WEAPONIZED with Jeremy Corbell & George Knapp - UFO Transparency In The Corridors Of Power - Guest : Lester Nare

Episode Date: September 24, 2024

When Jeremy and George began recording this episode of WEAPONIZED, the proposed UAP Disclosure amendments to the Defense Authorization Act were still alive. By the time the recording session ended, Disclosure was dead for 2024. Nonetheless, the fight goes on. Last week, Jeremy Corbell met with several elected members of the House and key staff members to map out plans for upcoming UFO hearings. At the same time, an experienced lobbyist Lester Nare was also on Capitol Hill urging members to keep pushing for UFO transparency. Will such efforts keep the issue alive in Washington, in spite of significant pushback from powerful interests who prefer that UFO secrets stay buried? In this episode, Jeremy and George provide an update on what members of Congress are thinking, and Lester Nare shares his thoughts on how the fight may unfold in the coming months. ••• Follow Lester's work on X at https://x.com/LesterNare & https://x.com/UAPcaucus Reach out and see what you can do to help UAP Transparency here... https://UAPcaucus.com ••• Watch the three-part UFO docuseries titled UFO REVOLUTION on TUBI here : tubitv.com/series/300002259 ••• 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 WeaponizedPodcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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 Spriteberry 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. This summer, serve up the cookout classics,

craft mayo and dressing. Toss green salads with delicious ranch dressing or zesty Italian. Serve smooth, craveably creamy potato salads with mayo. We all know it's not a cookout without craft. In this episode of Weaponized. For the last several days, you've been in D.C., meeting with people, as you said.

Do you want to say, obviously, it sounds like you met with Nancy Mace. You want to say who else you met with? I'm here for a variety of. of reasons talking with legislators who are working on this issue, and I'm very impressed with the desire to learn and put best foot forward for some powerful new hearings. Members are armed with other ideas and tools for ways to get at, for example, some of the lower-hanging fruit for declassification, such as the intelligence assessment from OD&I about the origins of UAP.

Secrets, cover-ups, and strange phenomena. UFOs and ideas that challenge reality itself. All 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.

This is weaponized. I'm George Knapp, lounging here in the bunker on a crisp autumn day in Las Vegas. I'll tell you, folks, if you ever want to visit Las Vegas, this is the time to do it. From mid-September to the end of October, it's the nicest time of the year, temperatures in the low 60s, into the high 80s, feels like Kauaii outside. It's nice to be able to walk outdoors and not have your skin burst into flames. Jeremy, where the heck are you? I'm in Washington, D.C., actually. Really?

What are you been doing? Oh, man. I don't know. Kicking down doors and shaking trees, George. I mean, you know, that's, this is a really exciting time for the topic. I think people are starting to get a sense of that. I know there have been some announcements on like Twitter and most of them are rubbish, but there are some hints of what's coming.

And, you know, absolutely no secret. second hearing, going to be chaired by Representative Mace, you know, that is public information. I'm not saying that out of school here. And that's very exciting. She is, she's, she's, she's a pit bull. I mean, she is. It's going to be really exciting to have her chair it. I was reviewing some of the questions that she asked during the last hearing. And I started to recall, wow, the question she asked moved this conversation forward 50 years because she asked about biologics because she just wanted to know what does that mean, you know, non-human biological entity. She wanted to know what that meant, you know, non-human intelligence. It was simple questions that the American people

wanted to know. So no secret. That's coming. So obviously I'm here for a variety of reasons talking with legislators who are working on this issue. And I'm very impressed with the desire to learn and put best foot forward for some powerful new hearings. So I don't know how far you want to go, but for the last several days, you've been in D.C., meeting with people, as you said. Do you want to say, obviously, it sounds like you met with Nancy Mace.

You want to say who else you meant with? Not at this time. I think it's good for people to know that I met with a lot of people, people that you haven't heard from yet very much on this topic. So I think that that's very, very positive. You know, there are some usual suspects, that kind of thing you could say. But really, I think those meetings are, you know, it's more confidential. I'm going to learn, but also to give whatever information that collectively you and I, George, have, to try to support the mission of bringing this to the public and revealing to the public, whatever the truth may be.

We'll come back to that subject of what's going on in D.C. a little bit later, or we'll bring a guest in and talk about some specifics. But, you know, it's interesting, Jeremy, you've been traveling so you're not up on social media. But a lot of people commenting on X and other places, it seems like a lot of, lull in the UFO topic that has kind of disappeared. And I'm wondering, what the hell are you talking about? Because it is not a lull. You know, there are always peaks and valleys with this subject over the decades.

But there's a heck of a lot going on, right? Yeah. Look, I understand I'm kind of getting goosebumps because, you know, it's kind of a downer when it's not all over the news on every channel and every station because we're kind of accustomed to that now. And I want to talk about how we got accustomed to that because that was never how it was when We started working together 11 years ago, right? I looked at that the other day.

That's crazy. But you've been doing it for so long. And there was a lot of times where it was hard to even get a story on the news about something like this. You were the only one really doing it. So these lulls, they do feel like, oh, man. However, behind the scenes, what makes it to have an explosion of information. And I want to talk about whistleblowers today. But having an explosion of information, that's from a whole bunch of information.

that's from a whole bunch of silent work from people who probably will never be public who work behind the scenes. And George, you and I know, I mean, you've been in a skiff with one of them that I think is one of these unsung heroes. Nobody will ever know their name, most likely, although one day will pull them out of the shadows, right?

But there's a lot of people like that that are working behind the scenes. And I think to your point, George, people should be highly optimistic that people, representative government is on one hand becoming more educated on the facts of this issue. On the other hand, getting more aggressive because they realize they're being lied to actively and the information is being suppressed despite the fact they should have oversight and accountability from these individuals and organizations running the show behind the scenes.

So you've got these two very powerful things happening, education and the realization that they're being lied to and stopped from knowing the truth. And let me tell you, a lot of these representatives and a lot of these members, both sides and both in Senate and the House are pissed off. And that is good for trying to find out brass tax, you know, fundamental truth on this issue if we can. I just to kind of give the public a sense of how far we've come in a short period of time, we know where we were five years ago today, right? Five years ago today, at the time we're recording this, where we were. Tell our audience where we were. Man, I can't believe it.

