Somewhere in the Skies - The Congressional UFO Hearing & Whistleblowers: A Timeline (w/ Cristina Gomez)

Episode Date: September 22, 2024

On episode 374, we bring you an uninterrupted presentation by Cristina Gomez originally aired during Anomacon 2024. With a Senate UAP Hearing recently having been confirmed by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Gomez takes a look at the timeline of events that led to the most recent congressional hearing, the players involved, and the challenges facing both congress members and the public when it comes to the UFO mystery and beyond. Subscribe to Cristina Gomez's channel: https://youtube.com/@cristinag?si=MffFO5nJayQ6LpZ8 Subscribe to AskAPol: https://www.askapol.com/s/uaps Patreon: www.patreon.com/somewhereskies ByMeACoffee: buymeacoffee.com/UFxzyzHOaQ PayPal: [e-mail] Website: www.somewhereintheskies.com Store: http://tee.pub/lic/ULZAy7IY12U YouTube Channel: CLICK HERE Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/somewhereskies/videos Order Ryan’s new book: https://a.co/d/4KNQnM4 Order Ryan’s older book: https://amzn.to/3PmydYC Twitter: @SomewhereSkies Read Ryan’s Articles by CLICKING HERE Opening Theme Song, "Ephemeral Reign" by Per Kiilstofte Produced by LIONSGATE Copyright © 2024. Ryan Sprague. All rights reserved. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/somewhere-in-the-skies. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is Somewhere in the Skies with Ryan Sprague. Recently, the Ask a Poll podcast founded and run by Matt Laslow, caught up with Senator Kirsten Gillibrand to inquire about the possibility of a Senate UAP hearing sometime this month. Here was her answer. Are we going to see a UAP hearing this month? Yeah, I have it on a schedule. When is it, the schedule? Since September, I'm pretty sure.

Interesting. Why is that a priority? Priority for me, because I think it's very important that we continue to make things publicly available, give progress report on how many unidentified aerophenomenal we've assessed and analyzed, give examples of what we have identified, and give examples of what we haven't identified, so that the community can be kept up to speed about what we're actually doing and what this office is doing. We also want to try to continue to build credibility within this office, so more of the public can feed in sightings and have a place and a platform to send. information and inquiries, because that's eventually what this office is supposed to do. And this is going to be with Arrow, Timothy Phillips. Yep, and we'll have a, there's a new, there's a new head that's been identified. I don't know if it's been probably named yet, but I'm hoping that the new head will be the one to testify.

So, as we prepare for either an eventful or uneventful hearing, I thought we take a look back at where we've been with all of this when it comes to hearings and whistleblowers. The following presentation comes to us from Christina Gomez and was originally aired as a presentation at Anamacan 2024. It's a wonderful timeline to get us all up to speed as we head into whatever the Senate hearing turns out to be. And subsequently, what happens after that? I hope you enjoy. This happened in the last few years when it comes to the United States government taking a serious look at U.F. And according to Anna Palina Luna, we should be getting yet another UFO witness hearing in September or October.

But it seems like a lot has happened before getting this more bright future. So today we will be covering all of the public UFO hearings that have taken place in the 21st century, sharing both important information, connections, and video clips. You could say that the United States government has been attempting to unravel this mystery that has a pretty extensive history. Let's get straight into it. The first one we need to look at is the one that took place May 17th of 2022 being the AOMSG, which was an open subcommittee hearing on UAP. This was the first one that took place in 50 years and it was run by two people, a part of the AOMSG. being Scott Bray, who was the then deputy director of naval intelligence and Ronald Moultrie, who was the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. He's going to be very important, so remember that name, remember what he used to do, write it down, because we're going to get back to it.

And so looking at Scott Bray first, he was chosen to be a part of the airborne object identification and Management Synchronization Group, also known as the AOMSG, back in 2022, due to his extensive experience and expertise in intelligence collection and analysis. And then as of December of 2023, Scott Bray is no longer serving as the deputy director of naval intelligence, and instead he's taken a new role as the Assistant Secretary General for the Intelligence and Security at NATO.

