WEAPONIZED with Jeremy Corbell & George Knapp - UFO Bombs Dropped On Capitol Hill - Guest : Chris Sharp

Episode Date: July 18, 2023

Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer shocked his colleagues - and the world - by unveiling proposed legislation that would force the release of long-secret UFO files stashed in the bowels of government agencies. The legislation specifically targets defense contractors and private individuals who might be hiding nonhuman technology, crashed saucers, exotic materials of unknown origin… even alien bodies. Schumer gave a nod to his friend and mentor Sen. Harry Reid, whose support for UAP-related investigations is largely responsible for the dramatic events unfolding right now. British journalist Chris Sharp joins Jeremy and George to discuss the potential impact of Schumer's proposal and the importance of the upcoming public UFO hearing to be conducted by house members days from now. Which witnesses might testify? Check out Chris Sharp’s publication called Liberation Times : https://LiberationTimes.com GOT A TIP? Reach out to us at [e-mail] For breaking news, follow Corbell & Knapp on all social media. Extras and bonuses from the episode can be found at https://WeaponizedPodcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough. Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your oceanfront room. Just steps from the water.

The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. Welcome to Sephora. I'm looking for a perfume that's not too perfumi?

I got you. Serum moisturizer or moisturizer syrup. Let's get into layering. My concealer is making me look worse. Sounds like the wrong shade. Let's get you meshed. There's only one store that really gets what you're going for. Get beauty from people who get beauty.

Only at Sephora. Hi, I, uh, let's get you a basket. Last episode of Weaponized, we heard directly from Tim Burchett. There was a lot that he said, but there was a lot that we could not say. Now, some of that was put out. July 26th, we'll have a hearing. We'll hear directly from firsthand witnesses. Senator Schumer is a pretty crafty politician.

He's not going to stick his neck out if he doesn't have some kind of support for taking this sort of a position. We all have to believe that the testimony of David Grush that came out a few weeks, our friend David has played a major role in the steps that have been taken both in the Senate and in the House. You said you've been in contact with, say, the Lockheeds of the world. You know, we're talking about technologies that could eradicate some of the damage caused by climate change, for example, which is a huge, huge political issue right now. Now this news tonight from Senator Schumer introducing new legislation, things are happening fast.

Again, if you're a skeptic or a believer, it really is a really a news tonight. doesn't matter. Even if you're a skeptic, it's still interesting. We should get to find out what's actually known and what the government is up to, even if you don't believe in UFOs. So it's going to be interesting. If UFOs are not a matter of belief, we're past that. We know it's true. There's machines that outpace ours that are in the sky. We don't know where they're from. The witnesses are kind of like Mark Zuckerberg. They're like, send me location. Secrets, cover-ups, and strange phenomena. UFOs and ideas that challenge reality itself.

these mysteries all this time. Are we ever going to get to the bottom of these? My name is George Knapp. I dig into news stories that others can't or won't. I'm Jeremy Corbell, and for some reason, people tell me things they probably shouldn't. And this is weaponized. Welcome back. This is weaponized. And as you know, we've been telling you for a while now about things that were in the works in the shadows and the past few days, wow, it's come spilling out, following the blockbuster testimony from career intelligence officer David Grush a few weeks ago, bombs have been dropping, heads are exploding, the minds of hardcore debunker types have melted down into tiny puddles of sad, salty tears. Plus, their little hearts. Jeremy, there's so much to talk about.

Let's start with Chuck Schumer in this big drop a few days ago about an amendment to the defense bill. Yeah, man, this is awesome, powerful new language that really it puts the screws on. on some of these holding companies that allegedly have off-world craft not made here on earth. And if that's the case, man, they are putting the screws to these companies being like, you best be telling us. And hopefully this becomes law. There have been some really great voices that have kind of, you know, piped up about this. One of them is Chris Sharp.

He dropped this great article super informed. I did a quote for it because he was pushing me to get more information for him. man, super informed article. Are we going to go to talk to Chris? Let's get him because honestly, I've respected the way that he's handled some of these more difficult cases and he's a great resource. Let's get him right now. Chris Sharp is the editor, publisher, writer of Liberation Times.

He's been covering the UFO issue, UFO transparency, action in Washington in ways that major mainstream American media just have failed to do and he joins us now. So we have Chris. Chris, great to see you, man. Great reporting. Thank you for having me, my friend. It's an honor to finally appear on webinars with both you and George, who are both heroes of mine and great friends as well.

So thank you. Chris, do you find it amazing that we Americans, the news consumers in our country, have to rely on you and the excellent job you do for information about what's going on about UAP, because our mainstream media, even after all that has happened, still don't really cover it. Or when they do, they cover it reluctantly. Yes, that's correct.

And it's very, very disappointing to see, unfortunately. And I think the stigma and taboo of this topic is really, really unfortunate. And I don't think what is more unfortunate is the fact that journalists, they no longer have this fearlessness. of actually just reporting the news and investigating on what's actually going on. It's really sad. I wish we could go back to the 1970s sometimes, and that era of reporting, you know, when you had real journalists really going after these types of stories. But beauty of now, today, the world that we live in is that we can have independent publications such as Liberation Times, independent journalists, you know, such as what you guys are doing on weaponized, for instance,

you know, going after these cases and just reporting the news, basically, investigating what's going on. And I really feel that the independent journalists reporting on this topic are really, really going to help us push through and hopefully get some transparency in the years to come in relation to this really vitally important topic. Of course, some bombs were dropped in the last couple of days because we all talk off the air, off the record. You and I and Jeremy keep in touch. We've known a lot of this stuff was coming, but even we were surprised by some of the things that have happened. And reluctantly, even the New York Times had to report on this bombshell dropped by Senator Schumer within the last two days. Can you give us a recap, your take on that story, what it means to this topic?

