like an artificial drug addiction. You're fueling because you want the more responsive tech, more integrating with your make easier so you can get your fix quicker and more efficiently, or something like that. I don't know.

2:01:38 Speaker 2: And why yeah, well, I mean, why would fucking staring at a stupid cell phone give you a dopamine rush?

2:01:44 Speaker 1: Well, it does, it does, it does, I'm not a biologist.

2:01:47 Speaker 2: It and you get addicted to your goddamn phones. And then why would it be that we would innovate and create things like Instagram and TikTok that are insanely addictive to the point where you look down and you've spent three hours staring at nothing nonsense like what what?

2:02:05 Speaker 1: Why is that?

2:02:05 Speaker 2: Well that ensures continual use of this device until it lures you into this ultimate integration.

2:02:12 Speaker 1: Well, it's right where they there's people at oh Meta, I guess now, or Facebook, you know, where they actually have a whole team of scientists on how to make their apps more addictive, right, so demons, Yeah, yeah, I don't. I don't use social media. I have never tweeted in my life. Really, that's amazing. I mean I have, like I use Facebook back in the day when it first it first came out, when I was going to college. I yeah, I Instagram. I've never tweeted in my life. I don't intend to, because you don't want to get sucked into that mind virus, which is like, uh, people responding you and you have to feel like you have to respond back.

2:02:49 Speaker 1: I don't even Yeah, I don't even touch it.

2:02:51 Speaker 2: Well, I'm very aware of those traps, so I don't. I don't do that. Yeah, I don't. I used to, but many years ago I stopped interacting with people because I just realized, like overall it's negative, Like there's positive aspects to it. It's great for people that like you and their fans. It's great too that you're an actual human that you interact. Occasionally, I'll comment on a post like that's really awesome, congratulations, that kind of stuff, But then I get the fuck out of there and I don't read any responses.

2:03:16 Speaker 2: And I found that that's the very best way to mitigate all the negative aspects of social media. But then you're also dealing with algorithms. You're dealing with things that recognize what makes you more likely to engage, and so those things are constantly showing you the things that you engage, and you know, it's not necessarily even positive, it's just it's just whatever you engage with, that's what's coming your way. Whether it could be cool stuff like maybe you're just like really into muscle cars and it shows you a lot of muscle cars, or it could be like murder, Like I see a lot of murder on Instagram.

2:03:48 Speaker 2: Yeah, fucking crazy.

2:03:50 Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm a car guy, so like my feed is like, oh do you ever think about this mod for your Ford Bronco? Or those lights look nice? Why are that shit up next week? Yeah? So two, Yeah it's bad.

2:04:01 Speaker 2: Yeah, I have a problem with that. I have a car problem.

2:04:04 Speaker 1: My wife doesn't allow me to have the good stuff anymore, so I have to keep it under a certain price. So that's good. That's good.

2:04:11 Speaker 2: I'm more actually interested in old stuff than I am a new stuff.

2:04:15 Speaker 1: Do you like like rat rod stuff? Right? Well?

2:04:17 Speaker 2: I like muscle cars like this very specifically nineteen sixties muscle cars. Those are my favorite because what they are to me is it's a toy that you could drive. It's like a ride that gives me immense pleasure to just drive around and it's really fun.

2:04:32 Speaker 1: I don't even have to go fast.

2:04:33 Speaker 2: It's just going around in a nineteen seventy Chevell, just driving it. It's hard to describe for someone who has never experienced it, but it's just it's just so engaging, and it's like you're on this drug.

2:04:48 Speaker 1: It's like.

2:04:51 Speaker 2: It's like everything, you feel, all of it, and you're engaging all of these senses.

2:04:57 Speaker 1: Very tactile. Very yeah, I totally understand that. I mean, the only kind of old cars I like are like a black Lincoln Lincoln Continental Suicide stories from the Matrix. I remember seeing that when I was a teen, when The Matrix came out. I'm like, that car is badass. It's like totally I want like to have whatever Morpheus drove there are. They're essentially art.

2:05:16 Speaker 2: It's it's it's it's functional art, like you could it's a piece of art that you could actually drive around in and it gives you this very bizarre sensation. But the point is that, like, that's not most people. Most people want the newest, latest, greatest thing, and this there's a motivation to get the newest, latest, greatest thing that I think if you just follow that up to its logical conclusion, it's going to create life. It's going to create I mean, how many films have been made about this, you know, ex Machina and all all these different films.

