Secrecy Among 'Legacy UFO programs' (Ft. Congressman Burlison)

0:29 Speaker 1: All right, everybody, welcome back to the Total Disclosure Podcast. Will repeal back the layers of secrecy and shine a light on the truth that shape our world. I'm your host, Tie, and today we're honored to have one of my favorite members of Congress and a true champion in the fight for transparency, Representative Eric Berlason from Missouri's seventh district. Rep. Burlason has been at the forefront of the UFO UAP discussion and investigation in Congress, working tirelessly alongside colleagues like Rep.

1:06 Speaker 1: Anna Pauline A Luna and Representative Tim Burshett to demand answers from not only the government, but from private contractors and the deep state apparatus that's kept these secrets buried for decades, from whistleblower protections to subpoena powers and beyond. He's pushing for a disclosure that can redefine humanity's place in the universe. In this episode, we're going to be tackling everything from advanced technologies hidden in plain sight, to potential interven interventions by non human intelligence, and even darker connections like to figures like Jeffrey Epstein.

1:43 Speaker 1: With that being said, I'd like to welcome my friend Eric Berlson, Rep. Burlison. Rep. Burlison, thank you for joining me. This is your third appearance on Total Disclosure, not including the recent meeting that I was. I was unable to attend with Robert Salas, but you you met with him, and I was a little under the weather. I couldn't make the hearing, even though I was invited by you guys, and it was it was I literally killed me not to be there. But at the first, the second hearing in with witnesses, the one that Alizonder testified at, I had brought Salas in to meet with Mith Mace and that had gone over so well that, you know, when you and I kind of got in touch, I wanted to do the same thing because the nuclear witnesses are something that's very close to me and it's a topic that I'm really passionate about.

2:52 Speaker 1: Huh. Kind of just starting off the show, how did that meeting go and how how did did it open your eyes to certain things? How was it to be briefed by Captain Robert Sallis of the Malmstroam case.

3:06 Speaker 2: Yeah, mister Sallas is an amazing human being. He's you know, and he and he's very bold. You know, he's put his reputation on the line. He's a patriot who served our country and and he's got a remarkable story. So it and he certainly was somebody that you know, he wasn't like a low level individually. He was pretty high up in his rank whenever the event happened. And to hear his story firsthand and to meet him firsthand was a real honor for me. So it was, it was, it was great. And thank you for helping to set that up.

3:42 Speaker 1: Ye oh, my god. And that's one thing I wanted to kind of start with because I I kind of know my place in the community. I have these discussions, I facilitate stories, and I facilitate people being able to talk. You know. Uh, we had a phone call the other night, you and I and I said, you know, I don't care if you tell me you're a vampire. I want to hear more right. I probably won't hang out with you past a certain hour, but or hang out with you at all, but I'm willing to hear you out right. And I think that's something that you and I both have in common.

4:20 Speaker 1: You know, we're we're not afraid of of people in the community being like, why are you talking to that person? Why are you talking to that person? It's something that I've really respected about you, you know, pretty much since I met you and since you started getting into this topic. How's it been. I mean, it's it's it's been about a year now, right, a little over a year. How's that been.

4:48 Speaker 2: It's a pretty steep learning curve, especially getting to know all the all the players involved, getting oh yeah, and everybody that's passionate about this topic. There's there's a lot of people. And then also you have the it's it's a very rich history involved in and so if you know, one can spend years just researching all of the events and the timelines of those events and locations and the details. And so there's there's quite a bit to you know, jump into. But I feel like we I've jumped in with both feet and have an open mind about it.

5:23 Speaker 2: And so it's been it's been quite a year and a half or more.

5:28 Speaker 1: Yeah, And and and looking back on twenty twenty five, you know, just to again kind of warm ourselves up into the conversation, how do you look at twenty twenty five as a whole now that you know, we're the first day out of twenty twenty five or in twenty twenty six. Now looking back on twenty twenty five for the UFO UAP topic and you know, broader, broader, some broader things. Where do you think we're at. Do you think we're in a good going forward? Do you think we need to change some things?

6:05 Speaker 2: I think we're in a good place. Obviously, there's more that we can do, and we plan to do more. I would say the successes that we've had in twenty twenty five or that you've got you know, you know, a lot more awareness from from the different branches of the government. So you've got more awareness from the intelligence community of this topic. You've got more involvement from the different from you know, the FBI and others that are paying more attention to these reports, particularly because you've got you know, it kind of overlaps quite a bit with with drones and so there's there's a lot of drone activity that's happening, and so it's kind of forcing the different agencies in the government to pay attention, to pay quite a bit more attention and to dedicate some sort of you know, surveillance equipment and research towards this topic, and I think that all of that is a good thing.

7:04 Speaker 2: And I think the hearings that we've had and the focus this last year has only elevated the conversation. I think having the the film Age of Disclosure come out has only elevated the conversation more. Having some key players like Marco Rubio in that documentary was is I think groundbreaking, and so I think that this year has moved the ball forward absolutely.

7:31 Speaker 1: I couldn't you know, I'll kind of skip ahead. I had this a little bit. I think I had this as my second actual written question. You mentioned Age of Disclosure, you know, in what many call the Age of Disclosure for UFOs and UAPs. What were some of your key takeaways from from the film from recent developments and what do you believe the broader implications for society, technology, global security will be going forward.

8:07 Speaker 2: I think one of the most remarkable conversations that I that I pulled from that was when Marco Rubio was absolutely when he was discussing the fact that people assume that the president is read in on day one, and I think he might have been paraphrasing what others have told him, and he and we often get we often get blamed for things like I often I'm in interviews all the time and I'll be repeating what somebody has told me, and it gets somehow reported is what I'm saying is fact when I'm just relaying what I've been told.

8:40 Speaker 2: And but at the end of the day, to hear from Marco Rubio in that documentary that the president is in essence and on a need to know basis is was jaw dropping for me. I think the other thing that was kind of a jaw dropper was when Clapper talked about I believe was Clapper was when he was talking about that that there was there was UAP activity over Area fifty one and that that was something that was being investigated. So the fact that You've got some major players that were coming forward, willing to come forward and test and provide their narrative to that documentary, I think was was really compelling.

9:26 Speaker 2: I think that Dan Farah did a fantastic job, and I think that he kind of kept it on track. Part of the journey of this process for me has you know, if you allow it, it'll take you down some rabbit holes that are pretty crazy. And I try to try to have an open mind, but sometimes you have these conversations and you think, how in the world did I end up in this conversation? And I but I think Dan Farah did a good job of just kind of keeping that grounded and doing a doing a great job and making it something that digestible for people that are that are not like you, who have been involved, you know, like knee deep in this for quite some time.

10:07 Speaker 1: Right.

10:08 Speaker 2: I think it was a fairly digestible documentary.

10:12 Speaker 1: Yeah. And and and you know, the community, and I think we should probably talk a little bit. We talked on the phone about kind of keeping this in a positive, you know framework. But there's a huge problem in the community that it's always like it's always a fight, it's always a it's like this Star Wars. I come from like the Hollywood world and you know, superhero movies, and there's no bigger uh in fighting than in like the Star Wars community and in the Marvel and D community.

10:50 Speaker 2: Right.

10:50 Speaker 1: And then I came, yeah, yeah, exactly, And you know, I come, I come over to the UFO side of things because of how toxic Hollywood is, and I'm it's almost like I've seen this before and I'm looking at it going, guys, where you're doing exactly if there is a deep state, which I think we can all probably agree there is, in fact, I mean I undoubtedly there is. Right, the people that are controlling the Epstein's, the Ditties, the Harvey Weinstein's, if that doesn't define the cabal, and if those aren't the same people that are suppressing the technology that you know we so desperately want, those are the people that are blackmailing presidents, right, lords princes like that is who we should be focusing on, not fighting each other.

11:44 Speaker 1: That this is what they want, and and that goes for every day like every day, everyday life too. They'd rather hear us fighting about gender and and and race when nine point nine percent of the time I go into the city, there's no racism. People are holding the doors for each other. What we see on the news is is just it's yeah, it's pitting us against each other.

12:17 Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a really good point. And unfortunately social media really exacerbates this because there's a lot of people that feel that it's they have this drive to get clicks and to get more people to follow them, and so they're willing to say outlay indish things and be rude and sometimes vulgar accrued on social media, and that it is just part of the game. I deal with it. I've been dealing with it ever since I got involved in politics. Unfortunately, it's just the way that human nature is.

12:49 Speaker 1: Yeah, I guess, but I guess just in a community where we really do all or at least I thought so, where we all have one goal in one commonality and that's total d disclosure, how we get there, I think is a concerted effort. But luel A Zondo is not going to be the one to run the ball across the goalpost. Neither is doctor Greer. It's going to be all of us. And I think that's what gets lost.

13:22 Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think that, like I will say, just you know, observationally, from my perspective, people are picking camps way early. I mean this is there's not enough facts in my opinion to pick one camp over the other. That's based on the time that I've been looking into this. I mean, choosing team griffindor versus Team Hard whatever you call it, huffle pop or whatever is. Unfortunately, that's what people are doing quite often in the space and what I would submit is that there are you prepared to be wrong?

13:56 Speaker 2: Right? And so I think that people, if you really truly are trying to find the truth, you need to be prepared to be wrong about at least some things, right, and so rather than but I think that unfortunately, what what these factions are doing is really digging people into a narrative that may or may not be true. And so, and I know and I think that they're they're you know, the attacks on anyone else who brings out contrary information is is not necessarily helpful for the for the discussion, for the cause.

14:32 Speaker 1: It's it's it's not it's what it is is day to day these there's people that like they live on h X or Twitter. I can't still I can't get used to that. But they live on the UFO Twitter, right, And that's it's it's it is what it is. I mean, you do you boo, But that's it's it's like the boredom of of of not something happening every day, Well, they got to fill the time with something else. So that's where they start poking and prodding. And that's my you know, observation as a as a as a as a someone who's inside the community.

15:14 Speaker 2: Oh, Tyler, I'm sure that someone's gonna take this podcast and they'll they'll be people will kind of storm, what's you know, find something that they can disagree about. Absolutely, it's just inevitable.