it is a huge story, an absolute manner for the story, because what was previously relegated to the Office of the Undersecretion of Defense for Security and Intelligence is now at the desk of the highest office in the land that's of the President of United States. So this is an absolutely huge story, and what it is, it's a new amendment. National Defense Authorization Act by, you know, it's by the most powerful person in the Senate. It's by Chuck Schumer, who's the leader of the Senate from the Democrat side. And he's inserted this huge amendment, basically, which provides a UAP review board,

which will basically look to release UAP reports going back decades, But not only that, it would also look to potentially, potentially release UAP materials, which could also mean craft, and let's say biological specimens as well, relating to UAP, which are non-human in nature. And that is just explosive, because we know there is already a version of the Intelligence Authorization Act and a National Defense Authorization Act. which provides amnesty period of 60 days for basically the likes of Lockheed Martin to actually come clean about what they have. Now, this new amendment by Chuck Schumer is a follow-on in away from that because it says that if any UAP materials, you know, or biological specimens are discovered, then the US government will possess those materials.

So Lockheed Martin, look, if they have these materials, they'll have to surrender them to the US government. And it looks like there's a real plan coming together now about how we get this stuff out and release it to the US public. When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed sponsored jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this show will get a $75-sponsored job credit at Indeed.com slash podcast. That's Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs.

Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition for Citizens Bank. Jeremy, you want to jump in? I mean, that's a lot to unpack right there. I know we both have a lot of questions. Do you want to jump in there? Yeah, for sure. So, Chris, first of all, I got to congratulate you. I do contribute to your articles because you call me with a lot of questions, but you are so obsessed with perfect accuracy, and you force me to make calls, to make sure that what you're doing is correct. So you actually are breaking news in this last story you wrote that people I don't think have really admired

yet, but I think they will. Look, this new legislation is making a powerful move to expose the issue of illegal UAP technological holdings. Like, that's what this legislation is doing. I got, George and I got a preview of it. Just put it that way. But it has to be put into law, but that's what it's trying to do. So we should be asking ourselves, in my opinion, we should be asking ourselves what the authors of this amendment know. I mean, this is like, what do they know to try to put this into law? You don't aim to push this kind of language into law unless you have direct knowledge of illegal UAP holding facilities and programs backed up by folks directly and currently working on these UAP programs and technologies and projects. So I happen to know,

that this language was written with purpose and intent, and that this language was written from a place of knowledge, they wouldn't be putting it into law if they couldn't back it up. Does that make sense to you? Correct, correct. And also, thank you so much for your contribution, Jeremy. I mean, anything reported in Liberation Times, we ensure that we are correct as possible

because the topic of UAP, there is so much stigma surrounding it. So when you're reporting information, you have to ensure that it's accurate. And look, if the circumstances change, you update that article as well to ensure that you, you know, you're keeping your readers informed, basically, of what the latest is. You don't just leave it out there, you know, you make sure that everything you report on, if there is an update, new information provided, you put it out there. There is such a weight of responsibility that I feel when I'm reporting on these articles. And yes, I feel that there is some smoking gun evidence of UAP,

potentially being of either unknown origin, albeit of a non-prozaic origin, let's say, or non-human origin that they're able to determine. And I would just put out this out there. I would love to know your opinion. I've not asked you about this before, Jeremy, But we know that there has been in coordination in terms of getting this new amendment out there with the White House and National Security Council as well. So following the February shootdowns that occurred over North America, there was a rumor which was going around about a very, very senior member of, let's say, the US Armed Forces who approached.

a White House staff member, let's say, and spilled the beans about legacy programs and stated that the US Air Force is lying when it comes down to the topic of UAP. And then we have the White House set up its own kind of task force all of a sudden to look into UAP. And that kind of disappeared. And now we know that this bombshell language, which basically asserts that there are non-human entities. or implies that at least, that now that's come from, in part from the White House, the National Security Council. And like you said, I just think that came from nowhere. And I do get the feeling that there has been a series of events that have led to this place that we are at now.

Well, first of all, we're interviewing you. You're not interviewing us. I'm going to decline to answer any further. But it's really interesting, the things that you're saying. And I think that you are seeing a ripple effect, not just of public interest, but of people waking up to the idea of, holy shit, this is not only true, but I've just been shown evidence of it. So what you're getting is you're getting people being exposed to information, footage, documents inside of government, even all the way up into the White House that they haven't seen before. And so, you know, look, what do people hate more than anything? It's being lied to. And as George will tell you, after, you know, almost 40 years of reporting on this, we've been lied to. And so this is where people's hubris and egos are very helpful to the disclosure efforts about this topic, whatever it might be. So that's all I can, that's all I really want to say about that. I would jump in this way. Senator Schumer is a pretty crafty politician.

he's not going to stick his neck out if he doesn't have some kind of support for taking this sort of a position. We all have to believe that the testimony of David Grush that came out a few weeks ago, our friend David, has played a major role in the steps that have been taken both in the Senate and in the House in pushing this ball down the field. Grush is not alone, however, in the statements that was released by Schumer's office, he made it clear that they have heard from a bunch of people, not just grush, but a whole bunch of people who've come out offering information about these legacy UFO programs. And I will tell you this, that it's not the first time that the senator has heard this. My friend, the late Senator Harry Reid, talked to Schumer,

who was his protege. You might have seen one of the tweets that Schumer put out after he dropped this bombshell amendment. He paid homage to the legacy of his friend, Senator Reid, who died more than a year ago, what we're seeing unfolding here now, all these different elements in different places, can largely be tracked back to the work that Senator Reid started here in Las Vegas more than two decades ago. You know, I had a secret private conversation with him going for more than 30 years about his interest in UFOs, and I helped fan those flames for a long time, and I asked him flat out who among the his Senate colleagues he had talked to about this issue, and Schumer was one of them. Schumer was his right-hand man. Schumer learned the job of being

how to be a majority leader from his mentor, Harry Reid, and they did talk about UFOs. I would also say there are others current sitting members of the Senate who also talked to Senator Reed before he died. And after that New York Times story came out in December of 2017, one of those was a presidential candidate, Cory Booker. So there are a lot of members of the Senate who have not come forward on this yet. Senator Gillibrand, Senator Rubio, have been out in front on it. But there are other members who have an interest in it, and I think they are lending this support to this legislation.