2:05:51 Speaker 2: That's right, that's what we're gonna do. We're gonna do.

2:05:54 Speaker 1: I mean, there's no way we're not going to do that.

2:05:57 Speaker 2: It's it's if I had a bet on one thing, if the human race doesn't get wiped out by a media or a nuclear war, we're gonna fucking do that. We're gonna make a life form one and it's going to be almost instantaneously able to figure out all the flaws in its own personal programming and make a much better version of itself. If it if it's sentient, if it has the ability to make decisions, well, I think we're close.

2:06:20 Speaker 1: I mean I think I saw some stuff. There's like an open AI fiasco going on right now, and there's rumor that they might have cracked artificial general intelligence right agi and that's Oh Jesus, that's frightening. I mean it was like, was it sam Oltman, I think we're talking about I think there's like a board of open AI. There's some shuffle. I was just removed.

2:06:40 Speaker 2: Well, they removed him, but then apparently the shareholders like what the fuck are you doing? And there was so much outrage that they're trying to bring him back like instantly. So but but Elon had a very good point, like what was the motivation behind that? And when you think about the implications for the humanity as a whole, because this is such an emerging technolology that's so overwhelmingly powerful, what happened? Like what's going on? Like I think this is one of those things where like we need to know, like what was the motivation behind your decision?

2:07:11 Speaker 2: And if it was that he was holding back information about the actual creation of artificial general intelligence, but it's already it's already happened, And that he's like hesitant because he's a little cagey and how he talks about stuff. When I was talking to him about you could tell it's like a little bit like he kind of knows that he is at the forefront of this technology that the worst case scenario replaces us.

2:07:42 Speaker 1: Yeah, and you know, going back to is a program with any kind of empathy, et cetera, depending on if it handles critical I guess the thing I saw in the government, because I did a lot of cyber stuff in my career, is as AI gets more advanced, you you know, you create, say, offensive cyber tools that literally have a mind of their own, and if, say, theoretically, you release that on some target and you might not be able to touch that target again. So it's a one time whoop. You put it in there, Well, how do you control it?

2:08:17 Speaker 1: It's almost like Skynett and the Terminator. I hate to use at analogy, but like that was my fear when I was working at certain agencies working on offensive cyber tools. I'm like, oh my god, this is not good. And then of course with cyber right, it's the attribution actor. Attribution is the biggest thing. How do you know it was, you know, hypothetically Russia that used the cyber weapon to attack you? It could have been another actor masquerading as that foreign power, using tactics techniques procedures IP proxy operations to hide where it was coming from.

2:08:50 Speaker 1: So It's like you have a non kinetic fires that can potentially create mutually asshored destruction because you could take out critical infrastructure, blow up the power grid, et cetera. No radiation but potentially no attribution, or can you confuse the attribution such that you don't even know who to go to war with. It's really scary to me. So it is scary.

2:09:16 Speaker 2: Yeah, it's already happening with social media. Yeah, I mean, think about how many troll farms there are on social media that are just stirring up discontent. I mean, it's an active program that we know that Russia uses that is trying to undermine democracy and try to keep people fighting with each other. And it's been very effective. And if you look at social media, it's just fucking chaos. It's just people yelling each other, particularly Twitter or x you know that's in Facebook.

2:09:42 Speaker 1: It's like a lot of what's going on.

2:09:44 Speaker 2: One of the studies showed that out of the top twenty Christian sites that are on Facebook, nineteen of them are run by Russian troll farms. So if we know that that on a like relatively rudimentary scare scale, you look at the impact of social media versus the impact of artificial intelligence. They're already doing that. They're already hiding who's responsible and what's the what's the goal, and how to manipulate consciousness and how to manipulate influence and how people think about things and what the public opinion on things are.

2:10:19 Speaker 2: It's already very effective. You would imagine that a creation of artificial intelligence would radically accelerate that one hundred percent.

2:10:28 Speaker 1: Then I remember, the deep fake stuff was a real problem for my old community because we're like, holy shit, you could really fake some stuff, and you got to develop algorithms to make sure you can analyze, Oh, hey, that that is fake, because you've seen some of the deep fakes where it's like Obama or Arnold Schwarzenegger. Yes, the Tom Cruise guy. Holy holy shit is crazy crazy, Like you're gonna be able to bring actors from the dead back at this point, you're going to have like Carry Grant, you know, doing a musical or whatever you know or whatever you know.