15:27 Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like that. It's like bringing back to my uh going full circle Marvel here. It's like Thanos. It's just inevitable, right, it just all right, let's uh, let's really get into some stuff here. Man again, you know what, I'll say it, you're my favorite member of Congress. I'll say it for the record. Uh yeah, you're my definitely my favorite member of Congress.

15:52 Speaker 2: I'm not my own favorite member.

15:58 Speaker 1: Berchant. I love you, I really do. Paulina Luna, I love you too, But I don't know, I just have a good connection with you.

16:08 Speaker 2: Man.

16:10 Speaker 1: But Representative, you've been deeply involved in the UFO investigation on the Hill. Can you share your thoughts on how staffers uh can sometimes act as gate keepers speaking of it, potentially filtering or blocking critical information before it actually reaches said Member of Congress.

16:32 Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that. Look, I've spoken about this once before, so but I've kind of under underscored this point. Is that a lot of staffers. They enter the hill and they start off with the entry level role of being maybe an intern somewhere, and then they move up into being a course some in some form of correspondence, and they they kind of work their way up to being, you know, like maybe a legislative director for for member, whether in the House from the Senate. But then they all really see the big kind of like golden, golden parachute or no, not gold is is eventually becoming a lobbyist.

17:12 Speaker 2: And there's no better path to doing that than going through this being a committee staffer. So once they get on a committee, they're they're on their staff in that committee, and then eventually they'll get picked up by some by some firm and get some clients and there, and then they're able to afford their second third home, all of that kind of stuff. Okay, that being said, the I know for a fact because I've I've had conversations with staffers who have said to me they would prefer that I go on X y Z committee because at the end of the day, it gives them more career opportunities after the fact.

17:49 Speaker 2: So that I've talked with, I've spoken with staffers who will jump to different members because it because of the committee that that member might be on and what kind of doors that it might open. And so if that get kind of paints a picture of where staff and what they're thinking is. Now, let's talk about the UAP topic. This topic does not benefit anyone in politics. It's it's there's no real win here. And so if you're a staffer, you really don't want to spend any time whatsoever on this topic. It's a distraction from getting you into because look, there's not a lobby firm that's hiring on this topic.

18:29 Speaker 2: So any kind of effort or time that's spent on this is is not necessarily in their motivation. If anybody that is motivated to, it's out of pure personal interest. And so I have I hire specifically staff that do have an interest in this because because at least for right now while while I'm investigating this as part of this oversight committee, you kind of you try to hire staff that are that are going to be helpful. But but I don't know that that's the case across the board. So that being said, the other aspect that that that we have to deal with is turf.

19:10 Speaker 2: So we often have you know, these committee staff who have got the purview of you know, whatever top so the committee staff for the Intelligence Committee, or the committee staff for the Armed Services Committee, whether in the House and the Senate. In some cases you've got some some turf that's being protected by the staff on appropriations. So all of that sometimes that will come to play, and if you've got a topic that that maybe they don't want you to be working on, that you'll see some opposition outside of this topic.

19:47 Speaker 2: For example, when it came to the when we were doing the one big Beautiful Bill, you definitely it was a lot more difficult to pass because each committee staff was not going to give up up their domain of a particular area. So as a result, you ended up having to parse up or cut up the bill into multiple in the multiple pieces and then assign those to the different committees of where they've got their purview. And that what that means is that every committee has to has to pass their section in order to make the entire bill work.

20:24 Speaker 2: That if that gives you an idea how difficult sometimes it is to get anything accomplished in Washington, DC. A lot of it has to do with egos, a lot of it has to do with turf and and that's why it's so difficult sometimes to get anything done. And I've experienced that firsthand with trying to get the UAP Disclosure Act put on to the National Defense Authorization Act, or or get even getting the bill you know, heard independently and getting it to the floor has has all become difficult because there's because there's multiple committee that have jurisdiction.

21:02 Speaker 1: Mm hmm, yeah, in your experience, how can we how can we ensure is it? Is it what you do? Is it by just hiring people that are interested in How can we ensure that whistle that you know, the whistleblowers and the key intel make it directly to decision makers like yourself, like Luna, like Merchant without interference? Is it by hiring interested folks and dedicated folks.

21:29 Speaker 2: I think it's got to be under the direction of the member. So the elected official really is the only person that's going to put pressure on the staff to move something one way or another. So I think I would say the public should pay attention to who where the gatekeeper keepers might be and be willing to pick up the phone and call those offices and make it clear that that this is important for for you, because it's not. It's this is a topic that's not important to I mean, sadly, it's important to politicians or their staff.

22:03 Speaker 2: So the only way that it's going to become important is if people call and and and write their congressman or their senator to make it important.

22:11 Speaker 1: Absolutely kind of shifting gears here, you know, because that makes total sense. It's it's got to be on the member and and hey, if any member out there needs help or you know, an advisor, I'm willing. I'm willing to do it. Uh, you know, I got some media training and uh a journalistic background. Just you know, let's go.

22:36 Speaker 2: I think you want to live in d C.

22:38 Speaker 1: No, I don't know. I don't, but it would be close to the action. And there's something that is a little nice about that if anywhere, But I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I've been wanting to someone just sent in a chat about it, and I was going to ask you guys this anyway, So he just interstell Uap said, do Congress in the intelligence community take Chris Bledsoe's the lady prophecies? Seriously? In what role do you think this could play in UFO disclosure. I want to just hold that right there because I did have a question that I wrote about that, and so I don't know if you know, but respected individuals like Chris Bledsoe in his book Ufo of God predicted that when the star of Regulus aligns with the gaze of the Sphinx, humanity will enter a new stage of consciousness.

23:39 Speaker 1: Others in the community discuss potential world challenge world changing events tied to non human intelligences. Have you heard this and what is your take on these types of dated predictions, and you know, do they align with anything that you've heard in congress? A lot of people talk about twenty twenty ses Evan, this is specifically Easter twenty twenty six, and when they did the after he was told by this entity the lady that that date was going like that. When the she never gave a date, she said, when the star of Regulus is in the gaze of the Sphinx.

24:19 Speaker 1: So astronomically they did that. They did it out and it just the the star of Regulus is a red star and it's bright red. So she said, the red star of Regulus when it aligns with the gaze of the Sphinx, humanity will enter a new phase of consciousness. So that is on that happens to be Easter twenty twenty six, which is Easter is like the It's really critical to his story. He has a very religious framework on this, and he's been visited by NASA, the CIA, Jim semi Van and the CIA, NASA, Travis Taylor.

24:57 Speaker 1: You know, people that have very very interesting backgrounds have been paying attention to this guy. Have you talked to him?

25:07 Speaker 2: I've met Chris Bledsoe. I've not. I've not heard this prediction from him directly. I haven't. This is the first t Ii'm hearing about it. I probably need to take some time and pick up his book. But I've got a lot of things I'm working on. Surprising this this occupies maybe two percent of my workload. I hate to say that, but like we've got health care issues in America, We've got all kinds of other things that are in Minnesota. Yeah, in Minnesota. So that we Oversight Committee will spend an enormous amount of time investigating this latest round of fraud efforts.

25:50 Speaker 2: I'm on the Doge Committee. We spent a lot of time on that but but yeah, Chris, he's a he's a really really kind and gentle person, really great to be around, and I and I I enjoy him. He's a he's a nice person. He's so I've been. I went to dinner with him after I'm trying to remember if it was after the hearings or before one of the hearings. Went to dinner with him and some other people that are kind of in a way that they're kind of grit Chris Bledsoe groupies and and I'm saying that in the most like, you know, they're they're good people too, but but they kind of that.

26:29 Speaker 2: But they're all friends together. So I didn't really know them very well, but they wanted to have a conversation. So I just happened to have the evening open and we went to dinner. And I didn't know who Chris was. I learned about about his you know, his story and what he what he claimed to me that he was able to actually communicate with and that he had like the ability to to communicate and call in U a p S. And so I asked him, so, where where does this happen in the desert over the water, you know, where can this happen over a city and he said anywhere, And I said anywhere, anytime of the day, at night when And he said, you know, pretty much anytime.

27:13 Speaker 2: It's easier to see it at night. And I said, what about right now? What about right here? Right now? And I and I said that because I have been, you know, this last year and a half or more of being involved in this topic, it gets pretty frustrating to hear lots of stories, to hear people's first hand accounts, and yet not have any kind no receipts, no proof, nothing. And so I asked him if he would be willing to demonstrate that we we went on the Capitol Mall after a few hours. I gave him a few hours and nothing happened.

27:50 Speaker 2: But you know, but then I was told that a few weeks later they went to the exact same location and I think they recorded it was on Ross caulth Arts Show. They actually released some some videos that they had taken from their cell phones of some objects that they reportedly according to them, that they called in with Chris. But I was not there, so I can't confirm that that was the case. All I can tell you is that I gave him a chance went out with him and nothing happened. And so that's all I know, if.

28:31 Speaker 1: I'm being fair. I I was at Contact in the desert and Bledsoe was there. I actually introduced him at Contact and Desert to the stage. I had the pleasure of introducing him. And he's someone that his story does resonate with me a little bit. But he so that that aside, right, you know, because he was he was at contacted as they did a SkyWatch and it's in Palm Springs. There's a lot of things moving in the in the sky, whether it's satellites. Again, I think it's a little bit. It's a when they do it like that.

29:16 Speaker 1: What Chris says is if there's anyone that's a non believer in the group, it will affect the Yeah, so you know, again.

29:27 Speaker 2: I'm the non believers. That would be me. Then I was the non believer. But I'm willing to I was willing to see and and to and and was willing. But but if that's the case, then I guess I might. I guess I gave some bad juju for that moment.

29:42 Speaker 1: Did you tak you tainted the ex.

29:46 Speaker 2: Maybe it was me?

29:48 Speaker 1: No, No, Eric it's not you. It's not you because that contact in the desert. Uh. And then they do them on the beach a lot. But there are people, so I listen, maybe take this at take this for what it is. Maybe go I would say, maybe I can work it. Maybe I can work this out. Actually, maybe you and I could go to Chris's home. He's invited me to his home. People from Nasev gone there, like like I said, the CIA have gone there. And they even the show the Skinwalker Rant show, the spinoff one that's a little bit more scientific in my opinion.