But you can bet that Senator Schumer has his ducks in a row before he makes an amendment that he knew would make as big a bombshell impact as this one did. Yeah, I think he's extremely well-informed at this point. And I know that there's a big learning curve, as you have always said, George, but I'd love to hear what you think about that, Chris. Yes, so earlier this year, I was informed that there's a whole host of committees both in the Senate and in the House that are interested in the UAP topic and which may hold hearings. So not just the Intel and Armed Services Committees, other committees, and one of the committees that was mentioned to me was the Homeland Security Committee in the Senate. And it just so happens in this new legislation that that committee is going to pay a major

or in terms of oversight in this new UAP review board. So I think we can expect a whole lot more. There are a bunch of other senators and representatives who are bursting to speak about this. And I think that our friend Chuck Schumer has just set the bar now and provided cover for those other politicians to actually start talking about. talking about this publicly. There's some specific things we should probably touch on. The creation of a UFO panel is similar to the JFK assassination records board, nine-member

panel to be named by the president and others. And of course, that raises a lot of eyebrows because the JFK panel, you know, to hardcore JFA conspiracy folks, they're not happy with it because after 60 plus years, 60 or so years, we still don't have all those records. They still have not been released. And I can see UFO people who are inclined to believe in conspiracies worried that a panel on UFO disclosure might do the same thing and still classify things that the public has a right to know.

What do you think? Well, I would say that this new amendment is a major push forwards. And look, for the last three or four years now, we've had multiple UAP amendments and language added to both the intelligence Authorisation Act and National Defence Authorisation Act. So I don't, you know, yeah, I think this is a major step in the right direction, but I would also say that I would also expect more to follow as well. And we also know that this is in conjunction with the other language out there, which provides amnesty to basically defence contractors like Lockheed Martin. So I think it works in tandem with other

legislation that can come forward and i think that we can expect more legislation to come forward whether it be in this national defense authorization act or perhaps next year um i think they've really really they smell something's not up now and they feel that i think being a u.s politician at the moment i i feel that they feel that they're being lied to this is something that's happening to this day under their noses and that it could be be world changing, you know, not just only learning that we're not alone, but also the breakthrough technologies that we could learn of and we can develop if we open this up to a wider range of engineers and scientists, you know, we're talking about technologies that could eradicate some of the

damage caused by climate change, for example, which is a huge, huge political issue right now. And I would just say that, yes, I mean, JFK, that's, I think making, making that kind of comparison, I mean, that happened a long time ago and you don't really have the same momentum regarding transparency in that case amongst key politicians, as you do with the UAP topic. There is a broad bipartisan coalition in both the House and the Senate to get this through. So I feel that the UAP topic has a lot more momentum, has a lot more support and bipartisan support as well. you know, within U.S. politics. So I think really that people that are worried about that,

I really would ask them not to be worried. And I think that we're making major, major steps in the right direction. Here's the other part of it that jumps out of me is the use of eminent domain, concept in American law, I don't know if you have something similar in the UK, use of eminent domain to claim government ownership of any non-human tech, T-tech, saucers, craft, materials, bodies. It belongs to the government, if this becomes law, and say, let's just pull a name out of a hat. Lockheed has saucers stashed in a hangar somewhere.

They have to give them up. They have to give them to the U.S. government. Even if it was acquired by private interests, even if it was on private land, I wonder that applies to, for example, people who've gone out to the Roswell crash site and found bits and pieces of strange material, or some of the meta-material samples that people like Jacques Valet and Gary Nolan say they've been testing. Then they all have to cough it up. Would Bob Lazar have to find the non-existent pieces of 115 and turn them in? It presents some interesting questions for people and companies who may have this material. Yes. So I mean the legislation just uses the term persons. So that could refer to individuals and organizations.

So I think it may do. I think it would be good advice for such people. If they are confused or worried to seek advice or seek legal counsel, basically, to see what the repercussions could be if they do hold onto such material after the amnesty period. And also, I'd say this as well. I'd say that if Lockheed Martin does, and I'd mean leasing with the Lockheed Martin spokes, person last two weeks or so because if they do have an illegal UAP program, then that would be a material risk. And if there are material risks that you can disclose, you have to disclose that under

SEC law. You have to disclose that to your shareholders because your shareholders need to know if you've got a really huge material risk that could mean that, you know, your shares sink, basically, and you lose a lot of money. So there's lots of rip. precautions around this for the likes of Locky and also in terms of competitors as well. If they had an unfair advantage, that's huge as well. So I think there's a lot of fine detail that needs to go over that we need to go over as well. And I think that needs to be included within the legislation such as compensation. I mean, a lot of people like to throw Lockheed under the bus and maybe rightfully so, but it's also a fundamental pillar of, you know, the Western

Western defences, basically, not just for the United States, but the United Kingdom as well, if Lockheed Martin were to fall down and cease to become a function organization, that has major defence repercussions that will harm a lot of us. I feel that there needs to be a way to do this so that you don't sink, you know, aerospace-based corporations. And also, I think, as well, if the US government is going to take possession of such craft, What do they do then? Is there then like a tender process or something, whereby, you know, other defence contractors get an opportunity to, you know,

gain access to such craft? You know, does Elon must get an opportunity to study it under SpaceX or something like that? I think that would be really, really interesting to know what the government does from there because you can't just leave it locked away in government. You would have to ensure that there's a huge push to actually, you know, study these crafts. Yeah, I mean, clearly this legislation is focused on defense contractors. I mean, clearly there's something that's known and they're trying to force it out. The eminent domain clause, my buddy said was especially deadly.