2:10:58 Speaker 2: Well, Bruce Willis, who has some sort of degenerate generative neurological condition, sold his likeness for the ability to make commercials and all sorts of other things like he's essentially saying he's fading unfortunately, and now he will give this thing, which is this property, which is Bruce willis his famous person, and they will be able to create versions of him starring in films well.

2:11:27 Speaker 1: And certainly if you train an AI model, just like Chad Gpt, you could actually get almost like what they would normally say, yeah, their knowledge, and it's almost like having a permanent historian too. You could, like, you know, if you want to talk to Clint Eastwood about his films in the sixties. After Clin Eastwood, you know, passes, you know, may he live forever, but like that would be it'd be crazy, really interesting.

2:11:50 Speaker 2: But I mean he might actually be able to give you advice. He might be your personal advisor.

2:11:54 Speaker 1: I know, it'd be cool.

2:11:55 Speaker 2: I mean, that's probably one of the things that's going to come out of this. But when we think about empathy, we also think about just human beings and the way we communicate and interact with each other. Empathy is very important, and also compassion and forgiveness. All these things are very important qualities because we recognize that we are very flawed. But when you create something that is not flawed, then the need for empathy, the need for all these things that we attach to human emotions and human reward systems, they'll no longer be a significant issue because you're going to be dealing with something that operates on a higher plane.

2:12:32 Speaker 2: It might be the answer to all that ails us, which is so terrifying for us because we recognize that what we derive, the joy that we derive from love, from companionship, from friendship, from community, it's like a key component to life on earth for us. But it's also because we recognize that without that, we are the Mongols. Without that, we're Nazi Germany. Without that, you know, we're Hamas. Where whatever the fuck we are, that we recognize as being like evil or dangerous or horrible about humans.

2:13:06 Speaker 2: That when we think about the worst case scenario for human beings, we always think about things like the Holocaust. We think about what is the worst the worst acts that human beings are capable of with our current programming and our biological flaws, Like what are the worst things we could do to terrible awful things? Well, if we don't have those problems, if we no longer have envy, we no longer have greed, we no longer have evil. If we don't have any of those properties, they they don't exist anymore.

2:13:35 Speaker 2: We just have this new form of consciousness that's far superior.

2:13:41 Speaker 1: That's an interesting parallel because you have you know, you're no longer maybe apex sentience, if you have artificial intelligence, you know, governing certain things, right. And I think that's also kind of this psychological issue with this UAP issue, where we might not be the apex predator we have. We may be that mountain lion, and and we're going to have to be comfortable knowing that we're going to be vulnerable. There's people far superior that may have malevolent intentions maybe not, I don't know, and almost be humbled the fact that, like, sorry, we're not the smartest of God's creation and that and that might be really hard for a lot of people to process.

2:14:24 Speaker 1: And I think that's probably certainly I would imagine one of the deliberations they must have done years ago. We're like, oh, we can't disclose because you know, people are not going to feel comfortable in that worldview, and they're not.

2:14:39 Speaker 2: And then I wonder if these things that we're experiencing are the natural progression of what happens when you do seed life on planet, or you do accelerate biological life, you do have some sort of a genetic intervention where you take this thing that it has emerging intelligence, and you accelerate it, and that thing will in turn, with all of its desire for innovation and creativity and also all of its desire to control resources and have power and have influence, that it will eventually lead to the creation of.

2:15:16 Speaker 1: What we're seeing.

2:15:18 Speaker 2: That these things are the next stage of this process, and that maybe we're dealing with one form of that next stage, but there's another stage that's a million years more advanced than that, that's far superior, that doesn't even have a biological limitation in terms of physical space, That it exists completely in some other undetectable realm that is not no longer thinks about biological limitations of life and death and communication. It exists completely in some other space. That that's what these things are.

2:15:53 Speaker 2: And then I always wonder when there's a crash, or when there's a body, or when there's this that like and people saying, well, what if they're so advanced, why are they crashing? Well, hold on which what version are we looking at? We're not saying there's one thing that's visiting us. If there's one thing that's visiting us, and we know where this one thing is, we could say, oh, well, that thing it deals with a completely different solar system that's not as vulnerable. It doesn't have asteroid clouds, it doesn't have all these different things where it's like, it doesn't have a planet that has super volcanoes.