Looking at Ronald Moultrie, he served again as the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, and in his role, he acted as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on matters of intelligence, counterintelligence, and security. He was sworn in on June 1st of 2021 and then retired in February of 2024. And just like Scott Bray, he was also involved in the Navy because he was. He served as a senior advisor to the secretary of the Navy and contributed significantly to the Department of Navy's comprehensive cybersecurity review. So looking at Project Blue Book, that was run by the Air Force, and it seems as if the AOMSG kind of seemed to have been run by the Navy. Looking at the opening statements given by Andre Carson, he really highlights that this was the first. first one done in 50 years since Project Blue Book, but I'm going to let him speak on this.

More than 50 years ago, the U.S. government ended Project Blue Book, an effort to catalog and understand sightings of objects in the air that could not otherwise be explained. For more than 20 years, that project had treated unidentified anomalies in our airspace as a national security threat to be monitored and investigated. In 2017, we learned for the first time that the Department of Defense had quietly restarted a similar organization tracking what we now call unidentified aerial phenomena, or UAPs. Last year, Congress rewrote the charter for that organization, now called the Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group, or Aim SOG. For short, today we will bring that organization out of the shadows. This hearing and oversight work has a simple idea at its core.

I think this was a brilliant way to start the very first hearing in 50 years, and it set the stage for a level of seriousness. And it's actually because of this first hearing. We've been able to get several others up into the future one that should take place in September or October. We have to look at the basics, the steps. to see where we are today. Now, while I am praising this great intro, it went downhill from there for those that aren't familiar with it

because Bray and Moultrie, after giving their starting out speeches, reading a sheet of paper, they were doing great, they were doing amazing. And then when it became an open panel, an open panel of questions, that's when it just began to plummet. Not only where their answers,

not concise. They were vague. Their body language displayed how uncomfortable they were. And when they attempted to show footage of UFOs, did it go so bad. And you're going to see why. I'm going to play this right now. Thanks, Chairman. Mr. Bray, can you rerun that first image? It looked like it was outside of a plane window. And if you wouldn't mind going up to the screen and tell us what we're what we're seeing. Not that you can necessarily tell us what we're saying, but explain what we should be looking at in that first image. Absolutely.

And Alexi, what I'll ask is if you can stop it at a certain point. Okay. So as you can see, it's difficult. And I think the part of the issue is the laptop we're working with is not as easy for stopping that video in the right spot. We'll describe what we have seen in that.

What are we observing? What you see here is an aircraft that is operating in a U.S. Navy training range that has observed a spherical object in that area. And as they fly by it, they take a video. You see it looks reflective in this video, somewhat reflective, and it quickly passes by the cockpit of the aircraft. And is this one of the phenomena that we can't explain? I do not have an explanation for what this specific object is. And is this one of the situations where it is, that's the object that we're looking at right there? Thank you.

And is this a situation where it was observed by the pilot and it was also recorded by the aircraft's instruments? We'll talk about the multi-sensor part in a later session. So as you can see, the then chairman Adam Schiff said, well, can you show us this? And what exactly are we looking at? The worst part is that little section that I had to zoom or speed up about 10 times the speed. It was three minutes of wasted time for them to attempt to pause the video and then to say, oh, sorry, we don't really know how to work this computer. In 2022, you don't know how to work a computer and use the pause button. give me a break and even then it was such a bad display of a UFO video because you weren't really able to see anything and they were like oh this is a great example of what we're looking into no it wasn't it was actually dreadful then then after this huge downfall this cascade that was taking place representative mike galliger brought it back up brought it back to a level of seriousness because he brought up historical cases such as the Roswell

incident, the Maelstrom Air Force Base incident, and even the Wilson documents as well. But starting off with one of the first that he brought up when it was his time to speak was that he asked Moultrie specifically saying, have there been any projects right between Project Blue Book and an A-Tip from 2017? Has anything taken place in between? Well, let's hear the question from him, and let's hear the answer for Moultry. Mr. Moultry, as the chairman mentioned,

DoD had an initiative to study UFOs in the 1960s called Project Blue Book. It's also been well reported in our briefing and in other places that we have more recent projects, specifically ATIP. Could you describe any other initiatives that the DOD or DOD contractors have managed, managed after Project Blue Book ended and prior to ATIP beginning.