And I'm like, why? Because there's really no way out of that other than straight up fraud. And I think it's true to, and Chris, you've really, really digested the information that once the legislation is passed, there'll be a financial incentive for instance. insiders to kind of blow the whistle because they're entitled to like 10% of the recovered fraudulent sum. Is that correct? Is that in the legislation? I need to have a look at that again just to confirm. It has been said to me that there is a financial incentive. I'd need to have a look at that again. Would 10% even be enough, you know, in terms of this, especially if it got taken away from them, you know, you can imagine shareholders, you know,

discovering that Lockheed had craft of non-human origin, you know, breakthrough technologies, the shares would go, you know, they would go up by such an amount. It would be amazing for Lockheed, you know, but then all of a sudden you find out that Lockheed lose the craft, and then the stock sinks. It could lose a lot of money for Lockheed. I noticed something in the legislation, too, that was extremely powerful to me, which was they were creating definitions. And this is something I know you've been personally on the hunt for,

a long time, you're trying to use the war of the words here. And can you explain to us what you've been on the hunt for? Because I noticed they said, you know, unknown origin. And it's like as if they had to define that in the legislation. Why do you think that is? And what have you been on to when you have been speaking with? I know I think you've been writing to Susan Go. So tell me that little battle, would you?

Yes. So what happened was that when David Grush story broke, the DOD's, line was that the arrow hasn't found any programs, let's say, which whistleblowers have brought forward to it that found any materials of extraterrestrial nature. So I went back to Susan Goff because David Grush specifically mentions non-human intelligence. So I said, what about non-human intelligence? She said extraterrestrial, but do you also mean non-human intelligence? She failed to get back to me and I said, look, if you can't get back to me, I'm just going to say that you can't deny it. She didn't get back to me, so I reported it. Then the Pentagon had a panic. And then they came back to me and said, extraterrestrial also means non-human as well.

So I was like, okay, because they also said that it was verifiable information. So the arrow had found about no information, and verified zero information relating to materials of extraterrestrial origin. So that could mean that the array found non-proseic materials that may have suspected of being non-human. However, they haven't verified it yet to actually independently say, yes, it is extraterrestrial, non-human in nature. So I instead post a question, have you found anything of unknown origin? because that means that you may be going through the process of verifying whether it is non-human intelligence. So I'm yet to get an answer yet, but hopefully me and Sue can work something out on that one.

It was just great. It was in that legislation definitions. It was. It was in that legislation. And it was a surprise to see it there. But I think they're right on the money there as well, including that definition. because I mean, this is the thing. Like, how do you prove that it's definitely extraterrestrial, for example, you know? You'd have to prove that it came from X planet and you don't know what the composition of that planet is and materials and stuff like that. So how would you, could you ever determine it 100%?

Or, you know, they would probably find loopholes as well for non-human origin of how you could definitively prove it was non-human origin. So I feel that unknown origin is a really, really important term. It All. Pay off your home, travel for life, drive a Ferrari. In celebration of the world premiere of the Monopoly, Big Board Buckslot Machine by Aristocrat Gaming, Yamava Resort and Casino and San Manuel is giving one person a $1.6 million dream package. The biggest prize in Yamaba's history. Club Serrano members can earn daily instant prizes and secure a spot in the finale May 29th. Don't pass go and own it all. Only at Yamava. Celebrating its 40th anniversary. You win? Details at yamava.com must be 21-20. Please gamble responsibly. Monopoly is a trademark of Hasbro. Hasbro is not a sponsor of this promotion. All new drinks are now at McDonald's, with refreshers like the strawberry watermelon refresher, and the mango pineapple refresher with popping boba to crafted sodas like the Sprite Berry Blast, with berry flavors and cold foam. Who knew ice-cold drinks could be so fire?

Try them all now at McDonald's. Refreshers contain caffeine. Copyright 2026, the Coca-Cola Company. Sprite is a registered trademark of the Coca-Cola Company. I can imagine what a tough time it is for the debunkers who have been saying for a long time now, this whole momentum, seeming momentum for a UFO disclosure is really the creation of a small group of UFO believers who have somehow convinced Congress and congressional staff about this nonsense. It's all made up. It's going to be a little bit tougher for those folks to maintain that position, I think, going forward. I also think it's going to be tougher for people who proclaim their belief in transparency.

who obviously are not working for transparency. They're working completely the opposite of that. And then I wonder about the position of these, those companies that may have possession of this material. You said you've been in contact with, say, the Lockheeds of the world. I can imagine they feel they've done their country a favor by taking this stuff, storing it, trying to study it and figure it out for decades,

keeping it off the books, keeping the public uninformed, and now they're being called to task to cough it up. If I were Lockheed and I had flying saucers in this amazing technology, I wouldn't want to give it up. And I wonder, do you get any sense that they are fighting back, that they will use their considerable influence to try to derail this legislation before it becomes law? Yeah, absolutely.