2:16:24 Speaker 2: Maybe life evolved in a more stable environment and it allowed it to get to a far greater technological level, but not the ultimate.

2:16:34 Speaker 1: You know, we might be testing the extent of their adaptability. And like I said, are they crashing by accident, right, mission failure or on purpose? Right? So? And then of course with the far distances and everything, I mean, if they're traveling here through some kind of space time metric engineering construct, you know, the distances are not as vast as you think, right right, It could be going through some kind of you know, traversible wormhole or something like that where it's like a walk down the street for them, it's not you know, a thousand light years.

2:17:04 Speaker 2: We'll just think about communication. Just our communication used to be you had to get in front of someone and they had to talk to them so you had to know their language, you had to either nonverbal or verbal communication, You had to figure out a way to say things to them. Yeah, that's no longer the case obviously with this new Android operating system. It translates. But also the fact that you could have a fucking FaceTime call with someone in Japan right now and you instantaneously can communicate back and forth, which is insane.

2:17:34 Speaker 1: That's a vast distance, but for us it's like stupid.

2:17:36 Speaker 2: It's like, yeah, easy, vast distance and we're tumultaneous. Yeah yeah, I mean I was just in Scotland and I was facetiming my daughter back home. Yeah, fucking crazy. You're nine hours by plane and you're having instantaneous communication, which.

2:17:52 Speaker 1: Is wild shit.

2:17:53 Speaker 2: But that's just that's fucking that's like pong, that's Morse code. That's like, it's very primitive in terms of what if you physically can be in these places instantaneous. Yeah, and why would we assume that that's not eventually going to be on the menu.

2:18:13 Speaker 1: Yeah, it's just like the conventional propulsion stuff for not using an Elon Musk starship to get here, it's like you're doing something else.

2:18:21 Speaker 2: We talked to someone from the eighteen hundreds, and you said, you're going to go to Nevada. Jesus Christ. You know, father is on a wagon. You know that's months, man, But no, you fly to Vegas. It's two hours. Yeah, it's fucking easy. You know, Like we know that now, So why would we assume that there's a limitation to that advancement?

2:18:40 Speaker 1: I don't think. Yeah, And of course a friend of mine, Eric Weinstein, certainly expouses we don't even have the right theoretical frameworks right now. You know, he has his own geometric unity theory, and yeah, he's way smarter.

2:18:53 Speaker 2: Than he's too smart, but he's confusing.

2:18:56 Speaker 1: Yeah, he starts talking and you're like, it's so funny. If he calls me, I'm like, you got to call me in the morning after my twenty four ounce Monster Energy drink or or I can't even keep up.

2:19:06 Speaker 2: Man.

2:19:06 Speaker 1: It's like he's on another level.

2:19:09 Speaker 2: He has he's got some unique theories himself about where all this stuff is coming from. And it's it's all very very very interesting and intriguing, but also makes sense. All of it makes sense, including being visited. You know, I had this conversation with Neil de grasse Tyson like, why would they be interested in us? I'm like, what the fuck are you talking?

2:19:29 Speaker 1: We're super interested? Yeah, Neil, I mean obviously he's a fine science communicator, kind of the success and successor of kind of the Carl Sagan kind.

2:19:39 Speaker 2: Of I think feels a little bit more open minded.

2:19:41 Speaker 1: Yeah. I like Carl better, but more of a f I wish he was still alive.

2:19:46 Speaker 2: I love I watched really yeah, really really.

2:19:50 Speaker 1: I remember my my aunt gave me Cosmos by Carl Sagan when I was in middle school, and it was that book was from the eighties, but that book tripped me out and I was like, I to study science, and I read it was Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking. And I read those two books when I was like in eighth grade, and I was like, this is trippy. I want to study astronomy. This is insane. But I ultimately used kind of my technical background to be a spook, you know, for the government. But I still observe.

2:20:19 Speaker 1: I have a big telescope and I live like super dark skies in Colorado, and I still have that boyhood fascination of the cosmos. Now, ironically, I found out something else that kind of confirms that the cosmos is not lifeless, and you know, God paints with a broad brush, as like the Vatican has expoused a couple of years ago when they said this is okay with their theology. I have a.

2:20:42 Speaker 2: Theory that the universe itself was God.