George Knapp, we went out near Area 51, but not like just you and me alone with one person like we normally did. We went out there with thousands of people. It was the Don't Storm Area 51 event series. that, you know, is so interesting from a personal perspective, George, because how that all occurred, why that occurred is because, first of all, Bob coming forward with you back in 1989, blew the lid off of Area 51 and fine saucers. The concept was out. Popular culture. But there was some dormant, you know, there's some kind of dormant thing that was going on over time, subculture.

There was not a pop culture. It was in pop culture, but unlike anything we saw before when that movie, Bob Azar Eric 50 One of Five Soshes that I made, went out, some kid watched it. I went on for my first time with our friend Joe Rogan and brought Bob. And some kid watched the movie and saw the podcast and then talk about pop culture, going from this explosion you did in 1989 to 2018, I think it was when it launched. Oh my gosh, it's a meme. All of a sudden, Area 51, what was the show me them aliens?

You know, that was like the meme. So it blew up. It blew up. I blame Joe Rogan still for that. He'll point the finger elsewhere. But ultimately, it comes down to you and Bob. It should be blamed for that. But then huge, massive, global attention.

And obviously it was a joke. No one's storming Area 51. There's this whole thing with the FBI and the kid and like me having to get on the phone and talk with agents. It was just a joke. It was a mean. But people wanted to show that they were interested. And the media reported less than occurred. There were a lot of people there.

And it was peaceful and fun. We even had Paul Oakenfold come and your buddy who runs the, the, um, The center, what was it called? The Alien Area 51 Research Center. Right. George Harris. George Harris. Yeah, so he hosted it.

It was safe. It was fun. And people got together. There were a lot of spooks there. Some of which you recognized probably with your eyes in the crowd, George. But it was a peaceful event. What that showed me, just to back up, what that showed me, mass public interest. It's one thing to see it in the New York Times.

And, you know, highly educated people are reading that. And then pop culture. Here we go. Just right in pop culture. You got a meme and thousands of people show up and so many millions of people around the world knew about this. So that was five years ago today that we were in our RVs hanging with Dave Foley, Paul Oakenfold, you and me, it was great. You know, I know that people look at it as kind of a mess of an event because at first there was a couple hundred thousand people who said, yeah, I'm going. and the idea that a couple hundred thousand people would show up out in the desert with scant resources and facilities,

not enough bathrooms, food. It really scared people. It certainly scared law enforcement and the federal security establishment because they were ready for anything. I mean, there were so much security out there. They had their own village, as you'll recall. And at the end, you know, with the warnings that our news organization, KLES and others put out, Look, don't storm out to Area 51. Don't plan on violating the sanctity of the base or trying to get in there to see aliens

because that is not going to happen. Even if there were aliens there, which I don't think that's the case anymore, security would be more than capable of repelling a gigantic crowd of folks who might go there. So it was a much smaller audience that actually showed up, and it was kind of a party atmosphere. But it was serious in this sense in that I think it was an expression of public frustration on the subject, on the UFO subject, that people are tired of being kept in the dark. I think it was symbolic more than anything.

There was no chance that they'd actually, you know, pierced the veil and see any recovered saucers or bodies, even if they were still out there, which I doubt. But it was a fun event that brought a lot of media attention to the issue. And I think overall it was a success in that sense. So it's not going to happen again. The local governments out there were taxed to the, their limit. They don't want it. I think that probably there's a continuing interest by the public

that still goes out there pretty much every day. But as a media event, as a statement of public frustration, I'd say it was a success. Yeah, I'd say, public frustration and then I would also say, you know, public interest. I think for me it was this, holy shit, we've gone mainstream pop culture, which is, I just think, really amazing. I mean, look, there were, fanatics, there were researchers, there were spooks, there were even agent provocateurs. And I don't think I've ever told this story publicly. And I'm actually not sure it's the right thing to do right now. But there were agent provocateurs there to try to be able to shut it down by causing a problem.

And I directly was engaged by an agent provocateur at By Area 51 during that. Maybe I will tell that story with you sometime, George. But I think overall, on a five-year anniversary of that crazy meme, don't storm, Air 51, that we tried to, I tried to harness and make sure it went smoothly as a positive thing. Because I felt semi-responsible, although I think it was Joe Rogan's fault. We are in a different era now. So now we are off of a first massive congressional hearing that was just over a year ago with a whistle. blower and then David Grush, Commander David Fraber, Lieutenant Ryan Graves. That was a huge moment that we were fortunate enough to be able to be there for.

And as witnesses provide written testimony on congressional record, which I'm very happy about. 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 to help him see if he can afford it. Co-pilot shows Hank where the money's going and which little extras make the dollar slice work. Now, Hanks has a line out the door. Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets.

Learn more at M365 copilot.com slash work. When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed sponsor 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. We're coming off with that. But also remember, there were other hearings.

You know, Representative Carson, when he was running the first one, then there were the little Senate side ones, which I, you know, I hope they do better. once, you know, open door because that was just basically asking Dr. Kirkpatrick if he needed more money or how can we help you? Can we comb your hair? I mean, it was crazy. Now, the new head of Arrow, everybody's like, oh, maybe he's a great guy. Well, he's still in a blue book box. I hope he's a great guy. And you know what? Challenge here. We've always said, George, we're going to give these people the benefit of the doubt. Nope, I'm done with that. They can earn our trust through action. So we've got to flip the script on that. So new head of arrow? Great. Glad you're a good guy, would love to have a beer with you, but you got a lot, you got a lot of work to do

to earn our trust now. Whatever you can do inside of that box, I hope it's not a blue book box, but if you can do something to be more transparent to the American public, that's who you're responsive to. That's who you're responsible to. That's why Arrow was set up was because the people asked for it and Congress put it into action. So hopefully that goes well, but here's the good news. good news is if I were to map out the next four hearings, it's going to be a continuous pulse engine of sonic booms. Now, you can never look past the next one. And I know everybody's saying November and even the chair apparently said on Twitter just today

that through a journalist that it was going to probably be mid-November. And that tracks. I'll just say that tracks. The question is, who's going to be there? What are they going to talk about? And I think that's going to be exciting. Hopefully we get something that uplifts, elevates, and forwards the conversation. So that's happening.