Very, very good points made there. And I point out that the Senate Democrats put out a statement saying, senators, congressmen, committees and staff began to pursue the issue and uncovered a vast web of individuals and groups of ideas and stories to share. While these stories have varying levels of credibility, the sheer number and variety has led to summing Congress to believe that the executive branch was concealing important information regarding UAPs over broad periods of time. So this was not a small group that some people like to suggest. It's a vast number of people who are all saying broadly the same thing. So that's very important. And the appointed Lockheed, absolutely correct. Michael

Schellenberg, a great journalist, he was reporting that a major defence contractor, and I think that is Lockheed, a vice president was basically saying to the US military, look, we need to open up these programs because we're not making a lot of effort in terms of discovering how these craft work. We need to open these up to a broader range of like engineers and scientists and that vice president who asked that question of the US military was greeted hostily from my understanding and he was told no you can't do that so I think to some extent it is in Lockheed's interest to get this opened up to certain extent because at the moment you know there's not a lot of scientists and engineers working on this look if you've done drugs or something like that and you're a

scientists and an engineer, there is no way you're going to get access to these. And I can tell you that a lot of the best scientists and engineers out there have probably done drugs in their lives. I mean, we're talking about out of the box fingers here, you know, a lot of the best scientists and engineers are. And they wouldn't be able to get access to these such programs because of that reason. So I think that's a really important aspect to it. But I think like the US government, you know, it's not a simple answer. There may be varying degrees. There may be some within defense contractors that want to get this information out and others that are not so sure.

So I think it might be a mixed bag and I don't really have enough of an understanding of how the internal dynamics are working in relation to this. Hey, Chris, George, I just want to know, before you go here, are you excited? We have a date. It's been leaked, not by me. The 26th, not by me or George, but it's been leaked.

This is the 26th is the date for the hearings. Are you guys excited about what, going to happen? What is going to happen? Who's going to testify, Chris? Who's going to testify? I really have no idea. I really have no idea. I'm just really excited like the rest of you. I'm planning to get some popcorn, get a beer and just enjoy the spectacle because if there's anything I know, it's that this will be a spectacle because we're not going to have questioning of bureaucrats who are going to tie to the party line. We're going to have direct witnesses. is you can actually share what they know about UAP to the U.S. public.

And I think we can expect some fireworks. I really do. All the best hearings throughout U.S. history have been spectacles. And I think we deserve one on UAP, don't you? Yeah. One last point to raise with you, Chris, before you go. And that's about 29 palms. So Jeremy and I broke out this story.

We pursued it because of these U.S. Marines who were witnesses to an event. who told us that they saw a crap. And we know that this happened at a base where flares are regularly used in training. Some of our witnesses, these U.S. Marines, work extensively with flares themselves, and they told us that they thought what they saw in the sky was not from flares. We've now seen a release from the Pentagon, 126 photos. Presumably, they're all of this one flare episode, and it's sort of been generally described as debunk this case. You tell us what you learned, what information you were able to get out of the Pentagon

and what you think about where this is gone. Yeah, absolutely. So, I mean, at the time, we reported the information that we were aware of. And obviously, afterwards, more information has now come out. So we provided an update reporting that new information. I would say that one of the things that did stand out was two flares being shot up, which was described by the Marines.

And then when those two flares shot up, you can kind of like cease and smoke trails, which look like they may have been from flares. But look, nothing is conclusive, I don't think. I mean, you can say that it may be likely that it's frares. You can't say 100% that it was flares. And I can't report that either. And it's never straightforward with these cases. And also, I'd point out as well that a lot of the Marines did say they sort of craft.

They didn't say, oh, we just saw lights in the sky, could have been flares. No, they actually say that they saw the outline of a craft. So when you see an outline of the craft, of a potential craft, let's say, in one of the photos, that's not just captioned in the photo. It was seen by Marines as well. And I don't really think that's been sufficiently explained how the Marines saw the outline of what they think was a craft. And, you know, all I would say is I just welcome more information. If anyone else is able to look further into this and find out why that might be,

I think that would be fantastic, especially for the Marines. And, you know, they've done a really brave thing. And so actually speaking out, they did the right thing because they weren't getting the answers for them higher up. So, you know, you guys did the groundwork for them, you know. And I'm just hoping that we can get more answers for them in terms of some of the lingering questions. When did they tell you about the 126 photos of flares? Did they say when those flares had been recorded, when the photos were taken, where exactly they were? Did you get metadata with those photos, or do you know?

No. From my understanding, there's no metadata. So, again, this is why it's so, this is why it's so annoying, doing stories sometimes, because you can never conclusively say one way or the other sometimes, you know, I don't know how anyone could say, oh, it's 100% debunk because that's not like, that's not how life works sometimes. I mean, in terms of an investigation, you know, especially when you don't have full access to the files and records and anything else relating to this, if you don't have all the information in front of you, which has been verified, you're never going to get resolution. And that's just,

it's really, really annoying not to be in that situation, you know? I would love to say, look, it's conclusively flares. We know it 100% debunked, but look, the truth doesn't work like that sometimes, you know, there's varying explanations and subtleties involved. This is how life works.

You know, it's complicated. There's no simple answer to these things sometimes. So, I mean, personally, I think there is a body of weight to suggest these may have been flares, but again, I just can't conclusively say that if they were or not. And all I can do as a journalist is,

I can only report the news. I can report this new information has come out. Yes, it does look compelling to a certain extent. However, the Marines don't feel this. This is conclusive. So that's all I can do as a reporter. You know, and I could only, to a certain extent, insert my own opinion.