Did anything also predate Project Blue Book? So I can't speak to what may have predated Project Blue Book. I mean, of course, there's Roswell and all these other things that people have talked about over the years. I'm familiar with Blue Book. I'm familiar with A-Tip. I haven't seen other documented studies that have been done by DOD in that regard. So you're not aware of anything in between Project Blue Book? any tip. I'm not aware of anything that's official that was done in between those two.

I haven't been brought to my attention. Of course, this is incredibly disappointing. Why will now the public knows with the latest Aero reports, there have been a lot of studies on UFOs prior to Project Blue Book and all the way to Arrow. So we have 50 years of a lot of funding taken place for projects and groups to research UFOs, and yet all providing the exact same information of there is nothing to see here. And we were able to witness that in this hearing as well. But then Gallagher says, you know what, I'm not liking that answer. I'm going to ask yet another question.

And then he brings up the Malstrom Air Force Base incident. This is so good. You have to listen to this one. It's also been reported that there have been UIP observed and interacting with and flying over sensitive military facilities particularly, and not just ranges, but some facilities housing are strategic nuclear forces. One such incident allegedly occurred at Malmstrom Air Force Base, in which 10 of our nuclear ICBMs were rendered inoperable at the same time. A glowing red orb was observed overhead. I'm not commenting on the accuracy of this. I'm simply asking you whether you're aware

of it and whether you have any comments on the accuracy of that report. Let me pass that to Mr. Bray. If you've been looking at the UAPs of the last three years. That data is not within the holdings of the AP Task Force. Okay, but are you aware of the report or that the data exists somewhere? I have heard stories. I have not seen the official data on that. So you've just seen informal stories, no official assessment that you've done or exists within DOD that you're aware of regarding the Malmstrom incident.

All I can speak to is, you know, what's within my cognizance of the UAP Task Force, and we have not looked at that incident. Well, I mean, it's a pretty high profile incident. I don't claim to be an expert on this, but that's out there in the ether. You're the guys investigating it. I mean, who else is doing it? If something was officially brought to our attention, we would look at it. There are many things that are out there in the ether that aren't officially brought to our attention.

So how would it have to be officially brought to your time? I'm bringing it to your attention. This is pretty official. Sure. So we'll go back and take a look at it. But generally, there is some authoritative figure that says there is an insynthetic occurred. We'd like you to look at this. But in terms of just tracking what may be in the media that says that something occurred at this time at this place, there are probably a lot of leads that we

would have to follow up on. I don't think we're a resource to do that right now. Gallagher is gobsnacked. He said, how are you not aware of this? How is this not, quote, in your purview? What is going on here? But Gallagher went in armed with really fantastic questions. And he, Andre Carson and Mike Gallagher really elevated the conversation on this. And then, you know, other representatives, I think they did pretty well. But those two did the best. But then you have Krishna Morti who brings up the question of, well, have there been any near misses? Take a listen.

There have been no collisions between any U.S. assets and one of these UAPs, correct? We haven't had a collision. had at least 11 near misses, though. That is pretty wild stuff. 11 near misses that were documented. That is amazing. But one thing that we're going to see consistently through all of these hearings that I'll be covering with you today is the theme, the conversation, the question, the comment of NASA. Moultrie starts it off with this.

It's important that we, as a part of this effort, really build out the relationship that we have with others, including NASA, and for the reason that you just pointed out. So there are elements in our government that are engaged in looking for life in other places, and they have been doing that for decades. They've been searching for extraterrestrial life. There are astrobiologists who have been doing this, too. We're a part of that same government. And so our goal is not to potentially cover up something if we were to find something. It's to understand what may be out there, examine what it may mean for us, if there are any, from a defense perspective, any national security implications or ramifications.

But then to work with organizations as appropriate, if it's a weather phenomenology, with NOAA, if it's a potential for extraterrestrial life or an indication of extrarestrial to life. Why is NASA being brought up? Well, because they are the, really, they're the explorers of space. They're saying, we're going to tell you everything we know about space. And if we ever get into contact with extraterrestrials, we'll let you know. We've been told this for, I would say, a good amount of years, decades at this point. And with all of these hearings, NASA is going to keep coming up.

And when we're looking at the Arrow funding hearing that took place April 19th of 2023, obviously NASA was brought up. So let's start off with that one, how the independent study being done by NASA complements Arrow's work. Sure. And so as Arrow is developing and implementing its science plan, it has to do so grounded in a solid foundation of scientific theory across the entire range of hypotheses that have been presented for what UAP are.