30:31 Speaker 1: The guy Bustamante and the other guy, they they they did this thing where they put like EEG on them and he was went into meditation and you know, he went into a meditative state that is only achieved by like monks and like really practiced meditators, and he did it like that at least maybe that's how the editing showed it. But he did it really quickly. And then when his brain went into the alpha like or whatever it's called that the theta, I think it's the beta, he orb started coming through the trees and they did catch us on film.

31:06 Speaker 1: So these big spectacle part parties that they do where they charge people to go out. Again, that's where it gets a little tricky for me. Greer's done that kind of stuff. It seems more about something else. I'm not saying that about Chris. I'm not saying that about anyone, but I will say that that seems more gimmicky. But the stuff that's like really really interesting, I think is a very more localized thing. And he's also said things like one of the more what I find to be a little bit even more interesting is the fact that he also mentioned that a divine revelation would happen where non human intelligence might intervene during conflicts like those between Israel and Iran.

31:55 Speaker 1: He literally said, when Israel and Iran start trading missiles, that this non human intelligence, angelic, not alien, whatever you want to call it, was going to intervene and then make themselves known. And that's going to happen what I think you said in the next year two as well, and that it's heating up right now. Although that's like that, I don't know, I don't know, what do you what do you think of these things?

32:23 Speaker 2: I don't really pay much attention to prophecy. I mean, if it comes true, that's really fascinating. But I don't really and maybe this just comes from the being a Christian and having so many people get it wrong about you know, the date and the time that when when Christ is going to return. Usually that date comes and goes and nothing, nothing happened. So I don't. I just don't really give a lot of lot of credence to it.

32:52 Speaker 1: But fair enough.

32:54 Speaker 2: But you know, if it's if he, if he, if he hits the nail on the head and gets it, you know, right, then good for in.

33:01 Speaker 1: Yeah, I guess that. I guess it's something I just think for for my my own perspective. I I always tell people like if you have a date, if someone if some because you know, Chris looks at it like he's a very religious framework, like that Christian framework. If I'm not mistaken, it's the you know the lady, the lady in white, right, She's not she's not a non human intelligence, So to say is what he thinks is she's like uh shath or or like that. I don't know. It's it's kind of crazy when you actually get into it.

33:37 Speaker 1: But I I just say dates, you're better off not saying it because then you know, God forbid, you are a good faith person and you you want to contribute to the community, and then you put a date out there and something doesn't happen, then you lose all your credibility, like all of it with with one day. So move on from the Bloodstoe stuff. So, whistle blower David Grush and I know we have a couple of things in the chat to get to as well. The Lakatski thing is something I really want to look at. But whistle blower David Grush has been working with your offense in twenty twenty five.

34:17 Speaker 1: Can you give us an update on that collaboration. Have there been, you know, secure compartmented information facility briefings? Do you have details on those names, dates, lists of hostile versus non hostile witnesses yet?

34:33 Speaker 2: Yeah? I do. I mean it's been quite a year. David has been extremely helpful, particularly in kind of navigating the intelligence community. He helped us directly write the interrogative letters that that we ultimately ended up sending just before the before we had the hearing this last year, and and then and he's helping us write some more different other agencies and private companies. So he's been helpful in that regard, also helpful in kind of evaluating witnesses and providing insight because he's interviewed most of these people in his official capacity when he was employed with the federal government, so he was able to give that kind of insight also about you know, some of the players even that have not been whistleblowers yet he's bringing he has brought to us that he is that he's working on a potential new witness that seems has seems to have a tremendous amount of potential, and so I'm excited about that, but it could fall through at any point, So I don't want to get people's hopes too high.

35:47 Speaker 2: But we do have we do have more witnesses and potential whistleblowers to come forward. He's he's introduced me to some people that and set up some meetings and conversations with people that have we're not willing to go public, and those have been pretty interesting conversations. Again, I'll say, nothing that has produced receipts, but but at least it's kind of helping kind of flesh out what we're some some different perspectives as well. So David also was helping our staff with the UAP Disclosure Act language.

36:25 Speaker 2: I also have Danny Sheehan that's working on that. So Danny is kind of working to evaluate. You know, since we didn't get it put into the bill, we've got some time to kind of re evaluate that language that was originally written by by Grush and cooperation with some others, and and I think that language was was what Chuck Schumer ultimately kind of settled on. But there's there's there we might be able to tweak that language to be a little bit more grounded in a way in which we're not allowing gatekeepers to to stop information because I think that one of the criticisms of the of the Disclosure Act language is that if a president really wants to stop something from happening, that they could appoint a board of people that are committed to not releasing any information.

37:16 Speaker 2: Now you've got Senate confirmations, and I think that the Senate would would kind of have some say in that. But at the end of the day, we want to have as much authority in the hands of Congress as possible because we've we know the executive branch has a history of not being fully transparent, so so Gresh has been really helpful in a lot of ways to our staff, and I'm glad that we had him on. He's still he still sometimes speaks a language that I don't understand. And what I mean is that there's so many acronyms and and different departments and agencies and even like forms and software that that is part of the vernacular of people in the intelligence community.

38:00 Speaker 2: But but but I'm getting just now getting used to.

38:05 Speaker 1: Interesting. Interesting and Okay, So Rep. Luna spoke about a couple of not even maybe two days ago. Rep. Luna spoke about some sort of threat or event that took place before a skiff meeting. If you don't mind, could you follow up on that. I'm very interested obviously.

38:30 Speaker 2: Right, so you never know what was going on, But we had a remote briefing where Grush was was at a different location in a skiff. And there's there's a technology that allows us to do basically what we're doing right now, like a type of zoom type.

38:49 Speaker 1: Skiff the skiff communication.

38:51 Speaker 2: That's right, Yeah, And it's and it's very I don't know what, I don't know, but it's highly encrypted, highly secure, and and I'm sure that the Federal Gunment has enough confidence that that it is secure. So and you have to use very particular devices. You've got to be in a in a location that is really secure as well. And and so because for convenience, Grush went to this one location and on his way there he he had I think it was a road rage incident, but someone basically flashed a gun at him when driving on his way to to the to the skiff.

39:33 Speaker 2: But you know, it could be anything I once had. And a lot of times you kind of see things, you see shadows where they aren't really shadows, so it could have been I kind of chalk it up to that it was just a road rage incident, because yeah, what you're.

39:53 Speaker 1: Saying is it could be it had nothing to do with Grush himself, like being a U faux whistleblower. But it was more like road rage, regular road rage and someone who's just because I've had that, I haven't had a gun pulled on me like that or flash to me like that. But I've had people follow me, you know, and I don't go on I don't go on the air, and and I'm like, oh, yeah, I got followed by uh the f No, you know, I accidentally cut or what he thought cut off. So you're saying there's no definitive evidence to suggest that that was related, But that could also be exactly what they want, right, Yeah.

40:33 Speaker 2: That could be I'll give you like. And this has happened to me before. So years ago, when I was a Missouri state representative, I sponsored a bill that's called right to Work. And right now, anyone who's one of your viewers or listeners is now imediately not gonna like me. And that's but who is union? So this is a bill that the state's sponsor that is part of the Taft Hartley Act. It lets it lets individual members choose whether they wish to join a union or not join a union. It's up to them, and at the end of the day, I'll move on.

41:07 Speaker 2: But it is a very controversial bill, and it got me a lot of death threats, and I mean a lot of death threats. And I to the point where they would call my wife, they would find out who my wife was, they would call her and tell her that your husband isn't going to live through Christmas, things like that. And in the middle of that time period, I was driving down I forty four headed home at night from Jefferson City, and I had a pickup truck go flying past me, you know, probably more than ninety miles an hour.

41:38 Speaker 2: Then they hit their brakes, came back up to me and did a pit maneuver on me and spun me into oncoming traffic going seventy miles an hour on I forty four. The Yeah, the truck had Union bumper stickers on it, and it and so as a result, as you can imagine, it makes you think, oh my god, they really did try to kill me, or someone from from the Unions really tried to kill me. But it turns out it was just an individual who had who was high, who had taken some some either meth or fit and al and and they not only hit me, but they hit about four other vehicles as they were like ping ponging down the highway.

42:20 Speaker 1: Sounds more like meth to me, right to sleep, Yeah.

42:27 Speaker 2: But the end that's like to me, that's when you're in the heat of things and you've got and you've got all these threats happening, and you know, there's a lot of intensity and there's a lot of scrutiny around things. It can cause you to kind of jump to conclusions that may not be necessarily true.

42:42 Speaker 1: It become paranoid, yeah, you know the straight I mean, getting a death threat. It's something very spooky, and not a lot of people have had an app I would say a small number of people relative to the population size have gotten a death threat. And even if you know it's something like on the internet, it's kind of like a rite of passage if you get a death threat, Like if you're a public person and you get a death threat, it's like a rite of passage, ironically, and it's most likely meaningless, but something does change in and I can imagine being someone like you or David Grush, or someone who's living with this kind of burden.

43:31 Speaker 1: MM could because then everything I mean, if you if you're not able to balance that paranoia out, I mean you could you could go down. You could spiral pretty easily if you if you weren't sound of mind, of course, like you guys are so that that that's terrifying. But I'm glad to glad to hear that that that you know, nothing actually happened. I'm glad to hear that. So is Grush going to be staying on in twenty twenty six?

44:06 Speaker 2: I don't know how how long in twenty twenty six, but we've got some more activity here in the next few months. And so as long as Gresh is willing to stay on and provide value, we'll be keeping him on on my at least on my staff.

44:20 Speaker 1: You guys on on weaponized, You guys. And when I say you guys, I mean you know what I call the trio, you burrel Lesson, not you, well, you bur Lesson. And then Rep. Luna and Rep Burchet, you guys went on weaponized. And I have two things. But the first thing was you guys talked about how there's no current plans to have any future hearings right now because you just don't think that it would actually move the needle? Is can you elaborate on that?