Things may change, as far as dates, but that is happening. But there's something else happening too. And I think it's kind of why I wanted to bring in a guest today. Turns out a friend of mine is also in D.C. I have not passed my friend in the halls, you know, walking around. I have not, but I know that this person was there with a group of people, but I want him to speak for himself. But the reason I think you and I, George, are interested in having our friend on this is because

there's many paths to the mountaintop. You and I are journalists and we can educate people within government and advocate. I can advocate for like how I think it could be more effective. But there's people attacking this from another angle. And as you and I have always said, we need a lot of. of minds on this, people doing different stuff with their skill sets. So I'm really happy to introduce a good friend of mine. And he runs, by the way, I'll let him tell you exactly what he runs and where to find him. But George, and I'm sure you're aware of him, tell me if you are aware of him, Lester Nair.

The following is a conversation with Lester Nair, founder of the civilian UAP caucus. Lester, Jeremy's been telling me about your work for a while. I've been seeing you on social media as well. Can you tell our listeners who you are and what your organization is? is trying to accomplish there in D.C.? Absolutely, George, and real pleasure to get a chance to talk to as well. I think for a lot of the new generation, we have the benefit of standing on the shoulders of giants.

We've been doing a lot of work when the social, professional, and political cost was much higher in the past. So, you know, one of the things that we're trying to do is continue that legacy forward. So I started the sort of civilian UAP caucus at UAPC caucus.com. About a year ago, after the Grush hearings

in the House Oversight Committee. And the idea was, you know, we had already had several years of legislation related to the UAP subject up until that point that had not really broken through both from a think tank and policy perspective or even in the media other than some independent media that we're all very much aware of. So we sort of have two things we try to focus on creating policy documents around what Congress has actually done related to the UAP subject. So we've done briefing packets for both of the ICIG briefings, the one that happened late last year and the one that happened in January.

We did another briefing packet around the DOD IG report that was released earlier this year, but the classified version was released in August last year. Again, to elevate and bring awareness that this stuff is happening at the serious level that politicians are used to seeing, as well as providing technical and operational support to a wide variety of these new. entities that are beginning to spring up around the UAP subject in the private sector. For example, we helped build out the new UAP integration and outreach committee website for the AIA, the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, which is the largest trade organization for aerospace in the world. So there is a lot of stuff, and I know you all know this as well, that is happening that is not talked about on Twitter or talked about on Reddit, but is moving this conversation

forward both politically and in the private sector. You and Jeremy have both been roaming the halls of Capitol Hill this past week. Can you give us a sense of what the reception has been like for you and what you've been telling them and what they've been telling you? Yes, so we were there over two days. I actually left and some of my team is still there now. And we started Tuesday focusing on members in both the House and the Senate. And the entry point was when usually you go to congressional offices, you're supposed to be

doing one of two things, you're supposed to be asking for something or giving something. And in our case, you know, we've been fostering these relationships with staffers over the last year, which is why they felt comfortable having us come in to talk with them in person. And I actually have a couple of the materials here that we talked with them about. I mean, the first piece was obviously, as we all know, the UAP Disclosure Act is again up for debate in the Senate. And so we actually printed out a hard copy of our explainer guide of the UAP Disclosure Act, which again breaks down sort of the significance of the bill. And I always love this quote on the back here that we put on it that, you know, speaks to the fact that this is an issue, regardless of what you may think about the

origin of UAP. It's something that Congress needs to focus on. So we brought that guide. We brought some of our declassification targets, some of the quotes from other members of Congress and the executive branch. And we expected to be doing a lot of education. a lot of bringing people up to speed. And I think one of the things that was at least somewhat surprising was there was a level of sophistication around the subject that was not just simply parroting what Arrow has come out in either their public statements or past reports, but understanding that Arrow is an agency that's already had appropriate funding and there's bureaucratic inertia that exists there.

So you have to deal with the environment that you're born into. So they recognize that Arrow is going to be there and how do we get the best out of it. But more importantly, they were thinking about the issue more holistically beyond just Arrow in terms of what are the other levers that they can be thinking about or pulling around the topic. So I think that was surprising that it was much less educating and it was much more of a dynamic conversation a little bit more in the weeds and nuanced. then has been signaled publicly or you would expect based on some of their general public statements. I am so excited. I'm bubbling right now.

So first of all, why didn't I get one of those? Why didn't you mail me one of those packets? If I had seen you in the hall, I would have wrestled you down for one of those. You got to get me and George one of those packets. I'm sure we'll learn a lot. You know, I think people need to understand. Like, sure, Lester, you know, we're friends. We have met in person.

But, you know, we're kind of fighting for a cause. It was nice to be able to have a beer with you at one point so we could talk about this stuff. And I think people will learn more about that mean later. But we're not in an organization together. We're two people taking very different approaches who find ourselves. And again, we didn't even see each other in D.C. But we find ourselves here at this critical moment. So I need to kind of backtrack just one second because I don't know the answer to this.

And the best questions are the ones you don't know answers to, right? Why in the world did you jump? in with a suit and sometimes a tie and start fighting for transparency on UFOs. What got you hooked on this? Why are you doing this, Lester? This is an interesting question, and I've talked about it in the past before. I mean, you know, much, much like many people, you know, we kind of have a roundabout way of ending up in this subject. I think there are three probably things that I can speak to of how I ended up here. One, growing up with some parents who were Zimbabwean immigrants, I play soccer, and I studied a lot.

But one of the things that I did with my dad, that was a childhood memory that's always stuck with me is we always used to fly model planes and model rockets all the time when I was a kid. So that already gave me an entry point of being interested in aerospace and flying and all these things. So that baseline as a starting point, in 2020, in 2011, I had a very mundane siting in North Carolina.

The typical amber orb situation could have been prosaic, but it was anomalous enough to stick out in my head until 2016 when the WikiLeaks emails came out that featured a couple of people talking about this subject. Also featured George Knapp, yeah. And political side. And I was a politico. I've always been very deeply involved in politics.

My day job is in housing affordability. So I work with local, state, and federal government officials on a daily basis. So it's a world that I understand very well. And much like many people, once 2017 happens, and then the David Grush. hearing and looking and seeing that nobody is doing the work. Just the basic stuff of any nascent political movement, I just knew that I had the resources, the skill set to be able to try to provide some movement here and at least show an example of how a normal average citizen who doesn't have a military background or an intelligence background, but understands

how our political system works can engage and help to move the conversation forward. Again, we're not having a conversation about whether these things are real or not. We're beyond that. At this point, you need to figure out what we're going to do about the existence of these things. And again, I always come at it. I don't have insider information. I don't necessarily work sources the way you guys do. I strictly come at it similar to how Gary Nolan described it on The Good Trouble Show the other day.