That range spans adversary breakthrough technology on one hand, known objects and phenomena in the middle, all the way to the extreme theories of extraterrestrials. All of that has physics-based systems. signatures associated with it, whether it's theoretical from the academic community, known from things like hypersonic weapons, or adversary breakthrough technologies, as we've talked about before, or the known objects that we have to go measure. The idea is across that entire range, you have to come up with peer-reviewed scientific basis for all of it. now that's out of the way.

Remember I told you to remember Ronald Moultrie and to remember his background? Because that is who Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick had to report all of his information to. That was Kirkpatrick's superior. And this is something that I find very shocking. Because if you're going to kick out Bray and Moultrie, change the entire name from the AOIMSG to Arrow. Then why is Kirkpatrick reporting to the exact same people? For what purpose? Do you see the flaw in this?

I find it very odd. And Moultrie didn't retire until 2024. So he was able to see all of Kirkpatrick's research, information, and data collected. And I can assume here that he also being the superior to Kirkpatrick and to Arrow, it seems like, He gave the clear to release that March report of all of the previous UFO offices, some that we knew about and some that the public didn't know about. That is odd because just two years prior. They're like, oh, we don't know anything about any projects between Project Blue Book and ATIP. Paperwork and time tells us otherwise.

Now, as for the report that Kirkpatrick gave to Christian Gillibrand, it's honestly, don't watch it. It's a waste of your time. It's just a report on how great he is and how much work he's done. And to all of his graphs just show that, oh, here's all the stuff that we are able to explain away. We have a very small team and we need more funding in order to get better data. That's some of the biggest takeaways on that. but, and I'm saving you time there. However, there are a few things that need to be very much highlighted,

preferably with a yellow highlighter, because near the beginning of this, he mentions that he wants to make his reports an SEP. What does that stand for? Someone else's problem. Take a listen to this. When previously unknown objects are successfully identified, it is Arrow's role to quickly and

efficiently hand off such readily explainable objects to the intelligence, law enforcement, or operational safety communities for further analysis and appropriate action. In other words, Arrow's mission is to turn UAP into SEP, somebody else's problem. That one does not sit well with me, and I'm going to guess it doesn't sit well with you either. Why would you say that, right? Of course, I can attempt to understand the logic. logic that once it becomes something identifiable, they can give it to the proper branch to proceed with the investigation or the research. I can get that. But when your goal is to make every single UFO an SEP, someone else's problem, even when you can't explain it, that's where it's not

sitting well with me. And for him to address that publicly, I'm like, oh my goodness, not, not the best move to make and he didn't have the best public appearance. The majority of people didn't like him. They didn't like how he held himself, how he handled his interviews, especially when he kept contradicting himself from previous interviews or conversations that he had that were made public, right? You know, maybe he wasn't the best candidate for Arrow. And what's even more shocking is that when this hearing took place, they didn't have an Arrow website. People weren't even able to report their UFO sightings to Arrow because they didn't have a website. And Kristen Gillibrand was pretty concerned about this. Have you submitted a public facing website product for

approval to your superiors and how long has it been under review? I have. We submitted the first version of that before Christmas. And do you have an estimate from them when they will respond or when you'll have feedback on that? No, I don't. Okay. In all honesty, it's very pathetic to where you submitted your website over Christmas in 2022, right? The website didn't launch until September of 2023.

Do the math. How many months did that take? And then even then, when the website was available to the public, it still took about a month or two for people to be able to report their UFO sightings after that. I know because I was keeping an eye on it. And whenever we got an update on the error report, I was always commenting on it in strangest news of the week, keeping all of us up to date on that. And that's truly appalling. And yet it's not surprising because with all of the reports that we've received, from them have been late. And the website being late, it's not a shocker, but it's disheartening, to say the least. Right now, one of the best things, maybe the, maybe the word best isn't the proper word to use, but one of the things that it's known for the most at the moment is the

collection of potential witnesses that many of them were not aware of, but that that Grush was willing to speak to Arrow, and Kirkpatrick didn't do a follow-up. Looking at, before we move forward to the UFO witness here, and that took place July 26 of 2023, Kirkpatrick had mentioned to Jill Abrams stating that, because our website isn't done, please continue to reference witnesses to Arrow. Take a listen. When do you expect that you will establish a public-facing discoverable? an access portal for people to use to contact your office as the law requires? So I would like to very much for referring the witnesses that you have thus far to us.