44:57 Speaker 2: Yeah, I would say that we've the wit or the potential people that we would bring forward at this point, I don't know that they would move the needle. And so that's why I think we're kind of there's a lot of conversations that we can have behind the scenes that we to just kind of continue to fact find and gather information. But I don't know that we should go about the effort of of of doing like a massive public hearing. Again, when that, I don't know that we would we would accomplish moving as we said before, moving the needle the what I do.

45:34 Speaker 2: So, but we're going to be looking for different witnesses. We're also looking to get access to some files and some documents that have been very helpful from one of the whistlers that has not been in a public hearing, which is Matt Matt Brown. Hey, yeah, Matt Brown, great guy.

45:52 Speaker 1: Maculate constellation for anyone who Yeah, for anyone who doesn't know,

45:58 Speaker 1: do you mind explaining who Matt Brown is?

46:00 Speaker 2: Yeah? So he was. He was someone who was working in the intelligence community, had access to some files and was able to see some things that that see a document called Immaculate Constellation. We had a reporter, Michael Schellenberger, come forward in the in the hearing that that Nancy Mace chaired, and that was and he was essentially providing information that that he had gleaned from his conversations with Matthew Brown. And now but now Matthews has come forward publicly, He's shown his face and I think he did it on Weaponized and so and so now we can we can we can talk about it.

46:48 Speaker 2: But he he's been extremely helpful in in providing some detailed information that we that we otherwise would not be able to track down. So I appreciate I appreciate his effort, and really everybody who's been brave enough to come forward.

47:04 Speaker 1: Yeah, and you know that brings me to this this question, so you have this is from Christians for Ironically, Christians for UAP Transparency. Eric has said that they don't want Lakatski to testify because it wouldn't be anything new. Grush didn't say anything new either. Wouldn't you want his testimony to be on the record and blow up the headlines? Now, I will also caveat that by saying that Lakatski has set on record that he will essentially lie under oath. I'm maybe I'm taking maybe I'm misquoting that.

47:53 Speaker 1: I hope I'm not, But I'm almost certain that he said that he would he would keep the like he would have to lie under oath, he wouldn't be able to tell the full story, or he would just you know, do the whole You know, we have to talk about that in a skiff thing. So what do you wouldn't the cats? He wouldn't he be somebody you wanted to bring in.

48:17 Speaker 2: I'm totally open to talking to him or anybody really if there if there's something that we can glean from that conversation, and if he's willing to come forward and we can provide some new information in a public setting, that's fantastic. I think the reason that we haven't really spent a lot of time and focus in his direction is that he has publicly said that he won't tell us anything that isn't already in his books.

48:43 Speaker 1: Oh that's right, yes, And.

48:46 Speaker 2: So I don't know, I mean, that's kind of a frustration we had. We in fact, we did kind of reach out to him through I kind of we did reach out to him through Jeremy Corbel to see if he was willing to come forward. And I'm not sure where that where that where the kind of fallout happened, but at the end of the day, it didn't matriculate to an actual, you know, interview and the and so look, I I'm open to talking to him and if he's got more information to share, maybe maybe if he feels more comfortable doing it in a secure setting, because a lot of a lot now a lot of them are are looking for that before they can, or at least you hear this a lot in the testimony.

49:31 Speaker 2: They'll give it a public setting. They'll say I cannot say that outside of a secure setting, and people.

49:37 Speaker 1: Are kind of people don't want to hear that in a hearing.

49:39 Speaker 2: Again, No, I'm sick of it myself. And because then it's hard to actually get him in a secure setting, because you got to then I got to go through the all the hoops of getting the different committees of purview to that. So if if that person signed an nda A with with the Pentagon on, then you got to get House Arm Services and maybe the Intel Committee to like sign off on letting that person provide a briefing to us on the topic. So it becomes a big hassle sometimes to get people into a secure setting.

50:15 Speaker 1: That was right, That was right. Christian tom Thompson said that it was Admiral Wilson that said he would lie under oath and that was from the Eric that the Wilson Davis memo, which you are familiar with, right, Yeah, when when you guys had so actually another thing you guys have had doctor Eric Davis in some sort of not a congressional hearing, but some sort of congressional I don't know what you would have called that, but it.

50:46 Speaker 2: Was a form or something.

50:48 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, And he was talking about different types of alien civilizations. Why did no one Why did no one ask him about the notes.

51:00 Speaker 2: About the notes about the.

51:01 Speaker 1: Memo that he's most famous for. Oh, Admiral Wilson like Davis, like I just I was like, why did anyone take that chance?

51:10 Speaker 2: Maybe maybe we didn't have that conversation there, but we have had that conversation with him in a a in a separate meeting in a secure location, because we have had a meeting with with Eric Davis and a skiff.

51:24 Speaker 1: Interesting. Well, he said that if he was able to get a presidential pardon, not a presidential pardon, but like a whatever it is when they commute you of your NDAs, like presidential whatever, like a blanket parton to get him out of those NDAs, that he would tell you, guys, everything is that something Obviously the right the the Republicans need to kind of win the midterm that's for such things to be possible. But could you see a situation where Trump actually does like if he wants to leave a legacy, it seems kind of a no brainer that this is the topic to do it with.

52:14 Speaker 2: I mean, it's to you, it is. I don't know that to Trump this is a you know, a topic that is top of mind for him. I think it has to become top of mind before he takes action. And I think that I'm not I don't speak for the president. I'm just I'm just kind of relaying what I'm getting a sense of from people that are that are immediately around him that it's not exactly a top priority and and there's a sense that this may distract from other objectives that he has, whether it's domestic policy or foreign policy.

52:52 Speaker 2: And so I think that if if given the opportunity, and if he knew that it was, would that the public was extremely interested in it. I think that Trump has no problem with the disclosing or what I've requested specifically is that he do an executive order that's similar to the one that he did with the JFK files, because we've we've actually gotten some pretty good new information on that topic, because because Trump did an executive order demanding those files be released. So I would like for the and I've I've requested that from the White House staff.

53:30 Speaker 1: But we'll see interesting. So the huh, okay, that's and then that's that's that's fair. That's fair. So we just have to you know, I think I think because on the campaign trail, whenever asked about it. On like the the podcasting side, I think this is the first election that featured podcasting as like a real means to speak to the masses, because the legacy media is just not the way it used to be, maybe never was. I I'm not sure I'm.

54:06 Speaker 2: Going to take like a Joe Rogan or Sean Ryan or someone that has that, you know, when Trump was campaigning and and they I believe that Rogan brought it up.

54:17 Speaker 1: He did.

54:18 Speaker 2: I think it's going to take that kind of level of inquiry to get Trump to respond. And I hope that Rogan.

54:26 Speaker 1: Can you guys just show him Age of Disclosure. Just get him in a private theater.

54:32 Speaker 2: Wh he has time to sit still for that long?

54:36 Speaker 1: Yeah you got. Yeah, we got to do like a congressional watch party of Age of Disclosure.

54:43 Speaker 2: Yeah, we so, Anna and I and Tim Burchett were invited by Dan Farrah for a pre screening and we did see it before it was released and The New York Times covered that.

54:55 Speaker 1: Wow. Yeah, and I so again, it's just like I feel like age of disclosure. What was a good I thought that because there was talk of a Presidential Advisory Board or investigatory board after that film came out. Was there any truth to that or was that just kind of speculate, speculative community stuff.

55:19 Speaker 2: I'm not sure if they're if they're looking to put together something else. I know that there there is investigations that are occurring, uh that with within the within the federal government.

55:30 Speaker 1: Well, the FBI as a U a P thing now too right, I.

55:37 Speaker 2: Can't I can't really speak to that that that and I couldn't really say that there it's it's a U a P group. I think you would be I think we would all be ignorant to believe that they're not called in to investigate sightings and some of which might be end up becoming or into as a U a P. But you know, the FBI is their interest is making sure that the the airspace in the United States is secure, and whether that's drone incursion or or or other that it's something that they that they that they're called tasks to investigate.

56:19 Speaker 1: Yeah. Fair enough, fair enough, So I wanted to ask something. It's a bit it's a bit heavy. The Epstein files have revealed a web of influence across government left and right, seemingly covering up something much larger and darker. Why do you think that Epstein was so interested in figures like Eric Weinstein? Eric Weinstein? Why was he so interested in free energy and cracking advanced technologies?

57:01 Speaker 2: It could have been just a private interest. Look, I mean, clearly the guy was a pervert and he had a very dark nature to him. What I think that people tend to not like go into a social setting with people that they don't know or that they barely know, and just announce to the world what their proclivities are if they've got some kind of dark right, I mean, that's just is obvious. And one of them, I'll say, politically, like when you when you get to the point where I'm at, where you just you've encountered thousands and thousands and I mean tens of thousands of people, one of them is either many of them are criminals and you can't vet everybody that you talk to.

57:44 Speaker 2: That being said, a lot of them. I think that there is a weird instinct to some people that know that they're going down, like that they're doing something criminally wrong. There's a weird instinct that some of them have where they want to with want to get close to a politician or to like someone of influence, because if they know they're going down, then they want to kind of they want to create those relationships to for for what might happen. So or if you know you're going down, then you then you try to create an image of some you know, some something that's like on the to kind of like.

58:26 Speaker 1: Look at me, I'm working with the government, you know, like I'm I'm I'm a member of society that's not a total loser.

58:33 Speaker 2: Right, Look at me. I'm I'm donating money to all the yeah, to these charities and to the you know, I'm try investing in science and discovery all that stuff. I think that that while it may not be something that they put together as a formalized plan, I think that that's part of the motivation behind some of the efforts. And it could be that he was following some of his other interests. I mean, he clearly was a guy that was interested in being around some pretty heavy thinkers and scientists and quantum physicists, and and and I actually I wish, I wish that I was able to spend time with some quantum physicists.

59:15 Speaker 2: That's a topic that I can never get enough of. I think it's pretty awesome.

59:18 Speaker 1: But well, all right, and hear me out on this, he like hear me out apparently, so again I said this earlier. Is it not obvious in the sense that the people that are controlling the Epstein's right, the ditties, the Harvey Weinstein, that's film for anyone who doesn't know those people are, that's film, Hollywood, that's the music industry, and that's the financial world. Right, And then we go on to look at religious we know it's there too. We don't have to, you know, I live in Boston where it was uncovered with with a certain church, so I don't have to get into some super specifics here.