I don't believe anything. I just assign probabilities to possible outcomes. And based on the indirect evidence set that's out there, you know, there's something to it. And as our friend Robbie Williams says, George, as our friend Robbie Williams says, UFOs? Oh, yeah, something's up. Yes. Yes. I think Congress is looking for people who are looking at this issue seriously to have.

help them understand what to do about it. I want to like be, this is not a monolith in Congress, right? There are still certainly people who are stigmatizing the subject and think it's all nonsense, right? There's over 600 people in both houses, but there is a significant contingent of people who understand the seriousness of the issue, and they're trying to figure out how they can use the tools at their disposal to get at the issue and are looking for subject matter expertise in order to help them, think through those problems. So again, it's a dynamic, it's a very dynamic situation, and I think it's much less cut and dry than the way it's argued over on Twitter or any of these online platforms.

When I ask it to you, to give me a sense, because I'm not there in D.C. with you, of where things stand. So we've heard Senator Gillibrand say there's going to be a hearing. We don't know when. Matt Laslow was reporting as of Friday that Nancy Mace gave. him a solid date, November 13th for a House hearing. Don't know who's going to be part of that. How are those two mesh together? Do we know what Gillibrand is going to focus on versus what the House is looking at? Lester? Yeah, no, I can speak maybe to the Senate side. I think it's clear that we're going to continue to see the sort of arrow entry point as what the Senate hearing would focus on. This is my conjecture. This is not based on any kind of insider information. But

that does seem to be the way that they're lining up. And we do have a new director with Dr. John K. I don't want to mispronounce his last name. So I'll wait for that to come out. Kozlowski. So, you know, obviously we saw Christopher Mellon tweet the other day that, you know, he was very impressed with him after spending several hours. I know you two have likely back channeled with several folks who've worked with him in the past. So I think we will see probably is, you know, a little bit of a change of tone and tenor coming from the new director of Arrow. which will be a hopeful change. So that's definitely, I think,

what we'll see out of the Senate. With the House, it's clearly going to be focusing much more on the whistleblower and or getting information and getting to the bottom of what's happening piece. And that's just coming from Matt Laslow's article yesterday with him talking to Nancy Mace,

who's like a dog on a bone, you know, about this and, you know, wanting to create the environment that I think we all speak to where whistleblowers do feel that they have the protections and they have people who will be willing to go to bat for them to come forward and speak more publicly about what they know. So again, just from open source channels, that does seem to be what we're going to see in both hearings.

Yeah, I want to make sure to do a shout-out to Matt Laslow. I know there was like some friction on something we once said on the show. We were in Representative Luna's office one time and some information came out. He is a great journalist. He's jumping in there. getting quotes from people, even if dates change and this sort of thing. So big shout out to Matt Laslow.

People misunderstood, I think, a past episode when we're in D.C., George. I think he's doing great work as a journalist. He's the one getting those quotes and actively doggedly going after him. Lester, I would agree with you, and I'm not going to speak from a point of any direct conversations I've had. But in the ether, I can agree with you that it appears that on the Senate side, it's going to be probably very similar to what we saw with the former director of Arrow, Dr. Shankar Patrick, where you know, you have them sitting down talking about what they're doing. Do they need anything else?

You know, obviously, Senator Gillibrand wants to help facilitate the Arrow thing. I mean, the Arrow was created because of representative government. So, you know, obviously they want to make sure that they can, you know, have Title 50 or all the things that they need to do their work. It'll probably be like that is what I'm seeing as well, just from. general source information. I do think we should be aware of that, though, because even if we have a great new director, I kind of started this with George.

I don't know if you were on while I was saying this, no longer am I willing to give people the benefit of the doubt. They now have to prove their worth. So the new director of Arrow, other than a better PR campaign, so people start trusting them again because they got a real trust issue, a big one, other than the changing the PR thing, I would hope the new director would stand in the shoes of someone like a Jay Stratton who did great work to bring transparency to the American public on this issue. And I think there is an allegiance or an alliance or some sort of past working together maybe with the upcoming or the

new director of Arrow. So I'm sure he's a great guy. And I really hope he realizes this is more than a better PR campaign. The American public want to know what's going on. and they deserve to know, and I would argue they need to know what's going on. So with that said, it's time for that person to step up and do something about that. Now, on the other hand, this individual, who's the new head of Barrow, is within a box. That's an organization, and they're in the walls of the organization, and it has appeared very much like a more insidious Project Blue Book. And that has been not a peer.

It has been a counterintelligence operation. demeaning to whistleblowers. Just look at what Dr. Carpatrick wrote himself about David Grush when he's asking whistleblowers' witnesses to come forward and going on LinkedIn and doing some ridiculous rant. And also the interim director did the same thing, Tim. So it's kind of ridiculous. So at this point, within the walls and the confines of this project, Blue Book, disinformation cover-up campaign, recall an arrow.

I hope that the new director can break outside of that box to do what the American public wants them to do. Now, if he's a good guy and he can't, then he should step down and he should tell people he couldn't do that. But to continue along that path is going to be detrimental because shit's coming out either way. I'm just going to tell you as a fact talking and meeting with whistleblowers on this trip, maybe even facilitating meetings for whistleblowers unknown to the American public who will at some point be known at least by story. So I'm just saying, the information is coming out. better get in shape or they're just going to end up being another project book and we're going to go right past them. Now the house, last thing I want to say about that. Without any specifics of

confidential information, you know, look, man, I wish them the best. And I think they're on a good trajectory. And, you know, I got no crystal ball and I have no decisions. But anything that we can do to help inform people as this comes is great. They are, I'll tell you this, they are dead set on having this hearing, even if they already got pushed, right? They're dead. They're dead. said on having it. So I think we're going to be in a good place from a public understanding point of view because you have great people pushing this behind the scenes who are unknown to the public and then you have great people pushing forward with it who are known to the public. And just to list them off because this is no surprise to everybody, I mean to anybody,

we know Representative Burchett fighting hard. We know Representative Luna, sharp as a dagger and fighting hard on this. And kind of like a new warrior for truth on this, you know, Representative Nancy Mace. I mean, just incredible. And I also think other people that are jumping in, too, but we'll see more about that later. I think you bring up a lot of good points, Jeremy. And I want to just piggyback on two things. One, I'll also mention that Representative Garcia and Representative Moskowitz