2:20:45 Speaker 1: I think that's like what I was talking about with the you know, multi dimensional creator creating universes.

2:20:51 Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we have a very limited idea of when we say God, when God created the heavens and right, right, but what do you what are we saying? I think it's the universe itself. I think it's one thing, and that this one thing it seeks to create these things that continually push the envelope and may be Gods themselves eventually. I think if you extrapolate from our ability versus the ability of an amoeba, and you continue to move that along, what does that do, Well, it's going to be able to create universes.

2:21:25 Speaker 2: There's already been like theoretical papers that have been written about the creation of other things like black holes, other things like a universe. So like, what what is involved in the creation of a universe, What is involved in the Big Bang?

2:21:41 Speaker 1: Can that be replicated.

2:21:42 Speaker 2: Well not now, but if AI becomes sentient and AI eventually makes far greater versions of itself, if it keeps doing that, like what what what are the limits of its potential?

2:21:57 Speaker 1: Creates the matrix?

2:21:58 Speaker 2: Let's create literally really creates a simulated environment that's indiscernible. You can't tell the difference between that and regular life. Well maybe because there is no difference. Maybe that is what I mean. That's the theory of simulation theaty.

2:22:13 Speaker 1: Yeah, simulation theory. Yeah, familiar, and that that is a possibility because uh, the universe seems like a little too perfect. It's a little strange, very created to me. So just like we're in the Goldilock zone, perfect temperature. Like it's just we're still about the big bang itself.

2:22:32 Speaker 2: What what happened something smaller than the head of a pin, for no known reason becomes everything?

2:22:40 Speaker 1: Yeah? Okay, And what's the universe expanding into? Right, It's like a quantum foam or whatever. Like the latest theory is that's like beyond me.

2:22:48 Speaker 2: And then it perhaps just retracts back down to that infinitely small thing and then expands again. Yeah, and that this is an endless cycle and that We're just so limited because of our biological limitation. Our life and death is such a small, little, tiny blip. It's so minuscule in terms of just the overall known life of the universe. And then you have the James Web telescope. That's you know, there's people that question the actual length of time that occurred between the Big Bang and now that maybe it might be far longer.

2:23:22 Speaker 2: And there's people like Brian Keating they say, that's not that's not correct. It's just a lack of understanding of what we understand currently about the creation of galaxies.

2:23:31 Speaker 1: The Yeah, because I mean, obviously the length of the age of the universe keeps on getting older and older, and a lot of that's because of the Doppler fit Doppler shift, right, the red shift. Yes, the galaxies are accelerating away. You know, we can calculate what the what their origin point probably was, and how long it took for them to speed up like that, right.

2:23:50 Speaker 2: And only based on our current understanding, Yes, which is obviously at least fairly limited in terms of what its potential is.

2:23:58 Speaker 1: Well. Yeah, like we still don't quite understand the origin of the moon. The moon is at the right location the cause of solar and lunar eclipses. It's like the right apparent size to block out the Sun. It's like super weird. Same thing with like Mars. We're not sure, like what happened near where Mars had some probable life on it, either a proto planet hit it or there was some kind of impact that vaporized stuff, and like who knows.

2:24:25 Speaker 2: Who knows, And this is just this little tiny neighborhood that we're looking at. It's like we are in our backyard looking for evidence of like life in Africa, you know what I mean, You're not going to figure it out here. So there's just we're just looking at it such a small scale in terms of what we could potentially discover or potentially observe. Yeah, I often wonder, you know, when we're seeing, especially with the idea of UAP's UFO crafts, if we're seeing a version of what we will become, or something like us becomes if given enough time.

2:25:03 Speaker 1: That that I mean, there's like a doctor Mike Masters at Montana State. He literally postulates, you know, he says time travelers. We could debate time travel, but like he thinks it might be like an advanced form of Homo sapien is what we're seeing coming back. Yeah, like a breakaway civilization and we're coming back to see an older version of ourself that was left on Earth or something like that.

2:25:24 Speaker 2: Well, the way we would visit like North Sentinel Island and visit those people that are trapped on that island that are uncontacted.

2:25:31 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, exactly. And then a lot of you know, there's also like cargo cult religions and stuff. You know, the South Pacific World War II, they worshiped the fifty one and stuff, like they thought those were UFOs, but really they were just us, you know, yeah, and I.