1:00:10 Speaker 1: But am I the only one that's like, hey, wait a second, guys, the people that are controlling those that are honey potting and essentially blackmailing the most important and powerful public facing people. Ninety nine out of one hundred people will tell you that the United States President is the most powerful person in the world. Right, If if you've got a guy that's blackmailing him, the most powerful person, who do you think is controlling him? If that's not the deep state, if that's not the cabal, and that's not the same people that are suppressing this sort of technology, technological advancement, that have these that Daniel in Away right Hawaii you send it her from was also part of the Gang eight, spoke about this shadow government that operates with its own army, its own fundraising mechanism, its own agenda, It operates above the law.

1:01:12 Speaker 1: And you know, we've never heard of them. We don't know those people because they want it that way, right, these are are we not dealing with the same thing? And I feel like people in the UFO world they just they don't want to make the tie because it's it's it's dark, it is dark. But those same people, could that be the breakaway civilization kind of thing as well? Doctor Michael Masters has talked about it. You know, this cabal if they want to keep that technology secret, they want the rest of the world living on fossil fuels and taking planes that that haven't been upgraded, our aviation transportation, our grid, it's it's all very crude when we start looking at what they might have in some of these bunkers.

1:02:08 Speaker 1: So, I mean, have you thought about this?

1:02:12 Speaker 2: I don't know how to answer that. Those kind of there's a lot there to what you just asked.

1:02:18 Speaker 1: Do you understand why I asked a question? Let me try to There was actually no there was no question there. My real question is are you does it not make sense that all of it connects, that all of it seems to have a a the bubble seem to overlap.

1:02:41 Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm careful in this regard that the older I get, the more I realized that it's dangerous to try to connect things that may not be connected. I think it's a natural tendency to try to connect things and to look for a commonality that's kind of creating that that's connecting things. I'm not saying that they aren't connected. I'm just saying I don't know that I don't know. I'm not jumping to that conclusion. I think that with Epstein, to go back to that, I think the part of the problem is you've got some major major political donors and people of influence who whose names whether they were you know, part of the the perverted actions or not, or they were part of a cover up or not.

1:03:33 Speaker 2: They there name, they at least had enough interaction with with Epstein that they don't want their names and their reputations harmed. And they're gonna they're absolutely going to have influence over over whether that information is released. They're gonna they're going to make phone calls, and they're gonna try to protect their their their reputation. So I think that that's something that's at play now. I think, separately the com conversation about about, you know, if there's some kind of technology that our military contractors have access to, and if it's if it's being if there's people that are kind of gatekeeping that information, I think that's a whole that might I think it's a separate topic.

1:04:21 Speaker 2: But I have spoken with people that claim that there is a breakaway civilization, that there is kind of this dark, very dark agency within the government. I don't know. I don't believe that to be the case. Again, I'm open if somebody wants to bring the receipts, then then let's talk about it. But to me, it's really highly improbable that you've got so many people working on some of like something like this of this scale without having without having some evidence come forward.

1:04:57 Speaker 1: Okay, fair enough, I mean I suppose fair enough. But

1:05:06 Speaker 1: you know, there was a question that was asked that I was supposed to get to and I forgot, So I mean, I'm gonna get to this. In a moment here, Jeene Sticko asked a question. This is something that an age of disclosure was also brought up to though I don't know if you remember it, but Rubio, something that Rubio said that in that film that I really like that really stuck with me was that you'll have like you'll have Senator A, right, and Senator A will work with a private contractor. Materials will get transferred and then you know, the private contractor is you know, they go to work on it, and then the next you know, the next site election cycle that senator is is you know, whatever is not there anymore gets voted out, gets beaten an election or his term you know, uh, he steps down, Like not likely to be the case.

1:06:12 Speaker 1: But anyway, the second person that comes in, they have even less, probably half the knowledge that the first senator did about the original agreement, and then go down the line. So the private contractor just seems to have to wait out people in government because you know, again there there's those people are coming and going where the private contractor is not. So you know, when Rubio said that, I was like, wow, that that makes a lot of sense too. So do you think that materials have been transferred and then you know contractors might be taking advantage of of the democratic nature of our situation.

1:06:57 Speaker 2: I have no doubt that that happens across the board, whether it's this topic or other topics. And I have no doubt because when with the DOGE effort, that's what we were able to uncover is a lot of the things, the ways from abuse that they were able to find has to do with the fact that you've got decisions that were made from previous administrations or previous selected officials who passed something, maybe it was a government program, it was purchasing a software system, and then they move on and forget about it, and meanwhile we're paying we're still paying the licensing fees for software that has never been implemented, just to give my example, right, and so the so the problem is those contractors have no problem taking the check and continuing to operate, and in fact would prefer that no one remembers that what they're supposed to be doing.

1:07:51 Speaker 2: So I think that there's no doubt in my mind that that happens and probably does happen within our military contracts as well.

1:08:02 Speaker 1: That's so sad too, because.

1:08:05 Speaker 2: No, as a taxpayer, it's really awful. I mean, when you saw how much waste that was uncovered, I'm disappointed that we weren't able to actually codify more of the DOGE cuts. And look, I don't care if you're a Republican or Democrat. There was a time when Bill Clinton and Al Gore put together an effort that they is essentially DOGE of its time in the nineties. Yeah, and they had some really bold things that they were suggesting, things like consolidating the ATF into the FBI in order to save money and overlapping resources and scope they I mean, there was a ton of suggestions that they came up with because they were trying to make government more efficient.

1:08:51 Speaker 2: And sadly, I think that we become so partisan and political that even the most obvious things that we would we should all have a ninety nine percent agreement on end up becoming divisive, and so the DOJE effort, sadly was one of those and and hopefully we can move on. But but but that was I think one of the things that they fully uncovered was that a lot of these programs that end up becoming almost eternal. I mean, Ronald Reagan famously said, the closest thing to eternal life that we'll ever see on this planet is a government program.

1:09:30 Speaker 2: So sadly, politicians come and go, but the government programs tends to say and and it's and you imagine how big the government is today. There's not a single one person that can come through and know where everything is going. And so because of that, it's just that things get lost in the weeds.

1:09:49 Speaker 1: Absolutely absolutely couldn't agree more. My friend, so Jane does ask here, and Jane was a part Jane was. I know, Gene, he's a good he's a good guy. He was a part of just the intelligence community. Uh is also a veteran. He asked, how does how has the Department of Energy and Pentagon compartmentalization hindered oversight of US and Russian including the Soviet era reverse engineering programs, including the late nineties technology transfers.

1:10:31 Speaker 2: So I think that the the DOE is an agency that has probably not been looked at very very much, and I think that that's a that's an area that we really need to be focusing on at this point. So there there doesn't appear to be a whole lot of oversight over the Department of Energy and the and the the secure programs within the DOE and that, and I think that Tulsi's team is trying to change that. They are they're trying to get at least some more oversight from the Office of Inspector General into the Department of Energy, and so hopefully there's some there's some success that comes.

1:11:13 Speaker 1: Out of that progress. Yeah, are you guys doing anything different in twenty twenty six? How are you guys going to shake up you know, this this this hurdle that the UAP Disclosure Acts has enacted, you know, going forward? I know we talked about it a little bit, but how how can we get this pass? What are the steps that are going to need to be taken by numbers of Congress like yourself and by you know, ordinary citizens.

1:11:48 Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that there was some progress made in these last few months and weeks leading up to the passage of the National Defense Authorization Act because we had some success a year ago in the Senate getting it added on on temporarily, but it really was never fully considered by by the House or really the full Senate as well. So but now I will say my team we when we were going into the when we were going coming out of the shutdown, we we were calling

1:12:23 Speaker 2: or actually it was right before we went when we were coming out of the shutdown that first week, and then we were getting ready to we passed the appropriation bill to fund us to the end of January, and then we took our scheduled week back home at the week of the Thanksgiving period. During that week, I was on the phone with nearly every every person that I that would take a phone call, and I mean like the ranking member, the chairman of these committees, and and my team was working with their staffs and I and I think we made a lot of progress because we we we got a lot of people that were not aware of this bill just saw it as as this huge because the amendment is very it's a large amendment, and it's something that a lot of these committee staff are not familiar with.

1:13:11 Speaker 2: And so we got a lot of familiarity established in the in the this last Thanksgiving period so, but I think it was the problem is that we we really didn't have our finger on who who was the obstacle. Now, I think we've got some time and this is a topic that over the next year, hopefully we can get some some some approval early on to have this language added, hopefully in the early stages of the of the progression of the bill. I would love to have it added in committee before it even goes to the House floor, so that we can really lay the groundwork and get and have a good chance of passing it.

1:13:56 Speaker 1: Awesome. That's that's a that makes me like, it makes me really happy. I think something that I think the I mean, do you think you'll have to concede any language like eminent domain or anything that gives this this act teeth?

1:14:15 Speaker 2: I hope not. I hope not. Yeah, but that does not appear to be right now a red flag for others, and and I'm hoping you not make it a red flag.

1:14:27 Speaker 1: Okay, and then of course at least.

1:14:30 Speaker 2: There's very few people that have brought that up.

1:14:34 Speaker 1: Okay, Well, yeah, I think that that's fair. The people that I'd see having the most problem with it are probably the ones that we should be looking at SO.

1:14:47 Speaker 1: But I mean there are guys like Jacques Vallet who have raised concerns about it, and that's because he has collected material. So he said, you know, what does that mean for him as a private citizen with these materials. You know, he works with doctor Gary Nolan and and has the is He's turned over a lot of these materials to Gary Nolan.

1:15:13 Speaker 2: And I would say an easy way to thread that is to say, if the federal government gave you material to investigate and and we don't and now we no longer have access to that, it's time to give it back. I think that's a simple way of putting it.

1:15:30 Speaker 1: I like that. I like that, I really do. In the past, and I think even in past hearings you've referenced UH claims of Lockheed Martin transferring non human technology to government programs like ASAP. Have you received any new briefings from aerospace in aerospace companies on this and what and what and why can't have it? Read my writing here?