are equally as motivated as the members that you just mentioned around this subject, although they're on the other side of the political spectrum, there is some shared respect around the work that both parties are doing on this issue in the House Oversight Committee. So I think that's something that's interesting to note that they disagree on a lot of things vehemently, but there is some set of mutual respect around the efforts around the UAP work that they're trying to do. And just coming back to Arrow, one of the things that we tried to express is that the mandate that Arrow has to centralize data within the DOD so that there's a unified data set for warfighters

and operational reasons, which is a legitimate thing that we should have an office do. And public communication about this subject are two functions that cannot live within the same office. And that may be re-looked at to say, great, Arrow can do the internal work. data gathering, fine, wonderful. But there needs to be a different entity that's sole responsibility is the public communication piece and education piece, which cannot live within side the DOD and likely needs to be also not within Congress given what we know about the way in which these programs are being hidden with the Atomic Energy Act and transclassified nuclear information,

which can only be adjudicated by an entity that's coming out of the office of the president as an example. So that was one of the key things we tried to speak to is Arrow exists. It's not going to go away. It already has that inertia. But what its mandate is originally was unfortunately an impossible thing to do. They can't do both pieces. And so fundamentally, you need to have that separate entity, which in the UAPDA, It's being presented as the review board taking over that public communication function away from Arrow under the authority of the office of the president.

It might not be perfect, but it at least provides a path for that separation. Okay, break it down for me. I'm sorry. This is where my ignorance really starts to become strong. The force is strong of that ignorance here. I've heard about a select committee, you know, kind of like, you know, looking back in the day when they were uncovering like M.K. Ultra and that kind of thing. a select committee, and I don't really fully understand what that means. I would love that explained to me, as well as when you're talking about, you know, kind of separating into communications and having this

advisory board under the president, I've heard all of these things, but I'm really ignorant to it. Can you just explain that to me and our audience? Those two things. Absolutely. Absolutely. So, you know, the U.S. government is not a monolith, right? It's the largest employer on the planet. And it has three fundamental branches, the executive, the legislative and judicial, right? The legislative branch, Congress, the House and the Senate, one of their key responsibilities is oversight over the actions of the executive, right? So they give the executive branch the money to do their job, and then they have oversight on the job that they're doing. The allegations that have been coming forth from folks like David Grush, especially about the way in which these crash retrieval and reverse

engineering programs are operating is by using certain aspects of classification that allow them to forego congressional oversight, right? And so what that means is in Congress, you have different committees that are focused on different types of responsibilities. You'll have a committee on armed services, that's focused on military, on intelligence, that's focused on the intelligence community. and you do occasionally have special or select committees created for specific topics. As an example, former Representative Mike Gallagher, who had asked some very pointed questions in the UFO hearing two years ago. He was the chairman of the Select Committee on China and the CCP, which is a new committee

strictly focused on dealing with the U.S.'s relationship and strategic competition with China. So we have put out a white paper last year about the benefits of having a select committee for UAP in Congress because right now, as you're experiencing Jeremy, we're trying to have these hearings happen in the Oversight Committee or the Intelligence Committee. And those committees have a million other responsibilities to deal with that are not just on UAP. If there were a UAP select committee, they would have money given to them, staff given into them and their sole responsibility every day they wake up and pour their coffee and go into the

office would be to study this issue and they would also have the ability to do subpoenas and have hearings on their own time. Right. So that's a select committee idea. How do we get that real quick? How do we get that? So the challenges you need to have either the Senate majority leader or the Speaker of the House be on board with allocating political capital and resources towards the creation. Name those two people. Who are those representatives? In the Senate, it's Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. In the House, it's Speaker of the House of Mike Johnson. So those would be the two people for select committee that would have the most authority to make that happen. Now, I do want to say that would be a great way for us to increase the volume

of new information, new witnesses, and focus on this issue, creating a little bit more of a ground swell, but they might still reach, again, the roadblock that we all understand, which is not being able to get access ultimately to the underlying waived, unacknowledged, special access programs where these alleged crash retrieval programs exist. This is the reason why a presidential advisory board or review board would be valuable in addition to a select committee because that would likely be the only entity with the authority granted by way of the president to actually access those waived, unacknowledged special access programs. So Congress could have the select committee and they could look around, but we still might have

the issue of we can't talk about it in public, we can't get people in this skiff, and the continued roadblocks that we've seen historically. Okay. So how do we get that? So I understand how you've explained the select committee and the power of that. And what a, hold on, hold on. What a cool job that would be to get paid to study UFOs. I mean, sign me up, baby.

But look, they're going to get people, hopefully, hopefully that occurs. Let's push for that. I know actually personally, I'll tell you this. Representative Gates is all about that. I know that personally. I would love to see that happen. That's just a heads up for people want to, you know, try to reach out and push for that to happen. But the second thing you're talking about here, the idea of this, I guess,

presidential advisory group underneath the president, what is the exact terminology of that committee? It would be called the UAP Records Review Board, as is currently outlined in the UAP Disclosure Act of 2024. Okay, so how do we get that? Does that mean that the Disclosure Act needs to pass somehow for us to get that? Can you just explain it to me? Yes. So currently there is a proposal, a bill that has been proposed by Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota, alongside Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, who also have the co-sponsors of Senator Gillibrand from New York and Senator Heinrich from New Mexico. And the bill creates a nine-member presidential review board that will have subpoena power, that will have whistleblower protections, the ability to have hearings. have the clearances to access all of the same programs that the president has the ability to access,

right? And that UFO, UAP Disclosure Act of 2024 is currently in the Senate. It's being negotiated in the Senate. And there is a single person, and this is the information we did get this week, there's a single person who is the crux of this possibly getting out of the Senate into the next stage of the process to pass. And that is a minority leader Mitch McConnell. Mitch McConnell is the end-all be-all right now for the UAPDA to get into the Senate's version of this big military bill that's coming up, the National Defense Authorization Act. Did you talk with his staff? Did you get to Mitch McConnell? We did get to Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul, who was the second one, who was a little bit on the fence about this. I'll actually tell this great story. We were in one of the hallways right. Right.

where they do a lot of these interviews with members. And I saw Senator Paul wrapping up an interview as he was coming down the stairs. I personally went to him and handed him a physical copy with him with him and his staffer and told him that the American people are ready for this conversation. Both of those offices we know, because we've been pushing for call campaigns, have been getting a lot of calls. We need to, especially with Senator Mitch McConnell, continue to call his office. They are calling people. They are calling people. back, by the way, and telling them that we have received your calls and thank you for calling. We've seen that volume of callbacks increasing. So again, the public is a huge part of this

conversation. I know people feel jaded about it and think that the government's never going to have this. I totally understand that. But we were there in person looking at the whites of people's eyes and there is telling us that they are hearing these calls coming in and it is making the issue. man, George, your dear friend, you got him into the UFO topic. I saw that interview you did. The day you were releasing the Bob Lazar first interview, your dear friend, Senator Harry Reid. Can you talk to us a little bit? Because you've seen this.