I appreciate that. We've brought in nearly two dozen so far. It's been very helpful. I'd ask that you continue to do that until we have an approved plan. We have a multi-phased approach for doing that, that we've been socializing and have submitted for approval sometime. And once that happens, then we should be able to push all that out and get this a little more automated. Great.

What I would ask, though, is as you all continue to refer to us and refer witnesses to us, I'd appreciate if you do that, please try to prioritize the ones that you want to do because we do have a small research staff. have dealing with that. The reason to why this is so shocking is because of Grush. Right now, the man, the face of the UFO transparency disclosure phenomenon. Like, he is the face for it at this moment, especially when he spoke to News Nation in June of 2023. And then just over a month later, he's speaking to Congress under oath about all of the very

scary, interesting, bizarre experiences that he's had, that his men have had, along with Ryan Graves and David Fravor. And Anna Palina Luna asks the question of, well, what about Arrow? Did you go to Arrow? Did they do a follow up? And if they didn't, why not? And you know what? It's best if you hear her ask the question, and getting the response from Grosch. Okay, on the 19th of April, Dr. Kirkpatrick, head of Arrow, had said that he did not find any evidence of UAPs. You also stated that you had, in your interview, that you had briefed him on information that you were uncovering, but that he did not follow up with you. Were the items that you divulged to him pertinent to national security?

Yes. him and I had a classified conversation in April 2022 before he took over Arrow in July 2022 and I provided him some concerns I had. Do you know why he might not have fallen up with you? Unfortunately, I cannot read his mind. I wish he did. I was happy to give Sage counsel to him on where to look when he took the helm of Arrow. Looking at that particular UFO witness hearing, that is definitely one.

that I recommend you watch or rewatch before the next hearing takes place in September, October. Why? Because it was the most thought-provoking, condensed, informative hearing we have ever heard pertaining to the UFO phenomenon and UFO disclosure. We have not come across anything in the last few years where Congress is concerned

where they have taken a serious look at this, where you have every single representative asking tough questions from Bershette to Gates, to Mace, to Luna. And that list goes on and on. It was truly remarkable. And I want to share with you a few more snippets here. But this is one that requires an entire show to do analysis on, which I've already done.

You can find that right in the description box below. So we're just doing really what seems like a preface over all of these so that we can be prepared for the next one. And with some of these tough questions, Burleson asked a truly an important one. And it was pertaining to injuries. Has anyone ever been injured by people in the military, in the government to silence or by by NHA. Take a listen to this one. At one point, you had said that there has been harmful activity or aggressive activity. Has any of the activity been aggressive, been hostile in your reports?

I know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured. And the activity, by UAPs or by people within the federal government. Both. Okay. So there has been activity by alien or non-human technology and or beings that has caused harm to humans. I can't get into the specifics in an open environment, but at least the activity that I

personally witnessed, and I have to be very careful here, because you don't, you know, I tell you never to acknowledge tradecraft, right? So what I personally witnessed myself and my wife was very disturbing. And then as a follow-up, Anna Polina asks, are you in fear of your life? Mr. Grush, in speaking to you yesterday, I just wanted to follow up on Representative Raskin's questions. In the last couple of years, have you had incidences that have caused you to be in fear for your life for addressing these issues? Yes, personally. Okay.

I just want everyone to note that he's coming forward in fear of his life to put in perspective if they were really not scared about this information coming out, why would someone be intimidated like that? To your knowledge, are NHIs working with adversarial foreign governments in either technology exchange programs or back engineering programs? I don't have data on that. I'm not sure. Have you heard or you had people come forward to present that evidence?