1:16:02 Speaker 1: What is the U A U A P Caucus planning UH to send to compel answers from firms like Lockheed or BAE Systems or you know, include private contractor here.

1:16:16 Speaker 2: Well, we have we began with the Aerospace Corporation and then and then we'll continue to send interrogatory letters to other agencies, to other other contractors as well. So that's that's that's what I spoke to earlier, that some of the next steps that GRESH is working on.

1:16:36 Speaker 1: So okay, okay, so and and in these letters, it would just kind of state that listen, if you've been given something by the government, well.

1:16:48 Speaker 2: The letters kind of the way that we're setting it up is that we begin by saying we want a briefing. We want the Oversight Committee would like to have a have a formal briefing and a skiff and and we're requesting that briefing and and we're specific and then then there it's accompanied with the details of what the topic is and what we what we would like anticipate them, you know, bringing forward into that meeting if and then we can follow up with more direct letters after that. But that's the there's a strategy that the committee staff have that you know, the GRUSH is working through in order to get in order to get some of these answers, and that that's that's kind of the process.

1:17:35 Speaker 1: Interesting, interesting and I'm very interested to see how some of these these companies react to that. I although I I you know, I I I think I think as long as you guys remain committed and and I see a bright future in that In that regard, I don't know why, but you know, I could be wrong. I could be wrong. It's the optimism in me. What can I say? Listen? Eric Hecker is someone that I've spoken to on the show here. He's left a couple of comments that he wanted me to ask you about.

1:18:14 Speaker 2: Yeah. Uh.

1:18:16 Speaker 1: He he said that he briefed your team or made efforts to brief your team and just hasn't heard back. So he worked for Raytheon at the Antarctic Antarctic region that the station, and he is claiming that he had found evidence or or has evidence knows things that there is a weapon. There's a weapon in Antarctica and it is posing as a neutrino detector. H and and so have you have you spoken to him?

1:18:54 Speaker 2: You know?

1:18:56 Speaker 1: I mean, we we know there are things like directed energy weapons. We know that there are these systems that have been developed and might be private, they'll breach national security. I'm a I just want to know. Have you have you looked at that claim because it you know, if we are looking for contractors to tell us what they know. I mean, he did work for right down, he was at the wee Can. He's shown all that I mean, So, is there is there any future plans to look at this.

1:19:37 Speaker 2: So that the task force is not focused on things that are not I mean task force is focused on the JFK assassination and disclosure of that, and the and the RFK, the MLK assassination, the Epstein list, as well as the UAP topic. This is kind of tangential but not really part of the u AP topic, which is why it's it's an intriguing story at this point. It's a story, and so I I was willing to and I did speak with mister Heckler Hecker Hecker, Eric Hecker, I spoke. I spoke with him as probably a Bredian slip.

1:20:22 Speaker 2: I spoke with him for quite some time. We had a long conversation with my staff over the phone, and it was it's a remarkable story. I again, I kind of fall into the bucket at this point. I'm I'm I'll listen to your story, but I'm not going to believe you until you bring receipts to the conversation, and so and so that's kind of where where that conversation has ended. Okay, I'm open if he wants to bring some some form of evidence or proof. I think if I recall the conversation, he was he was challenging us to take a trip to the Antarctic and go busting in and I'm not about to do that.

1:21:02 Speaker 2: That's Oh, that would be the probably the biggest wild goose chase, potentially wild goose chase that that I could put. So I'd like to have some evidence before I continue investigating that.

1:21:15 Speaker 1: Okay, Yeah, that's I I don't I can't say that's not fair. I mean yeah, I mean that I don't know. If you know, the people of Missouri, uh would be like, hey, you know, Berl said, what are you doing in the in the Arctic? What does that have to do with anything? But I mean it is a place of very very high how do you want to say it? There? There there's very interesting things that I think, you know, I've heard about Antarctica and just the history of the of the continent and great to visit.

1:21:56 Speaker 2: I just I just I'm not I would be very hard to justify taking using government dollars to fly down there, and I'm certainly not going to go on a campaign fund. So so just more evidence. There's gonna have to be some kind of evidence that's going to have to surface to justify that.

1:22:17 Speaker 1: Fair fair enough, fair enough. You've also so you've spoken about the need for short term amnesty to encourage insiders, you know, from the actual UAP programs, the legacy programs, to come forward without fear of prosecution for NDA's or related crimes. Do you believe this could reveal evidence of

1:22:45 Speaker 1: human trafficking or financial misconduct tied to these programs and how would you structure such protections.

1:22:53 Speaker 2: Yeah, it could be a real possibility that that has been a narrative that you know that this narrative that is kind of common within it's part of the zeitgeist that you have a form of child trafficking of children that have some kind of ability that that is. But I'm not so. What we don't want to do is create a scenario where you have someone that really was a human trafficker that had nothing to do with this topic coming forward just so they can just sell immunity on some of the things that they were doing.

1:23:32 Speaker 2: So yeah, so that's why I'm leaving it up to in my bill, the UAP Disclosure Act, really leaving that decision up to the discretion of the board that's being created, so they would determine people that are coming forward, if they if what level of amnesty that they would be willing to give them in order to get the information from them.

1:23:57 Speaker 1: Okay, very very interesting. I have a and again, you know, the child trafficking thing, and again it it's again, it's it's really dark. And I think, like again, we have to be also not only do we have to be humble and okay with being wrong, but we have to be okay that if this gets a little dark, I would be surprised if it didn't.

1:24:27 Speaker 2: We have to go there, sadly, Sadly it's it's there's there's real evidence of child trafficking and and and some of which is related to the sex industry, and some of it's related to organ harvestings. Sadly, there's it's just really it's tragic in today's world, in today's modern society, that this kind of evil still exists. But yeah, it's that's one of the most disturbing things. In fact that the movie that recently came out, Sound of Freedom, is one of the most heart wrenching movies to watch that kind of covers this topic.

1:25:11 Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's fucking crazy, it's fucking it is it's part of my language. But it makes me, it makes me sick, but it makes me motivated.

1:25:24 Speaker 2: And sadly, and sadly, there was a lot that was related to having an open border over the last four years. Yeah, because there's there was a lot of children that are being trafficked across that border, and there are a lot of children that we admitted like that we and I say, Alejandro mariorcis admittedly lost in the process. So we have I think it was somewhere around eighty thousand children that they could not account for. Not to say that they all ended up in the sex trade or organ harvesting, but but that that create when you have that much confusion and that much happening, it's it's pretty that's that creates the environment for for some of these evil people to operate.

1:26:12 Speaker 1: So we need to be careful with amnesty.

1:26:15 Speaker 2: We do.

1:26:16 Speaker 1: We need to be careful, but you know that it is it is, it's it's going to be something I've always said that, you know, even since twenty seventeen and when Lou came forward, I always did say that, you know, we were going to have to meet halfway, Like we can't just be like we're going to put you all in prison, but tell us what you know about the programs, Like we're gonna have to meet them halfway, but they also need to be able to prove to us that they were involved in said program. Right, Yeah, that's fair enough, fair enough.

1:26:52 Speaker 1: You know you you you played a video in the recent hearing about it was the hell Fire missile and it bounced off of some sort of orb craft looking thing. Yea, you you were given that video what hours before the hearing? And you know, have you seen things? You know, have you seen other things like that that that would really make a dent in the community, have showed or dent popular haven't.

1:27:21 Speaker 2: I haven't yet seen any any new videos we have, As I mentioned before, we have a list of of videos that we're seeking and we're requesting, but I haven't. I haven't had my eyes on anything since that.

1:27:37 Speaker 1: That one was interesting. Uh, you know, how what do you see in that video?

1:27:47 Speaker 2: I don't you know, honestly, I can't really I can't ascertain exactly what it is that video is revealing. I mean, and I haven't gotten a clear answer as well. So the fact that there isn't really any anything anybody coming public with a clear answer as to what it is is it kind of it leads to the mystery. It continues the mystery about what was happening in that video. So well, there's funny I've heard that, I've heard like what people think it is what it's probably but it's but but there's but they also have no definitive proof of what of that as well, So I just can't.

1:28:32 Speaker 2: Yeah, Also, what I was hoping to happen from that A you know, I very much anticipated this could be a moment where I,

1:28:44 Speaker 2: you know, kind of what like what happened with Lou with the with the photo that of the of the agricultural rings or circles, right. I think Lou did that in an attitude of trying to be trans parent. But when you do that, you're taking a risk when the alternative is to is to sit on it and fully vet it and to and and then be confident about what you're getting ready to release with one hundred percent certainty. The problem is we you know that. I think that's where why we have the problem that we have today.

1:29:20 Speaker 2: We have an attitude of of that that where people are not releasing things. And my my position was, look, if I sit on this, I'm never going to find an answer here because this video was not some I don't have the capabilities of of of using I don't have the technology to evaluate whether it's an AI video or or what it is. And at the end of the day, I did I didn't claim that it was something more than what it is. I just simply said, this is the kind of stuff that is an elected official. I'm getting people are dropping files anonymously to to to some of us members of Congress and then and so rather than sit on it, I chose to release it and let the public decide what's what the video is about.

1:30:10 Speaker 2: And so I thought it.

1:30:12 Speaker 1: Was pretty But I honestly, I I thought that the last hearing that you guys held was probably and I'm not saying this to like stroke anyone's ego or you know, do anything like that. I really did think because I was at I was at the others this one I watched at home, and it was like it was the most electrifying hearing I thought, I in my opinion, I think it was the one that you know, I know, David Gresh made a huge splash with his but this hearing, I think with the topic, you know, slowly distigmatizing and some of that stigma shedding away.

1:30:56 Speaker 1: The Dylan Borlins, the George Knapp, Chief Wiggins. I thought, you know, Chief, there was a lot of things that you know, he's an active duty member of the Navy, So for them to let that happen, that was pretty amazing.

1:31:12 Speaker 2: Yeah, it was. It was a great hearing, and and I thought that some of some of their first hand encounters were pretty remarkable and so and these are highly respected individuals. So sadly I wish that they had taken their camera phone out and filmed what they saw. But we are right now, we're just kind of left with their narrative. And I think, you know, at the end of the day, I don't doubt that, I don't doubt what they're saying that they believe they saw, and I think that they they they saw things they believe you know, was either I think we had in that hearing alone, you had a rectangular shape object.