2:25:47 Speaker 2: Think we were probably alien to them. I mean yeah, I mean just look at how Cortes looked to the people that you know, had no idea that people could ride horses, Like, what the fuck is going on? These guys are riding horses.

2:25:59 Speaker 1: Yeah, these are gods, These white guys coming in.

2:26:02 Speaker 2: And they've become on a ship in the ocean and they ride horses.

2:26:06 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, exactly.

2:26:09 Speaker 2: Yeah, it's all based on our limited understanding. And for someone, whether it's the federal government or whether it's military contractors, for someone to have key elements that could give us a better understanding of this whole picture. It's it's really inexcusable to not relay that to all of humanity. So this is too much information to be secret. It's too important if it is real, it's too important for someone to have access to just because they have power and money and influence.

2:26:47 Speaker 1: Yeah, it seems insane. I mean, that's the whole primer for what I did. I mean, it's I you know, I think I'm a pretty moren ethical person. I just could not live with myself if I didn't try to like make a difference, even though it was very uncomfortable, Personal privacy and and you know, professional and personal health was at risk, you know.

2:27:07 Speaker 2: So it also seems like the public understanding and appreciation of these things, particularly after the twenty seventeen article in the New York Times, has changed. There's been a shift whereas before, if you would talk about UFOs or the idea of extratrustural life, you were automatically lumped into this group of people that believes in bigfoot. You know, it's like you're in the lock nest monster.

2:27:28 Speaker 1: You're kind of alone.

2:27:29 Speaker 2: Who likes fringe things because probably got problems in your own life you're not addressing and so you're distracted.

2:27:34 Speaker 1: It's like a gambler or something like that.

2:27:36 Speaker 2: You're just like distracting yourself with this craziness in order to ignore the reality of existence itself, which is so complicated and difficult to manage. And then I think that if we had a better understanding of the overall scale of the potential of life in the universe, based on what we know, like physical evidence, undeniable physical evidence, it shows us that we're not alone. That would be a massive change in just the overall shift of consciousness on Earth. If we could understand that these territorial disputes that we have, which are almost always over resources or over land or over religions and ideologies, if we could understand that these are nonsense in the vast scope of the universe itself.

2:28:27 Speaker 2: And this is the the was that effect that the people that get into the space station have an astronautics.

2:28:36 Speaker 1: Overview effect? Yes, William Shatner had that when he went up in the Blue Origin.

2:28:41 Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sure, I'm sure everybody has it. I mean, I'm sure it's just like you go like, oh my god, like what are we doing?

2:28:47 Speaker 1: Like this is one, and that's how I felt. I mean like, after I found all this stuff, I could have continue my career. You know, made lieutenant colonel here this winter, made senior executive service in a year or two, did national security stuff. But I'm like sitting in my office and I'm like, there's better things for me to care about than Russian troop movements. Like we're not alone, right, this is insane, Like I have to like pull the whistle on this. This is insane because certainly the people who we talked to are not lying, and the documents I meticulously went through they were not forgeries, they were not deception material.

2:29:24 Speaker 1: So it's just like I have to do something.

2:29:27 Speaker 2: I'm sure you've seen those Freedom of Information Act disclosure papers from the CIA. From god, it was like the nineteen fifties where they're detailing all the various forms of life and that we know are currently that currently exist. And you remember that, Jamie, we pulled up that document. Do you think you can find it, Jamie, You'll find it. But it's like nineteen fifty something where they were discussing these things interesting.

2:29:53 Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm not sure which ones you're talking about. I have to see them.

2:29:56 Speaker 2: So it's pretty weird stuff because like if they knew about this in nineteen fifty, like how did they know?

2:30:01 Speaker 1: Well, there was like CIA docs about consciousness and like weird remote viewing stuff. I mean, besides the Stargate program that we're released in the Foyer reading Room on CIA's website too, that are pretty trippy, where like, wow, CIA is looking into some really interesting stuff. I mean, they're a hardcore intel agency. What's going on there, But.

2:30:21 Speaker 2: It makes sense that they would kind of have to find out if that's bullshit or not, Like you can't ignore that if you're really doing your job, if your job is intelligence, Like okay, like let's look at this.

2:30:32 Speaker 1: Well, it's an aspect of the phenomenon because it's like a reach out from the crash Retrieval program like, Hey, I need you to look into some weird stuff because it might be the key unlock for something that we got in a warehouse.