Yeah. And that's where I find myself. And I appreciated the way that you covered it because a lot of people, they just fold like cheap suits because of public pressure on Twitter and all that. you know, the idea is to solve the case. I don't even know why people would write the word debunked. The idea is to solve it. And, you know, from the very beginning, we're seeking answers to the nature of the event.

We're reporting what we're being told the best we can. People are arguing, well, why did it take you two years? You should have known there's a training event. I'm going to say one last time. It was over two months of training. If you've ever actually spoken to anybody there, they'll tell you that, that there's constant training exercises. A lot of that footage that they show

was definitely from the 20th was also on the 16th was put up. That's Michael, the magician behind the recordings here, was able to find that on the website. When you got information like that, you can't just decide that you know what's going on. You've got to go further. You've got to go deeper, and that's annoying to people.

So, you know, I've been going to the Marines and I've been showing them and going through them and recording with them saying, what do you think of this? do you think of that? Does this make sense? And across the board, there's an openness to solving the case. They want to solve it. But across the board, they feel that they know what they saw. I'll read you one quick quote, direct response to that. And all those footage, all those images, George, there was one image, one image that they're saying is these flares with the smoke. Cool man,

let's solve the case. But here's one of the Marines that I showed it to, This is what he said. He goes, we were not briefed beforehand by any higher-ups about any training going on at the time. We were not offered an explanation afterwards either. I just know we had photos showing a shape, and other Marines said they could see a shape with their own eyes. I basically said, honestly, I'm 60-40 after these images have come out, 60% being that they aren't flares. And, you know, I think that comes from being there and. seeing it and being like artillery men, being like, I know what flares are like. So look, that's the

conflict. That's the divide. And I'm not going to just, you know, say something is right if I don't know for sure. And people can disapprove of that type of investigatory effort. But it's an investigatory effort. And I'm just going after it. Again, I'm open to it. I want to solve it. But the words people use, like concede or another word is debunked. No, man, this has always been about finding out the truth. And so let's find out the truth. You know? Chris, thanks so much.

We love the liberation times. Can't wait to talk to you again and are so glad that you're on top of this story. Oh, thank you. Thank you so much for having you guys. I'm a huge fan of weaponized. Brilliant. Keep up what you're doing. Talk to you.

We'll do our best. Nice to see, man. See you. Thank you. Thank you. Man, that was great to talk with Chris. I always love his perspective. He is so thoughtful.

He's fair. He's balanced. He wants to know the truth. He really digs deep when he does his Liberation Times articles. I honestly said anybody who's interested in kind of learning that support what Chris is doing because we need a man. We need a journalist like that who's independent, who's not one of these mainstream organizations where they get blocked from doing stories.

That's happened to a bunch of friends of mine. So I really appreciate that he talked to us today. I want to talk about hearings. I am so excited, the behind-the-scenes stuff that's been going on. You know, George, man, we've been working our butts off. Yeah, so, you know, last episode of Weaponized, we heard directly from Tim Burchett, a congressman from Tennessee,

who's been directly involved in this. There was a lot that he said, but there was a lot that we could not say about when the hearing was going to happen, who the witnesses might be. Now, some of that was put out, was leaked, not by us. July 26th, this House subcommittee, a subcommittee of the Oversight Committee, will have a hearing. We'll hear directly from firsthand witnesses. Congressman Burchett, Representative Luna of Florida, I think it would be co-chair

the subcommittee, but we were told that it would be bipartisan, that there'll be a Democrat on the committee to ask questions. How much do we want to say about what we know about that hearing? What's going to happen? Yeah, it's still a little bit of a dance. I mean, I'm kind of sworn to secrecy and trying to help facilitate this, right, from the witnesses. But the exact date is out. It's the 26th, you know, unless there's some atomic, you know, non-disclosure bomb that goes off. Like, we're set for that. I mean, I can tell you that we have, we have a few witnesses that are really important to go on record. But I think it's going to be really well done, George. Like, when people learn the subcommittee from oversawks,

that this is being done with, and they understand the numerous people from both sides of the aisle that are going to be there. It's going to be truly bipartisan. That's the promise that's been made, even to the witnesses, the people speaking. We were going to play a little role in that, and at this point, we'll see how this goes. But the role we can play is we can submit a pretty powerful statement that I think is going to be, you know, take it seriously. And then we're going to hear from people. And the people I would like to hear from. So let's just go this way. I would love to hear from David Grush, unhinged, unchained, ask David Grush, some really interesting questions. You know, I'd love to hear directly from a couple pilots, you know, people that might have like,

I don't know, engaged a UFO or been part of squadrons that saw these things all the time. That would be awesome. I mean, I also think it would be awesome to hear from from Lazar. There's a funny story about that. Yeah. Yeah, I know that that question comes up quite a bit. And you and I have talked to Lazar about it multiple times over the last couple of years. The topic has come up. You know, I don't want to pat ourselves too much on the back, but we have had a role behind the scenes working with this committee because they want to line up the best group of witnesses they could get. And some of them needed help to talk them into it. And we have to have to. And we have to played a part in that. And for a while, we were on the list of people who were going to speak.