1:31:56 Speaker 2: You had the the triangle shaped UAP as well, and then you had the glowing orbs that were described in that hearing, So.

1:32:07 Speaker 1: All kind of watching everything.

1:32:09 Speaker 2: Yeah, all three of those witnesses really kind of had different experiences, and and I thought that they were that. I thought they were honest. I just don't know that what they saw is exactly what they think they saw. Oh, that kind of I'm not going to jump to that conclusion without seeing it myself or having.

1:32:29 Speaker 1: Oh of course. Yeah. And that's why again, that's why I have the respect that I do for you, is because you're willing to talk to anyone, but you're not going to you know, quote unquote unquote jump into a camp. Right, That's that's just not who you are. And again I really really respect that. See. Look, Streamyard change my camera. Just for the record, we talked about this before the show, where it changes your equipment halfway on the fly, on the fly without you knowing.

1:33:03 Speaker 2: Yeah, I was in I had my audio source change on the fly in the last stream Yard that I did.

1:33:09 Speaker 1: So yeah, with guy, hopefully.

1:33:12 Speaker 2: The people of stream Yard are paying attention and they'll have a bug fix.

1:33:17 Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a member of Congress. Guys, come on, and by the way, I wasn't going to bring this up, but did I never talked to you about this. You know that our last episode, the one that we did, our last it got deleted from YouTube for some reason. I did not delete it. It got deleted from YouTube. So let me say that again. Someone asked me for a copy of it, and I went, what do you mean, why do you need a copy of it? And they were like, it's it's not on your page anymore. It's on the audio the audio podcast.

1:33:48 Speaker 1: But they were like, we want the video and I was like, it's on YouTube. And I went back. I start looking. I'm like, wait, what the hell where is the video? And I swear it was deleted. I have and I there was no I emailed YouTube, no response back. There was no indication that I had ever deleted it, or that there was ever any copyrighted material used that would have gotten it taken down, because they communicate that with you. Nothing. It was just gone. It was very, very weird. But anyway, as we round out, you know, because I think you know your time is of course super valuable.

1:34:35 Speaker 1: I'm super super thankful to you every time you come on the show, and we have something planned for in person. We won't talk about that yet, but something coming up that I think will be really make a splash, because I think twenty twenty six is going to be a really good year for UFOs and the topic in general. So rounding things, rounding things out. You what, what was something on twenty twenty five that you encountered in the UFO topic that had you step back a little bit and say, oh shit, this is real, Like there's something it's maybe this is real, Like there there's there's a real act of covering up or or distancing or whatever you want to call it.

1:35:26 Speaker 1: There's something there. There isn't there there? And maybe I got a little too close. Was there ever a moment like that for you in twenty twenty five?

1:35:37 Speaker 2: I would say the closest thing I'll say for me twenty twenty five was was there was some high points, there were some low points. There was some points in which which I would say to my staff, I'm like, this whole thing is total bs. I'm at the you know, I met kind of my wits end and kind of coming to the conclusion that this is all all this is all total complete you know fiction, and and and because because you know, if you're in my situation and you just keep trying to get to the to the facts and trying to get to some kind of physical, tangible evidence, and you keep getting shut down left and right, or you or you end up at a dead end, it gets frustrating.

1:36:24 Speaker 2: And so there's been those some of those blowpoints. There's been moments where I walked out of a of a briefing like I I was. I will admit, like the meeting that I had with Anna and David Grush and the skiff was one of the most I walked out of that thinking that there's some you know, he at least has a tremendous amount of knowledge about the topic, more and I more than I could possibly remember. And the sad part about when you go into these skiffs is that you can't take any notes. You can't take any notes with you.

1:37:00 Speaker 2: You you it's really you have to have almost like a way in which you try to try to memorize everything that's said, because because it's it's very difficult, and you walk out and there's especially if it's a long conversation, there's a lot said and you're gonna forget a lot. So, but some of the conversations I've had with Grush indicate to me that at the very minimum, he is absolutely he knows his stuff for sure.

1:37:28 Speaker 1: Interesting. Interesting. I told you I was going to ask a question that was going to be a little bit uncomfortable, and it's uncomfortable for me because just just because the Secrets Task Force, I believe it did leave one thing out and that was nine to eleven.

1:37:50 Speaker 2: Oh right, yeah, have you ever.

1:37:54 Speaker 1: Heard now, going back to the Eric Hecker story, directed energy weapons and stuff like that, have you ever heard of doctor Judy would? I'm not I would implore you to look into her work about potentially Now again I say this, I want to put as much you know, m hm, So I just talk about with you, uh take take this without too much like conspiracy mind, but

1:38:39 Speaker 1: there is this idea that when you watch the towers fall, a lot of people have talked about where did the rubble go? Where did the rubble go? How did this building get incinerated to the point where it justified We know that with work like that was you know in the Reagan era with the Star Wars insitutive if you want to believe Eric Hecker and what is down at the selth Pole. Uh. Then there's this other idea of Project Bluebeam in the UFO community. People said, it's already happened. It happened on nine to eleven.

1:39:20 Speaker 2: Uh.

1:39:21 Speaker 1: Do you think that there's any possibility that what we saw on those TV screens that day could have been

1:39:31 Speaker 1: not right?

1:39:37 Speaker 2: I don't without having some kind of some kind of evidence. Again, I'm probably going to stay away from that for anything. There's a lot of people that died, a lot of family.

1:39:47 Speaker 1: Members that three thousand people, Yeah.

1:39:49 Speaker 2: You know that that are probably still recovering from the loss of their family member and their loved one. And I think, I don't, you know, I'd have to be really cautious about h out I understand me into something like that without having some kind of evidence. Now I've talked to Anna about why nine to eleven is is is a subject, and I think that what we're evaluating more than anything is is was was the information available that could have stopped this? Did that? And I think that there's the there's often sometimes sadly, there's a cover up in order to cover your rear, right, So there, Yeah, I think that some of our intelligence agencies may have been trying to cover for the for the you know, lack of it or the lack of communicating to catch this, and so.

1:40:43 Speaker 1: That's that they it's not that they didn't catch it, it's that they weren't willing to pass the evidence along and communicate with the other intelligence Apparatusis I mean, that's crazy to me. That's crazy to me, right, Yeah, Like the we're supposed to be the pinnacle of the pinnacle of intelligence, and I think people are going increasingly aware that something bad, whatever it was. But I don't think do you. I don't think the official narrative is one hundred percent solid, and I think maybe we can agree on that that there's something that there's there's something wrong with the official narrative and how it was presented.

1:41:34 Speaker 2: Yeah, I would I think that you you, there's no way that everything that was said is one hundred percent accurate. But I also say it's probably probably ninety nine percent accurate to what what happened is. So there may be some outliers, there may be some things that we did that we got wrong, But I would say what we need to be investigating in the committee is is definitely the communication errors that occurred the like the you know, whatever our technology was that didn't catch this, or or human intel efforts that didn't that failed us here.

1:42:15 Speaker 2: And then if there was a cover up, if if there if the federal government or like whether it was the CIA or the FBI, you know, specifically hid documents that indicated that they failed. That's something that I think needs to come to light. I think. And then at the same time, we need to be open to if there's people that we need to talk to and look at and while we're while we're exploring the topic, I'm open so open to looking into stuff.

1:42:46 Speaker 1: Okay, well, I listen. I I would I would look at doctor Judy Wood's work. I really would, because I think it can inform you on multiple things. And and you know, again, even if it's just a surface level,

1:43:04 Speaker 1: you know, it is what it is. You know I I I can only I can only tell you. I can only tell you, and then you do with it what what you think is viable. So listen, I I Every time I talk to you, I have I have such a good time. I think you're one of the most relatable members of Congress, if not the most relatable in some aspects. I really commend that the work that you've been doing. I commend your ability to discern the signal and the noise. And I think if more people were like you in Congress, you know, we were there, there would be nothing that we couldn't do.

1:43:45 Speaker 1: I want to I want to ask you one last, one last thing,

1:43:53 Speaker 1: the community, you know, the community as a whole. How did something that really affected us this year was the Charlie Kirk, the Charlie Kirk assassination. And I'd be remiss if I didn't talk because you know, UFO is, Yeah, it's my main thing, but I also there are other things that when they happen, like these wars in the Middle East, like these wars in Ukraine, it's hard to push the UFO topic in government when things like this are happening. So you know, when Charlie Kirk assassinated that that was a blow for the right and since then there's been a lot of infighting and it parallels for me, it's a parallel to the UFO community and the infighting over there.

1:44:44 Speaker 1: Do you see similarities in that sense.

1:44:48 Speaker 2: I think that's an interesting observation. And yeah, it's really sad and disgusting some of the some of the some of the I think people are capitalizing on his death. And this is the fact that there are people that are gaining followers and traffic on their social media accounts by by saying outlandish and unproven things. Is I think there's a special place in hell for some of the stuff that's been said and from for those people. So I think it's disgusting. Particularly clearly it's harmful to his family and his widow.

1:45:28 Speaker 2: And so I think I think if anybody is you know, that people ought to treat the whole, you know, the death of anyone, whether it was that the people that died on nine to eleven or or Charlie Kirk. You know, we have to be really careful about about having conversations about these things without having any kind of facts or evidence. And and I think we need to be really careful about the fact that you're, you know, you're you're using, you're really besmirching someone's memory and their legacy, and for what you better have a pretty damn good reason why.

1:46:08 Speaker 1: Absolutely, And I think what you know, I wasn't exactly like a super fan of Charlie's, but I really loved the way he was able to bring people together to discuss, to openly discuss, because in a world that seems to be as connected as possible, we're we're also as isolated as possible. It's so weird how it's become like that. But sadly it has. The Internet. It gives people a way to connect with people and say, you know, socialize and you know, kind of touch on those same receptors. But all while you're sitting in the basement or in the studio or in the living room.

1:46:51 Speaker 1: It's it's it's weird in that sense. And it's also given way to a lot of things that, like I said, in the UFO community, the people that that the armchair armchair experts, the the people that capitalize on the drama and the and the and the nothing that's actually gonna move the needle forward, all right, they're focusing on the drama aspects because they know that's what gets the clicks. If it bleeds, it leads, And with Charlie, unfortunately, they took that to a whole other level.