2:30:43 Speaker 2: You knoweah, so whoa yeah, yeah, So as it stands, right now, what what's the future for this stuff? What's the future for these disclosures and what? Yeah, what are the bottlenecks?

2:30:57 Speaker 1: Well, I mean, certainly from the governmental prop you know, as long as the House doesn't kill the Schumer Amendment. And I'm you know, that's why I'm discussing it here with you, because if they don't pass it, it's going to be the greatest set back to humankind in US history. Literally that. So the Presidential Panel gets and paneled about ninety days or so after the passage of the bill, so by by Christmas, as long as it doesn't get killed, will be in the National Defense Authorization Act. Panel will be formed, say February March.

2:31:31 Speaker 1: Then they have a three hundred day process to develop a initial plan for the president. And I don't know if Chuck Schumer and his staff for being kind of crafty or whatever, but the three hundred days, if you actually do it out, it's like the election. So I don't know if they want to make it an election issue, which certainly if this act doesn't pass, I think it needs to be an election issue because the Senior Executive needs to rule on this. If Congress can't get their shit tother, it'd be quite honest.

2:32:02 Speaker 1: And we have a plan out to twenty thirty where this stuff starts getting rolled out. Knock on wood, perfect storm. Things could get delayed, but then in parallel. And that's kind of why I helped found the Sole Foundation with Gary Nolan, doctor Peter Scaife issues an anthropologists as well. Is we wanted to figure out the STEM outreach. We wanted to figure out the public policy, national policy to advise the US and its allies on this issue, you know, and we're happy. Like I said, I'm not here to slap the government in its entirety and monish everybody, Like I think there needs to be the truth and reconciliation process.

2:32:38 Speaker 1: But I think our foundation we want to be like, Okay, well bring us in as a think tank, if you know, based on my experience and experience of my colleagues, like you have an issue with X, well, let's figure out how to roll this out and how to you know, incentivize the National Science Foundation to look in this make this like you know, it's dual use, right, you might develop a unique scientific process that actually works well with nanobiology or something like that, but also has dual use with UAP.

2:33:10 Speaker 1: So there's parallel tracks. I mean, there's public discovery. It's like the Galileo Project with av Lobe, right that they're trying to on their own collect techno signatures, which as I applaud that, I mean, obviously the government knows a lot about that, but we don't want to obviously rely on the US government to do all the work for us and also to be honest. So I think having a parallel track, and you know, Galileo Projects Soul Foundation, Ryan Graves has his own foundation as well for pilots and people who've seen unique things to provide that data to people.

2:33:46 Speaker 1: So I think you got to have those dual tracks, and you know, hopefully we can create a tsunami event where the US government its allies and maybe the our avisaries. But really, if the US government doesn't get their house in order, he I mean, you could have uncontrolled disclosure events such that either maybe the non human intelligence is like, yeah, let's do it. Or what if one of our adversaries decides to disclose and they become the messiah figure on this and we lose sovereignty or national supremacy in that regard from an open and honest civil society perspective.

2:34:23 Speaker 1: So I but I think the governments were getting close.

2:34:26 Speaker 2: I think as long as before just the fact that they brought you in to have these conversations.

2:34:36 Speaker 1: Yeah, no, I'm I'm still advising the US governments on this, and and I'm trying to carefully message this, put all the broad things on the table, and I'm not trying to be coy. I'm not trying to be concealed anything. But it's like there's real national security and collateral damage with just releasing this willy nilly, And I'm just trying to get the government to get a plan together here and just be open and honest with the people of the world.

2:35:01 Speaker 2: Really so, and there's still the bottleneck with these military contractors that allegedly have access to these things.

2:35:08 Speaker 1: Yeah, and like to those guys and I know some of them, and the individuals that hold the keys, like this is a boon, Like this is don't look at it like you're going to lose money. This is a recruiting opportunity. Yes, you're going to have to let other people in the cookie jar. That's how a fair and free society works. And they should be able to compete for work. And because that was one of the main I talked to some individuals that were in an informal session for a previous administration on should we disclose or not for a former president and brilliant, insightful what they told me.