not that particular evidence that you just espoused. And of course, it simply wouldn't be a UFO hearing without talking about NASA. And we do have to think, Representative Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In 2022, NASA announced that it was commissioning an independent study team to examine UAPs. The NASA team is comprised of scientists across different fields, as well as former astronauts and pilots. In May, the independent study team held that its first public. meeting, which included the perspectives from NASA senior leaders, as well as perspectives from

the Department of Defense and Intelligence agencies. The NASA study team is also expected to release its first report pretty soon, and I think it's safe to say that we all eagerly await its results. Mr. Graves, how might NASA's research influence the commercial industry regarding safety and UAP? I think NASA has a big role to play as far as commercial aviation safety, and it's one of their original charges as an organization. One of the recommendations that have been put forward is to utilize their existing aviation safety reporting system to serve as a short-term fill and trusted platform for pilots that want to report on UAP. It also has built-in analytics capability and is funded by Congress. So yet again, why is NASA being covered consistently? Why is it being asked about

consistently, right? Well, as Frost had mentioned that at the time, they were in the midst of having their research group, releasing their report. And then NASA had their briefing, their media briefing, September 14th of 2023, around the same time at the Arrow website was released. And that from beginning to end, it was an awful briefing in the sense of starting off with the panel. The people speaking to the public, they were talking to us like we were in elementary school and had no idea what was going on. That was depressing and disappointing and a little bit disgusting. Then you had the open panel where the media was able to ask questions to NASA and they were not able to answer one question transparently or consistently.

They were all very vague or they're saying, oh, we can't answer that. after Bill Nelson consistently said, we're transparent and you can be at your boots. Where? Where is the transparency bill? NASA. Come on, guys. Get it together.

Well, all of that buildup from 2022 into 2023, all that buildup about NASA, NASA comes in, gives their briefing, and it wasn't, that was a nothing burger completely. Would I recommend you watching that one? No. Do I recommend you watching the UFO witness hearing? Yes, absolutely. Something that happened

rather recently, however, was when Congress had a hearing with the Department of Energy May 23rd, 2024. This particular hearing went under a lot of people's radars. I wasn't able to catch it until an article was written several weeks after the incident. But the reason to why UFO were brought up was because of Ms. Representative Anna Paolina Luna because when we are looking at the Department of Energy, we're also looking at nuclear facilities. And what do we know about nuclear facilities and UFOs? I feel like Anna Paolina Luna gives this subject justice. Secretary of Granholm, earlier when Representative Birchett asked you about some UAP stuff, if you said that the DOD essentially had denied any existence of that, and you refer to them as drones, correct?

It's my understanding that the Department of Defense has looked at this an issue to report about it. I have a lot of questions, so just quick and consents, if possible. There have been persistent claims in reports, including those from credible whistleblowers to this committee, suggesting that the U.S. government potentially including the Department of Energy has been involved in reverse engineering technologies recovered from UAP. For example, the Pentagon's proposed Kona Blue program aimed at reverse engineering such technologies, although it was ultimately not established. Can you clarify whether the Department of Energy has been involved in any such efforts, either historically or currently to analyze reverse engineering materials from related to UIPs? I have no knowledge of that. Okay.

There are several reports indicated frequent drone incursions over DOE nuclear facilities, including an incident on April 1st, 2021 at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. also known as LLNL. Can you detail the DOE's current security measures to prevent unauthorized drone activities or UAPs and what steps are being taken to enhance these measures of frequencies of incidences? Yeah, we have a whole counter-dron effort to make sure that all of our national security sites and our labs are protected from incursions from drones, I'll just say, that are not authorized. So there's a whole series of protocols probably not ripe for discussion in this public setting. Correct. So I review some unclassified materials from around the 40s and 50s, and so they weren't just being reported as drones back then. And I encourage you to look over those materials because I think that you guys should be upgrading that program to cover down on UAPs. There have been documented sightings of metallic spheres over DOU facilities, if you want to call them drones in this instance, such as one report on April 30th, 2019 over LLNL, what investigations have been.

conducted in regards to these sightings and what conclusions do you guys have about the nature and origins of these objects? I'm happy to follow up with you on that. Okay, we'll be submitting also too for public records and questions after this. If you can please answer those. Considering the DOE's involvement in nuclear and sensitive research facilities, how does the DOE coordinate with agencies like the Department of Defense and Arrow to investigate UAP sightings? We are part of, we obviously are teamed with the Department of Defense because of our national security and nuclear mission. Are you able to cite any specific investigations or shared data analysis efforts? I don't have information on that.