1:47:25 Speaker 2: Right and sadly they're they're still doing that.

1:47:27 Speaker 1: So, yeah, did you hear about this? Like in Minecraft, there was like this place they built apparently in Minecraft. I don't understand Minecraft. I think it should be shut down because of the uh people, the people looking for little kids on that site or yeah that look into that. That is crazy. But Minecraft and all these games predators are it's a huge fucking problem. Represented if it's a huge problem. Sean Ryan had this god I can't remember his name. He's he's he's a white hat. He used to be a hacker, like a real real hacker, and now he's like a white hat hacker and he and he and he catches predators and the number one places Minecraft apparently, and no roadblocks roblock but Minecraft to roadblocks all those games and and it's crazy.

1:48:31 Speaker 1: It's crazy to me.

1:48:33 Speaker 2: But in the I think parents, I think parents should be should turn off all of that, like networking chat, especially to people that are that are unknown.

1:48:44 Speaker 1: Well, you can buy roadblocks. Roadblocks was because they make us if you know. You can buy skins in the game apparently for your character. One of the skins was a white shirt that had freedom on it with blood everywhere. It was the yes roadblocks. That shirt is still being sold on roadblocks so people and people can go to the assassination and take part in it or just be an observer. But they built the whole world out and then they're selling the T shirts on there, so then then they're taking a cut of it.

1:49:22 Speaker 1: They're taking thirty percent of that. And like it's fucking insanity, Like the absolute disassociation from reality that the that these it's happening and we're running, We are running when we should be crawling with this whole AI thing. I'm sorry, but yeah, sorry, I got a little heated there. I'm sorry about that. It really aggrevated. I don't even have kids and that aggravates me. So thank you for what you're doing. What what what's next for Eric Burlason and and the topic of UFOs.

1:50:00 Speaker 2: Yeah, so we will be hopefully we'll have that with whistle blower come forward.

1:50:06 Speaker 1: Well, if you're not going to have hearings, how is he going is it going to be?

1:50:10 Speaker 2: I'm talking, we're going to have a meeting with him. First, We've got a handful of people that we're going to be sending letters to. This is all based on previous people that that have come up in hearings or other other conversations, and these individuals have not been willing, They have not voluntarily come forward and have and so we're going to be sending letters requesting that they meet with the committee. And then we're also looking to get some of these files and documents that have been mentioned.

1:50:40 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's that's someone said we need a Burlson in Canada. Yes, you guys do, Yeah, you do.

1:50:49 Speaker 2: My my wife's family's from Canada. So I been in Ontario, London, Ontario, Sarnia. So if you're from that area, that's interesting. I've been there.

1:51:00 Speaker 1: If if if actually what there was one last thing, I'm sorry. I do apologize the files that because I've been working with Gene on something and uh he I won't go into that part of it. I could talk to you about it off air because we only have a limited time. But the files that that Nap entered into Congressional record about the Soviet what he brought back from the Soviet Union or formerly the Soviet Union in Russia. Is there anything you can can you describe what he what he gave you? Is there any NDAs prohibiting you from that or.

1:51:41 Speaker 2: Is that not made public? If it's not made public, we can make that clearly, make that public.

1:51:46 Speaker 1: I please, if you could make that public because it's it's.

1:51:49 Speaker 2: Not yeah, okay, wow, I'll be happy to try to scan that in and and unless somebody stops me or something for some reason, I'll be happy to make that public.

1:52:00 Speaker 1: Well, like I said, Gene is a veteran and uh he he not that I don't want to give you the whole thing. But his father in law was the Soviet era, like die, it's Latvia what was formerly the Soviet Union. Very patriotic guy father in law, and Gene is married to obviously his daughter. He died, but in the inheritance they got this like journal, this this journal, and it was all about reverse engineering UFOs like not not like writing like a book, Like it's not a book, it's a mathematical scientific maybe I can send it to you.

1:52:47 Speaker 1: It's it's wild. So that's why I ask, because there's a lot of ties there, especially with the nuclear topic as well. But so what what what what could you say about the documents? I mean, as it a what was brought back bye by now.

1:53:09 Speaker 2: So a lot of it was some reports of that that they they uncovered some craft and and their research and and kind of trying to reverse engineer that craft. And I think one of the one of the narratives was that there was a part of the craft that they they were able to basically convert into some weapon and for for at least one period of time, it were able to activate it and utilize that weapon. So that's kind of that's part of the description. But I don't I believe the way it described it was it was it was, it was used, and it was and then it was never capable capable to be used again.

1:53:49 Speaker 2: But that's part of the that this narrative. I'll try to get that released if it isn't already. I would have thought that, just if you, I would have thought that the Oversight Committee would have put it up on the on the you know, in our hearing notes.

1:54:06 Speaker 1: Yeah, I I haven't found it, so I would. I would definitely appreciate that, and I know others that would as well. Yeah, So Eric, till our next discussion. My friend, you're one of the most amazing UH members of Congress and I I really I can't wait to see what you do next. I truly, I truly can't. So thank you so much for you know, always taking time and meeting with me and and doing these doing these shows.

1:54:37 Speaker 2: Absolutely thank you and happy New Year.

1:54:39 Speaker 1: Happy New Year to you and your family. I'll be in touch, of course about what we talked about about that in person thing, uh and making that reality. So,

1:54:52 Speaker 1: oh are you you guys are bringing the what's his name Walls in, right, Tim Walls, that's what I heard.

1:55:04 Speaker 2: I don't I haven't heard that, but that that's a.

1:55:07 Speaker 1: Nancy Mace put a tweet out today that said, if you have any questions that you want me to ask Tim Walls and the hearing, submit them below. So I assumed that that you knew that. I guess they're bringing them in.

1:55:21 Speaker 2: I think she wanted to have a I think she wants to focus in on the nuclear topic, on the on the connection, and so this might be. I I haven't heard the details of what she's putting together, but well, no, no.

1:55:33 Speaker 1: No, this is about well, okay, interesting because interesting because I brought Bob's Alice to her office and and and that was at the other hearing. But I meant about the fraud in Minnesota, Tim Walls.

1:55:46 Speaker 2: Oh, okay, I think that over. Sorry, I'm sorry.

1:55:51 Speaker 1: Oh you just dropped a little exclusive.

1:55:54 Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I was thinking of I thought you were talking about Mike walls.

1:55:57 Speaker 1: I know, I jump everywhere. I'm crazy and.

1:55:59 Speaker 2: So no, Okay, So when it comes to Tim waltz Nick, I'm sure that the over the the overarching Oversight Committee and Chairman Comer are probably going to be I would be it's for sure that we're going to be bringing him in for questions.

1:56:18 Speaker 1: That's oh, I cannot.

1:56:20 Speaker 2: Probably bring in the whistleblowers in Minnesota as well, and then kind of work our way towards Tim.

1:56:29 Speaker 1: Amazing, amazing, amazing. I can't wait. So, my friend anything to say, what what would be your number one piece if someone asked you, what was your number one piece of advice that you could give to people in the UFO community going forward and leaving twenty twenty five behind and you know some of that stuff. What would be your piece of advice to anyone entering the subject.

1:56:58 Speaker 2: I would say, be respect full of of something you know and and and a lot of people are really quick to just jump all over people if if if you make a statement or a misstatement, try to try to give the community needs to like give people a little bit of grace. And I say that because they're there's so they're throughout this experience I've and maybe it's because people are so passionate. I've never been involved in a topic that has got such such little grace in in what said. And there's to the point where you really have to parse your words because you realize that anything that you say is going to be could be twisted or could be questioned.

1:57:44 Speaker 2: And so I would say the community just needs to let up a little bit. And yeah, and have and and the other thing is take a step back, because as I said earlier at the beginning of this interview, is that you're your perspective may not may be wrong, and you need to be prepared for that. So try to be have the same attitude of you know, of a true investigator, where you where you're willing to kind of accept the fact that some of your preconceived notions might be might might not be provable, or they may not have been proven.

1:58:17 Speaker 2: So be ready to change that and so absolutely have the perspective of a scientist who's actually trying to get the truth.

1:58:26 Speaker 1: Yeah, and when yeah, actually no, I'm not going to say that. I don't want to offend anybody on on the other side, but repro Lissen, keep doing what you're doing. We did get a last super Chat question. I feel bad for not being able to ask it. But there's evidence about seeing of the first and second and third generations of black triangles in Kansas. I don't know what that is. Elaborate on the evidence he has seen of the first, second, and third generations of the black triangles seen and filmed in Kansas.

1:59:06 Speaker 1: Do you know what? Do you know what this means?

1:59:10 Speaker 2: Yeah, there there's an individual that is that has brought forward some photos and in a claim that that these are a third generation or second generation of reverse engineered craft. They I don't I'm not. I haven't been able to verify that this is true, that that any anything that has been said is true. So we I in fact, I don't like Oh, okay, yeah, there's there's a lot of there's a lot of questioning about about the motivation of that's coming from that from that perspective.

1:59:53 Speaker 1: Okay, I think I I I actually I think I I think Tim Phillips I asked him, I think this is all the same person. So because I had Tim Phillips of arrow on and yeah, anyway, mister Burla said, representative to you and your family, nothing but the best I cannot wait to see what you guys have. I'd be very interested in you know, let me know if that whistleblower does come forward, because you know, I'll fly down to d C too to be a part of whatever you know, public forum that takes. And uh, we'll chat, we'll chat.

2:00:33 Speaker 1: Keep up the good work, my friend.

2:00:35 Speaker 2: Thank you, Happy New Year.

2:00:37 Speaker 1: Happy happy New Year. And to everyone else out there, please like, share, subscribe. It's the best way you can help support the channel and the podcast. If you're listening on one of our amazing platforms like spot, Spotify or Apple Podcasts, leave a rating and a review. Also, that's like liking and sharing on YouTube. Uh and if you want to become an asset your early accs ad free episodes and priority questions when the shows are live, I'll see you on the other side. Stay humble, stay kind, Stay vigil