That's not going to happen. It changed this week. But we're happy to help the committee as it moves forward. And we know that this is the first of what's going to be a lot of hearing. So yeah, Dave Grush would be at the top of the list of people that I'd like to hear from. Aviators like Dave Fravor, Alex Dietrich, Ryan Graves, folks like that would be great. There's two names I want to bring up that I'd like to hear from sometime. I think it's kind of a long shot to get. either one of these guys, but they'd be great. One is Jay Stratton. The other is Dr. Jim Lackatsky. And of course, Jay Stratton, we had him one weaponized. We revealed him to the world. And I think our third episode, he's the only person we know of that was involved in every step of the way since

Ossap, since that program created in 2007 at the Defense Intelligence Agency. He is the person who single-handedly did the first investigation of the Tick-TAC case for O'SAP. What we now know about Tick-TAC was largely as a result of his work. He was part of Allsap, that first investigation after Alsap ended, he was a key part of, with Lou Elizondo on ATIP. When that ended, he was brought back in by the U.S. Navy. He put together an unofficial team that eventually became formalized by Congress, became the UAP task force. I think a lot of the work that he and Travis Taylor did on that task force went into AIMSog and Arrow, and then he left government. He's still working on UFO-related issues, but he'd be a great witness if they can never talk him into it. And of course,

Dr. Lekatsky was the brain behind Ossap. He's the guy who started it. He talked Harry Reid and Robert Bigelow into creating it and funding it. He oversaw it. He was courageous in terms of the scope of the program. Appropriately, inappropriately, I think that was cut off before its time. If it had not been, they were pursuing crash retrieval programs during OSAP, and maybe that was part of the reason why they got their legs chopped off. Of course, Lou Alizondo, we'd all love to hear official on the record testimony from him because he's been so key to this whole process. And of course, the last name I would mention is Admiral Thomas Wilson,

and I don't have to explain why. Yeah, yeah. For audience, should go listen to one of our past episodes or the last episode to hear about the Wilson Davis memo as it's called. There was even a clip where I was talking about it on the Joe Rogan podcast way back in the day, George, before it was really accepted and put into congressional record. So they can look that up. Yeah, all these names, man, all these people, I want to hear from all of them.

If it was my choice, it would be just a huge party of people spilling beans. But I think we're really lucky to have landed where we got to. You know, I actually think this is like our role in help facilitating. I think that it's really appropriate that we hear from a few. people with direct experience from a military perspective, people on the inside talking now outwardly, rather than just having the bureaucrats trying to stop all the information as if they're uneducated.

So I kind of like where we landed. I'm excited to be there. I'm excited to kind of see and help this process kind of get louder. This is our first set of hearings in history, where you have people like this under oath. I think they put you under oath, right? You're under oath in the congressional setting. I mean, it's going to be awesome.

And I think some of the people I know, they're ready to throw some grenades. Do you want to get back into the Lazar thing? Because I had this funny experience. Sure. Go ahead. Before we leave this, I'd just say, as you touched on there briefly, is what's going to happen at this hearing is important. What is not going to happen at the hearing is also important.

And that is we're not going to hear excuses. We're not going to hear bureaucrats or people. who want to dismiss this, or folks who claim they have no knowledge of nukes, UFOs over our nuke bases, they've never heard of the Wilson Davis documents. They don't know the history of this, or they claim they've heard no credible evidence that there's non-human technology or sightings or cases or things of that sort. The excuse makers that have sat on this stuff for so long are not going to be the witnesses we're going to hear from, and that is going to be a refreshing change. Yeah, and also I've seen some crazy stuff online. I mean, this is not going to be

some ultimate disclosure. They're going to walk an alien in as a witness. However, that would be really cool if they did. But I mean, I'm pretty sure now, after kind of working with everybody, I know what is not going to happen. And it's, you know, I'm not going to be able to, like, show some new footage in the public, put it in the public realm at that time. We're not going to, you know, have this kind of mass thing people are talking about. I've just read some crazy stuff online. You know, keep your expectations right where they need to be, which is that we are starting the conversation under that setting, you're going to see those people talk, and it's just going to be really powerful testimony. I think people are going to go just a little bit beyond

where they've gone before, especially if they're asked good questions, because everybody makes a statement. But then there's time for very smart people in Congress to ask the right questions. And I think that's going to be very essential to how this goes. But like you told me, George, maybe this time we're actually going to learn something compared to the other. hearings. Yeah, I hope so. I really do hope so. I hope we can be there for it. That's my plan. I don't know about yours, but I hope we're there to see it in person. And I know we traditionally try to lower expectations, but this might be a case where good, solid expectations are appropriate. Yeah, I think so. Look, I'm an optimistic person. And you know we are going to be there. We have

some things we have to do. So you know we're going to be there. But anyway, that sounds great. And I do, it was really kind of funny experience I want to talk about. It's kind of cool. But there was this clip I saw and it was of Commander Fravor on Lieutenant Graves podcast called Merged. And it's just an awesome podcast. And he focuses on pilots and that sort of thing talking about this idea of bringing the information out. And also he started a new organization. And man, he's done some great work. But that conversation between Commander Fravor and between Lieutenant Graves was spectacular. And what was of real interest to me was funny because I know Commander Fraver has spent time with Bob Lazar and that they become friends through understanding each other.

But to hear him on that, I would like to play a clip of that. I hope Ryan's okay with that. But it's just this cool clip where they kind of talk about the climate of politics right now and kind of mentions Lazar a few times. And it was really interesting to hear Commander Fraber talk about Bob Lazard, how different it is now, how different the climate is now about going to Congress and talking about UAP or UFOs than what Bob said back in 1989. But why don't you hear from him himself? No one goes to Hank's for his spreadsheets. They go for a darn good pizza.

Lately, though, the shop's been quiet. So Hank decides to bring back the $1 slice. He asks co-pilot in Microsoft Excel to look at his sales. and costs. Help him see if you can afford it. Co-pilot shows Hank where the money's going and which little extras make the dollar slice work. Now, Hank says, line out the door.

Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets. Learn more at M365 copilot.com slash work. Some of the folks that are physics-minded that say, well, that's against the law of physics. No, it's against the laws of physics that we know. Einstein came up with a lot of laws of physics and theories that went against what people believed at the time.

but they've been proven to be true. So because we don't have it now, doesn't mean it's not possible. It just means we haven't figured it out. And if you talk to, you know, because I've talked to Bob, he'll tell you, I said, how long to you think you, well, you saw, he said at least another 100 years because of our material science.

It's the same thing with anything else. You go, oh, can we do this? We don't have the material science to do it. But now we do. So I was talking to him one day, and I said, I said, hey, how would you describe it? He said in 1989, because he says he got to go inside the craft. And this is obviously to the audience, if you're assuming that you believe Bob.

But I'll just say Bob's a very legitimate guy, and he's very smart. He said, if you'd asked me, it was made out of wax, and then you heat it up, and then all the seams would melt because it didn't have any seams or rivets or anything of that. That was 1989. I said, what about now? This is a couple years ago. He said 3D printing. He goes, you would just 3D print it.

Because if you look at anything 3D printed, you know, you can make things that move in 3D printing, but it's one solid piece. it's literally revolutioned. There's a guy that made a whole car out of 3D printing. So the brake assembly is literally one unit. It's made as one unit. And the piston inside moves and it doesn't have, you can't break it, you can't. And what we're probably imagining here is more of, you know, not 3D printing as we have it today, but, you know, a technological progression that would make it probably visually seamless and very strong,

not what we have today. It's going to get better. With everything coming out right now with Mr. Gorsh coming out, I have to say, say his name about, uh-huh. Crush, I think. Croce, crush, crush. Literally saying the same thing that Bob Lazar said in 1989, and, you know, Bob got chastised for it, and this guy's coming out.

Now it's like, because it's accepted. In 1989, if you just said UFO, UAP, whatever in Washington, D.C., you'd have been laughed out of your seat in Congress. Well, now you've got active congressmen and women that are pushing policy, you know, and I think it was Senator Rubio and Senator Gillibrand, who were literally diametrically opposed politically. But on this thing, they're not diametrically opposed. And I've sat in rooms with both Republicans and Democrats

who are diametrically opposed. But on this topic, it's bipartisan. There is no Republican or Democrat. It's like, what are we trying to do? And all people want to do is this is not about little green men and what it is. If it leads to something like that because we have stuff, so be it. To me, it's not important.

What's important is from our incident onward is how do we figure out what these are, how do they work, can we use that technology? With social media and now the support of elected officials that want to know, you know, if there is stuff, it's only a matter of time. It's only a matter of time. You can only hide so long because sometimes. Someone's going to talk. You can't put that back in a box.

So anyway, that was a pretty cool clip. And, you know, I just thought it was worth repeating. It's funny, man. I want to tell you the story. So I can't, I don't want to reveal a bunch of it. But like, you know, of course there's this conversation of Will Lazar testify. And you've been asked and I've been asked to help facilitate and we've talked with Bob about it. You know, there's nothing that would stop him from doing it.

It's just that he's told you everything that he has to say. But he did say the first. funniest shit the other day. So it happened was I'm on video on FaceTime with Commander Fraber and just kind of walking him through kind of what's going on with hearings, why it's important, what the steps would be, who's holding it. And I go, look, man, it's just going to be a handful, very small handful of people that have a kind of a direct experience. And also I want you guys to kind of shine that we know, I don't think we're going to have Lazar come up this time. I think that there's too much stigma. And he like stopped me. He's.

stopped me in his tracks. And he goes, why? And he goes, get Bob on the phone. Get Bob on the phone. So we patched in Bob right into the, right into the FaceTime. And man, Fravor was like, everything you said, man, everything you said. He goes, I and I work in a really special job. And I can't tell you what it is, but I'll tell you everything you said, man. And it was just so cool to see that interaction. Bob's reaction was hilarious because it was kind of like a soft pitch. you know, at the last minute, hey, man, what do you think about coming to D.C. to testify? And he was basically like, off the cuff. Why would it help them find missing money when those assholes tried to ruin my life?

Yeah. I mean, that's not a decision. Yeah, it's funny. But, I mean, there's other factors that go into it, too. Bob does not feel like he owes the UFO world any kind of debt or a sense of gratitude or how he's been treated over the past 30-plus years. I think he gave it the office. It's like what the saying used to be.

He told his story before there were whistleblower protections, and he got dumped on for it. And he continues to get dumped on pretty much every day. I don't think he has any sense of loyalty to UFO world at all. Yeah. Yeah, no, I wasn't trying to make light of it. I mean, I get it. You're bringing it to the real, which is like, man, you know,

he was beat up by all this. He's like, look, if you guys find out it's all true, great. But it's not really part of his life anymore. He doesn't really care. I know that's hard for people to hear. There's got to be something in him that, you know, likes it when punches are thrown. You know, it's cool conversations he has with people like a matter of favor. But yeah, he's just, I think he's past it.

But, you know, George, I'm an optimist. You never know. I think having your story told again, if you can give the account in different settings, it touches people in different ways to come to conclusion on what you're saying. Well, we'll see. We'll also see if I'm able to get to Washington for this July 26th hearing without some airplane disaster happening. You know what the curse is like. The travel curse is real with George Knapp.

I can testify to that. Anyway, man, look, I'm really excited for what's coming up in the next few weeks. I know that there's going to be some really awesome information put out. And I'm just pumped. I'm excited. and yeah, man, let's all watch it together. Yeah, we've got some good stuff coming too. Yeah, we do.

Until next time, everyone. Never has so few, had so much to tell, but could say so little. Following this and webinar, the presentation of Jeremy Corbelle, George Knapp, Dark Course Entertainment, and Cadence 13 Studios. Available now for free on the Odyssey app

or wherever you get your shows.