Okay. As of right now, again, we'll be submitting some questions for you after this, but I hope that you guys can answer those in a timely fashion. And again, for those that might be tuning into this, I would encourage you to look at some of those unclassified materials and we'll be happy to provide your office with that. I'll just follow up by one other question, I guess, to close it out. Does the Dewee currently work with J-Soc in order to handle security measures? We work with all of the security entities around the federal government. We're

part of an overall all-of-government effort on both cyber as well as national security. Do you guys work with J-Soc? Yes or no? Yes, we do. Okay. All right. Thank you very much, ma'am. It's very exciting to see all these representatives showing an interest in the topic of UFO's UAP, what's really going on. One thing that we've seen consistently from the AOIMSG all the way to the Department of Energy hearings and all the ones in between, it's not only showing an interest of the protocols that should take place when a UFO is seen, but also looking at it as a threat. And we're going to get to that in just a moment, but also the money and the funding.

where is the money going for this research on UFOs and UAP? Right? Like that's one of the biggest focuses that Timbershatt and Anna Palina Luna have when they are pushing for this UFO transparency slash disclosure is where is the money going? Now, as for the threat narrative, I know some are rolling their eyes. I'm like, Christina, how could you bring this up? But hear me out. Because when we are dealing with military, when we're dealing with government, if it's not

a threat, they're not going to put tax dollars money and research into it. If it is a threat, that gives them the excuse to do the research and collect the data on those incidents, right? That's how I perceive it. That's why they are really pushing this threat narrative is for that reason. And then also, when you look at alleged alien abductions, like, I can understand the threat narrative there. Like, that's pretty freaky stuff, right?

Yes. Yes, it is. Now, looking at all of these other hearings that I've taken place over the years, what can we expect for this September or October hearing that's going to take place in 2024? Because according to Ask a poll, when they asked Representative Anna Paulina Luna about this, she said it's going to be around that time frame. So who can we expect to be speaking at this next hearing? What questions will be asked?

Will there be any repeat questions? from the previous hearings. For instance, during that UFO witness hearing in July of 2023, one question that was consistent was the question of, is there a disinformation campaign? It was asked at least two or three different times by different representatives. And the answers were either I don't know or I can't answer that in a public setting. Are we going to get those same kind of questions for this next one?

Are we going to get completely different questions based off of the witnesses that are going to speak? We've heard rumors of new whistleblowers that are going to be coming forward at some point, right? Are we going to hear some old whistleblowers that we haven't heard speak under oath right in front of Congress? Who do you want to see? What questions do you want to have them ask? And what are your expectations for the next one? Let me know in the comments. Let me know in the live chat as well.

Because I truly like to hear where your mind stands on this one, where your expectations are here. And hopefully these representatives that are going to be asking these, hopefully tough questions, will be made aware of the questions that you have. And I do make music. It's space ambient music. You can find it under cosmic portals.

And that will help you relax, fall asleep, or use your imagination to wander the universe. Be safe, and remember, keep your eyes on the skies. Thank you for listening. Be sure to subscribe to the Christina Gomez YouTube channel and check out all of our work at strange paradigms.com. Also, be sure to subscribe to Ascopal. Learn more at Askapole.com.

That's ASK-A-P-O-L.com. If you have just a few moments, please rate and review Somewhere in the Skies on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, the two largest podcast platforms. Your ratings and reviews help us get featured, help us gain visibility, and also help us find new listeners. Just head on over to Apple, Spotify, or wherever you gave your podcasts. Thank you in advance. You can find us on Twitter at Summer Skies and Instagram at Somewhere Scott's pod. If you'd like bonus content, early access, and priority to ask our guests' listener questions, please consider becoming an Apple premium subscriber or Patreon subscriber today.

Click the subscribe button at the top of your Apple feet or visit patreon.com slash somewhere skies. Thank you so much for your support. And thank you for listening. Remember, keep your feet on the ground, but never stop searching somewhere in the sky. The Somewhere in the Sky's podcast is part of the Lionsgate Sound Network. Please take a moment to rate and review the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever possible. Thank you for listening. Lots of places can expose you to identity theft.

Oh, no. That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity, which is way more than anyone can do on their own. If we find anything suspicious, like new loans or changes to your financial accounts, we alert you right away, all through text, phone, email, or the LifeLock app. Get the alerts that could make all the difference. Save up to 40% your first year at LifeLock.com slash special offer. Terms apply.