You've sent somebody to Papu's Lake with oversight of black programs if you want to tell that story. So is this different now? What's going on? You've been down this path. But it's different now today, right? Your friend, Aerey Reid, what he was fighting uphill, and now it feels like there's a level playing field.

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. Where's your playlist taking you? Down the highway, to the mountains, or just into daydream mode while you're stuck in traffic. With over 4,000 hotels worldwide,

Best Western is there to help you make the most of your getaway, wherever that is, because the only thing better than a great playlist is a great trip. Life's the trip. Make the most of it at Best Western. Book direct and save at bestwestern.com. It's very different. I mean, Harry Reid, when he first expressed an interest in the subject, kept it on the down low. He had to. Politically, it was poison.

You know, it would seem crazy. So he had a quiet interest in the subject for a good 20, 25 years before he kind of came out of the woodwork. And he admitted it in an interview in 1989, a live interview, that said, yeah, I've been thinking about it. And maybe it's a good subject for hearings. It didn't happen for a couple more decades. But he was a lone ranger there for a while. I think there's always been a low-level interest in the subject among matters, members of Congress. There have been hearings in the past way back in the 60s, but now it's completely changed.

I mean, the script has flipped and that there are a lot. If you guys saw, there are a lot of members of the House and in the Senate who are open about their interest in it and are asking questions. What I don't know is the likelihood of the UAP Disclosure Act becoming law this year. I know you guys are both talking to people about it, but it seems like it is still blocked, that there is still a very effective blockage. I don't know where that's coming from, but maybe Lester or Jeremy, you guys got a hint about that earlier this week. Yeah, I'll speak to this briefly, and I think you bring up a good point, George. And this is actually something that I've said since the beginning of the year that the likelihood that the UAPDA passes this year is not high.

And it is not solely because of potential pushback. It's also primarily because it's an election year. And there are just other priorities that members of both houses, have, which is in an extremely contentious presidential election where people view the outcome as being as extantial, that takes up all of the oxygen in the room. What I will say is the primary blockage on the Senate side now with where the bill is, is around political calculations as opposed to direct opposition for the UAPDA. If it were to get to negotiation with the House in November, that, I think, is where you're going to see some of that opposition.

However, one of the members that was, you know, opposed last year, Representative Wicker, who's the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, was just in an interview yesterday with Joe Khalil of News Nation when he was asked about the Senate hearing and what his thoughts are about the subject. And his tone seemed very different than his direct opposition to what we've seen last year. regardless of whether the UAPDA passes or not, members are armed with other ideas and tools for ways to get at, for example, some of the lower hanging fruit for declassification, such as the intelligence assessment from OD&I about the origins of UAP. Now, for some folks who might not know, the UAPDA actually passed in part last year with two requirements. One, the presumption of declassification for all UAP records older than 25 years, and two, the creation of the UAP records collection at the National Archives where both an unclassified and classified records collection would exist. Currently, Nick Gold over a declassified UAP has an active FOIA request for the intelligence. assessment. What this would basically say is a high-level summary that's given to the Office of the

Director of National Intelligence to say, what are UAP, all possibilities at all confidence levels? And currently, ODI and I has stated for the record that they expect that the intelligence assessment would be a part of materials that are already being gathered as a part of the requirements for the portions of the UAPDA that passed last year. So there are other pieces of information and other channels to get things declassified that are not solely dependent on the UAPDA passing. And as we get things like the intelligence assessment and we see some of these more anomalous options for possible origin on there, I think you'll see that create a little bit of a firestorm going into the 119th Congress where we are also going to be working on alternative legislation

to bring forth around potentially a UAP regulatory approach or simply getting the definitions passed without the review board and without eminent domain, which would allow us to actually have a conversation about UAP being distinct and uniquely different than drones or what the term of art, temporarily non-attributed objects, which is somewhere where we're a little bit mired still in the conversation of people associating UAP as meaning drones when there's a clear distinction between the drone incursions we're seeing and truly anomalous UAP. Yeah, clear distinction. And I think we're going to learn a lot more about that in the months to come.

George, are you optimistic where we are now? Come on, man. Do I see optimism? No, no, absolutely not. I think they're just powerful players that will, when this finally gets to that stage, if it gets that far, will raise their heads up above the parapets and slap it down. You know, they're powerful interests in D.C. The Pentagon itself and then its contractors who hand out a lot of money to key members of Congress

and who still oppose this coming forward, it could be billions, hundreds of billions of dollars worth of technology that's at stake here, you know. This stuff, if we get over figure out how to fly it, it'd be worth a lot of money. You know, it'd be, if we could develop it, master it, it'd be worth a lot of money. And the people have been holding onto it for all these years don't want to just give that up. Yeah, but it does make you wonder, George. We know for a fact that the United States has been trying to exploit and get derivative technologies from hardware of NHA craft, that we have obtained, breached the holes of, and people have been inside of.

How we know that is because your colleague and friend and co-author, Dr. James Lekatsky, who ran the UFO program that is acknowledged called Ossap, told us for the first time in visual format on the show when we were talking with him that our government has obtained a craft of unknown origin, a UAP or UFO that we've breached the hole. There's suspicion that he might have even been able to physically see it or get inside of it. I don't know. But here's the deal. If we have been exploiting those technologies and we have been trying to get derivative technologies, have we made any progress.

You go back to the Bob Lazar account and whether people believe him or not, the claim was that we have these craft and that we're trying to reverse engineer them. That was the claim in the story you broke in 1989. And here we are today. They're saying we have at least one craft. and we are trying to exploit it and are trying to back engineer it. It's almost like Bob Lazar is just this really lucky kind of guy that no one believes. But it makes me wonder if we've gotten through that progress and you brought back Russian classified documents and smuggled them back to the United States as a journalist.