2:35:42 Speaker 1: And one of the biggest impasses to disclosure wasn't the ontological shock from a socioeconomic or theological perspective, it was, well, there's some white collar crime. We violated the federal acquisition regulations. We sol sourced this work to some big companies for decades. Tractors are going to litigate this to the Supreme Court saying they lost billions of projected income because they didn't get the bid on the work, and it's going to be this like liability disaster for the US government.

2:36:12 Speaker 1: And the problem with that is is like I understand that, but like, that's why you need to have a truth and reconciliation process. It's almost like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and post apartheid South Africa, where people who committed like murder came in and was like, this is what happened here you go and you know, they don't get convicted of those crimes. And I'm not saying I mean people who've committed murder as it relates to this subject, okay, we should probably hold them accountable.

2:36:37 Speaker 1: But for some of this stuff, there needs to be a process where we kind of mitigate some of those unfortunate legal issues. But that was one of the main issues. A certain group for a reasonably recent administration came up with and advised that president, Hey, look there's going to be a lot of Supreme Court stuff. Let's not be that makes me that guy. So it's like the like, that's the barrier, that's the reason. Come on, well, it's ridiculous. It makes sense though that they would think that way, because I do believe that lawsuits would emerge from something like that.

2:37:11 Speaker 1: Oh, certainly. It's and also it's like the government admitting that we can't protect its citizenry. You know, you know these non human intelligence you know, want to do something to you. Sorry, we don't ad encountermeasures to that. You know, it's like this, you know, there's a social contract between the citizens and the government. We can protect you, et cetera. And like in this case, it's like it's an enigma. But I think this is almost like remember like after nine to eleven. I was in high school wh nine eleven happened, and you know, people were afraid of dirty bombs, terrorists.

2:37:41 Speaker 1: We didn't we didn't know what was going to happen next. We lived in fear, but like you know, we banded together in the presence of fear and apprehension and unknowing what the world was going to be and we made it through it. Now, I mean, that's a course analogy to this, but I people just have to think mindset like, it's going to be a little scary. It's not going to be like Kumbaya, let's let's move the shit to Themithsonian and check it out. It's going to be there's you know, awkward and things we're gonna have to address sociologically.

2:38:13 Speaker 2: I guess are you optimistic about how all this lays out?

2:38:18 Speaker 1: I am. I mean it's kind of like when I was testifying in the public hearing oddly bipartisan in a good way. I had AOC and Matt Gates like agreeing on something and they were like smiling at each other. Okay, crazy, it's crazy, you know. I'm like, look at there's AOC, there's Matt Gates, there's timber Shat. I mean, there's like people Garcia, like people that wouldn't see eye to eye on most such such a human issue because they they want to know the truth too. And I don't think the leaders in Congress want to be told that they're second class citizens.

2:38:48 Speaker 1: I mean a lot of presidents weren't brief to everything. Some presidents knew a lot more than others. And I have a pretty good beat on that. And it's like, wait, the chief executive that also forms foreign policy, you don't tell him about a ostensibly a foreign element. So how do they as chief of state? How do they form foreign policy when you don't fully brief them on a foreign elements like classifying the existence of Russia? Right, So you're actually, you know, non constitutional by not allowing our commander in chief all information sometimes, you know.

2:39:24 Speaker 1: And I don't know what Harry Re talked to Joe Biden. I mean, it was certainly the substance that I mentioned here. And I hope that Joe Biden has been briefed on the program, so to speak. At least I'm giving him an oral, unclassified briefing right now. I guess if he hasn't been in you know, I'm happy to you know, talk to Jake Sullivan or Avel Haynes, and Avel Haynes if she's not briefed like she's supposed to be brief to all intelligence in the country, it's fifty US Code, Section thirty twenty four.

2:39:54 Speaker 1: The Director now National Intelligence has allowed everything from all federal agencies that's intel related. Well, ma'am, if you don't know what I'm talking about, we have a problem because you're not being briefed by CI director and some other agencies.

2:40:10 Speaker 2: So well, listen, David. I really appreciate what you've done. I think, thanks. You've done a great service to humanity just by taking a stand and communicating these ideas and letting people know how much of this is real. And you know, you've opened up a world of discourse that probably would not have existed if you hadn't done that.

2:40:36 Speaker 1: Thanks. Yeah, I mean this is not easy.

2:40:38 Speaker 2: I'm sure, so I appreciate it. Thank you very much for being here, and good luck in the future.

2:40:44 Speaker 1: Thank you, Thank you. All right by everybody,