By the way, George, I happen to know that those documents were submitted into JWix, which is a classified server within the intelligence community. and I know the date, and I know that they were put up there, everything you brought back, and there are a lot of people that salute you for doing that as a patriot and for America. But here's my point. Those documents said that Russia's aware and that they have their own UFO programs. We also know now that China does as well. How much have they learned?

How much technology have they been able to derive and exploit from these NHI craft? And is America going to be outpaced if we don't look at this soberly and it's not? admit the truth. As commander David Fravor, our friend and a good friend of mine who says to me constantly, the UFO problem is, it's like America and the UFO problem is like an alcoholic. We first have to admit we have a problem or we're not going to be able to do anything about it. And he's very sincere when he makes that metaphor. So my concern is that by stigma and bearing our heads in the sand and not listening to what the American people want, then we are going to fall behind in a critical aspect of what it means to be a technological nation on planet Earth where

everything is connected globally in 2024. I mean, it feels, to quote our friend Lou Elizano's book, it feels imminent that we deal and address with or address this issue. Additionally, shout out to Nick Gold. You brought up his name. Just I wanted to say that because I know he has some other organization that he does. And maybe you can quickly just give him a shout out because that he He actually told me through a message that he knows my older brother. So apparently he knows my older brother. So I just wanted, what is he doing? How is it different than your thing real quick and how do you guys collide?

So Nick Gold was a really key element to the success of this UAP hell day that we just did in D.C. He has an organization called Declassify UAP, very similar to what we do at UAP Caucus, right? we're providing the policy and think tank perspective for how Congress can look at this. So one of the things that he put together is actually seven declassification targets for Congress to look at in terms of these are low-hanging fruit that are above the fold that don't necessarily have to have you get into the deep programs that can help create a larger corpus of information that creates tangible, you know, more tangible reality in the public sphere about what's actually happening behind the scenes. So Nick, I want to also specify, he's one of the

best communicators with staffers, especially, in terms of speaking their language, understanding how they operate, having his own experience interfacing with, as a contractor on the, on a software and technical side, but with DOD programs. I want to quickly just come back to a small note from from George's very understandable and justified skepticism or cynicism about, you know, where we are and the possibility of it being this finally kind of getting broken loose. Are you going to try to make George optimistic about the UFO topic? Because he's been fighting for 40 years. That's the whole role of the new generation is to continue to give inspiration to those

that we are following in the footsteps of, I do think there are two new forcing functions that didn't exist before. One of them is, like you're mentioning, George, the old primes, the Lockheeds, the Boeing's, the Raytheons have been, you know, the dominant defense contractors and ostensibly the controllers of these programs historically. If you look at in the U.S. today, who are the people with power, political power and capital? There is a new crop, especially of this Silicon Valley, California cohort that are also now entering the defense tech space very forcefully. And it's an open secret amongst those of us in sort of the California tech space that they are looking at these programs and saying, these guys don't know what the hell they're doing. Give it to us.

We're the best technology people now. They were the best 50 years ago. But we're now the future. And we need access to this. and they have just as much money and just as much power as the old primes. That is a new variable that's different. Whether that means the public gets the information is a totally different story. But there is an incentive for these new orgs to have this come out so that they can get access.

I think the second forcing function is, Jeremy, what you said, which is if China is making progress because they can take the best scientists and just take them from wherever they are and put them on the program, and we are so caught up in our national security state bureaucracy that we can't get our best scientists on the program. That's right. We can't let them run away with this and get ahead of us in that process. So we might not have a choice if through intelligence collection we're hearing that they're making progress and we're stuck and we need to fundamentally do something differently. Does that mean it's going to come out? No.

but I do think those are two significant and new variables that do change the dynamics a little bit from what we've been seeing over the past 75 to 8 years. Here's a little recap of the source of our skepticism. You know, UAP task force exists as an entity before it became a formal organization created by Congress. And it was doing great work under Jay Stratton, Travis Taylor, and some other. other folks doing great work. Then it became a known entity. And as soon as that happened, Jay Stratton gets yanked out of it and it transforms into AIMSog, which was ridiculous. And then AIMSog becomes Arrow. They appoint Sean Kurt Patrick to head it. We knew about him before he became a known entity in the public sector what he was going to do. And sure enough,

he did it. They replace him with Tim Phillips and Jeremy and I both had really good reviews of what Tim Phillips might do, and we gave him the benefit of the doubt. And then he was Sean Kirkpatrick 2.0. So now we've got Dr. John Kozlowski. I read about Chris Mellon, spent several hours with him. We have heard from our friends in the intelligence world, in the UAP world, who are very encouraged, think he's a great guy. We will believe it when we see it.

Because he still works in that box in the Pentagon, investigating the larger organization and what they know, and is still controlled by a small group of people who seemingly do not want this stuff out. So I'm encouraged. People say he's great. We've been down this road before, and I'll believe it when I see it.

I hope that he's able to make progress, and I think your idea about taking the public affairs PR angle out of it, out of the Pentagon, because right now it's a one woman wrecking ball who controls that message. I'll believe what I see it. I hope that you're right. And I hope the tech sector, if they want to get into it, get the goodies, analyze the material, figure out how it works.

I hope they do that and that they were willing to share that with the public. But I suspect that they, like those legacy programs, once they get their hands on it, are going to go, oh, man, this is really great stuff. I'm going to keep this to myself and make trillions of dollars from it. That's what I think. I think it's totally fair, George. I really do. I really do it.

And again, I think this is, we need to be, we need to understand the dynamic, like the reality on the ground as you describe it, right? And be wide-eyed about the magnitude of the problem. To comment on what you said, George, I'm going to be as clear as day here. Lockheed Martin tried to transfer UAP. hardware to to AOSAP They were denied

They were unable to do that That never went through If you ever want to explain that story George You will you report it on bits of it But that is the fact Trying to bring it out the back door So they could bring it in the front door And get people like Lester said to look at it

Eric Weinstein A friend of mine has said before That you know we don't have the brightest minds on this That's insane That's insane if you don't let people You keep them in secret and you don't let them like publish articles on it. How does science work?

That was actually what Bob Lazar originally said is it's a crime against the scientific community, as you reported, George. So we've seen this obfuscation before with people you know from materials going from Lockheed to OSAP. So obviously there are ways to crush this. However, it's hard to hide with a bright light being shined on you. Thank you so much. Lester, I'm really glad, you know, that, that you're out there.

I still didn't get a straight answer what motivates you to do this. We'll talk further about this. But, you know, thank you so much. It's been a pleasure kind of getting to know you. And George and I are really grateful you spent the time with us telling people. We'll make sure that they hit you up and start, you know, doing what you need them to do. Yamava Resort and Casino at San Manuel is California's number one entertainment destination for today's superstars. Catch the Jonas Brothers return to the Yamava Theater.

stage on April 30th, the powerful vocals of Demi Lovato on May 17th, and the signature Southern Country Rock of Eric Church on July 19th. Tickets on sale now at Yamava Theater.com, only at Yamava Resort and Casino, celebrating its 40th anniversary. You in? Must be 21 to enter. I really appreciate it. No pleasure. Keep fighting the good fight, guys. Wait a second. Wait a second. Breaking news. So when we're recording weaponized like this, so this is Friday, as we talk about stuff, can happen. So right now I want to hear a little bit about what just happened from Lester so we know

what it is we need to do to kind of understand what's happening with his work. So I actually just got this on my phone literally as we were wrapping up with my segment. We do have a the copy of the manager's package from the Senate version of this big military spending bill just did come out. There is a UAP section. The UAP Disclosure Act is not included. in the manager's package. What's interesting to note is what it seems like they did, this is a little bit in the weeds, is they didn't allow any new amendments that did not already have a vote. So they folded in the Intelligence Authorization Act, which passed out of the Intelligence Committee on May 22nd of this year. And they included those UAP amendments,

which include a government accountability office review of Arrow. So they're big. basically having the watchdogs come in to look at what they've done. Also, the extension of funding limitations for UAP programs. So any unreported UAP program is going to continue to not be able to receive federal money. And then another small detail about the historical report related to Arrow. No UAPDA, but it's important to note that no new amendments were allowed. it wasn't, again, the procedural election year issue, not necessarily a specific pushback or opposition to the UAPDA because no other amendment was added despite support for other things that were not UAPDA related. So that just came out right now. We are going to work on what is next.

So we don't, this is literally breaking in this moment. So as we have that CTA, check out at UAP caucus on Twitter or at uapcoccus.com. We'll have a bulletin update on what this means for moving forward. But that has just come out now out of the Senate's manager's package for the NDAA. If I understand and they're not going to fund unacknowledged UAP programs unless they become acknowledged, then that's good news. If I understand that correctly, because that brings everything to light. So just one more time real quick because we don't know what the response aren't.

on your side should be yet, you're going to craft that for people. Tell us one more time after hearing this episode where they should go to find out what to do by the time this episode airs. Tell me. At UAP caucus on X or Twitter, we'll have live real-time updates for what to do next. We will also put out a bulletin on the homepage at UAPCoccus.com. As always, if you follow me personally at Lester Nari. You'll also see the updates as well.

So the main channel will be UAP caucus on X or Twitter. that will likely get out into a variety of the other spaces. But that's where you'll see, again, the next update here for what it looks like moving forward from the legislative perspective. Luster is an impressive guy. He is an impressive guy. Still don't know why he does it, but I'm excited. You'll get it out of him.

I will. You know, we started off the conversation talking about folks griping that there's a lull in the activity. Clearly, there's a heck of a lot going on in D.C. that you and Lester were following this past week that doesn't always make news, right? Oh, yeah. I can only speak for myself, but I could not be more excited. I don't think I could be more excited.

And I think what the public is hoping for is that some of these whistleblowers we've been hearing about for so long will step forward. Now, you know, you and I've talked about it a lot. We've met with a lot of them, and they're scared, you know, and for good reason, they're scared, right? Yeah, they're not scared. They're looking for proper protections to be able to inform the people that need to know that they are out of the loop. I mean, that's the bottom line. These are true patriots that want to tell representative government, you're being lied to. I have the proof. Here you go. I don't want to go too far on this. But yeah, we have met with a number of whistleblowers who are not known to the public, you know, as recent as in the immediate moment. I mean, there's something I want to tell people. It's not the right time for. it, but you and I will tell that story later. But let's just say that the lines of communication, the word on the wash are open, and people are getting into the rooms that they need to get into as of this week. So I'm very optimistic that these whistleblowers, who either way are just great human beings, that believe we have a real strategic disadvantage if there's this obfuscation going.

back to the idea that there's ebb and flow peaks and valleys for the topic i don't know how what people are looking at but it seems to me that the topic remains pretty strong i mean in the past week or so two pretty good examples of it donald trump goes on fox on the gutfeld show and among the questions they ask are this is not a question i would ask in this way but are there aliens at area 51 and of course this gutfeld paddle ha ha ha ha TEE, very, very funny. And Trump gives him an answer. Now, Trump has been asked about this before. In fact, he said on the show that he gets asked about this more than anything else, maybe. I've never got the sense, though, that Trump gives one wit about it, does not care. I mean, we've all heard the stories about how he treated national security briefings every morning that he got when he was president as not something that he wanted to sit through.

but I think maybe finally his antenna are going up. If that many people maybe at Mar-a-Lago are asking about aliens, Area 51, you know, maybe it's finally on his radar screen as something that's serious. Are there aliens at Area 51? You know, I'll tell you. It's a funny thing because I think that might be a question that I get more than any question. It is the craziest thing. So we have that so-called area.

They considered like a sacred area. And I will say this. I don't think I'm a believer, but I've interviewed pilots that look, I like Tom Cruise, but better than Tom Cruise. The blonde crew cuts, the hall and this, yes, sir. And they were in the Oval Office, three or four pilots. These are not people that make up stories.

They said, all I know, sir is there was a round object that was going four times faster than my F-20. which is a very fast plane. And it wasn't, you know, it shouldn't have been, it was round, sir. They have seen, I mean, four or five guys I've interviewed, solid people, great pilots for the U.S. Air Force, et cetera. They've seen things that they cannot explain. He talked about having these pilots, Air Force pilots at the White House and telling

about their encounters. I suspect that it was Navy pilots, not Air Force pilots. but if he's at least paying attention to it and has once again vowed to open up the books and tell everything there is to know if he's elected again, that's probably a good thing. Of course, he said that before. I'm not sure how much we should believe it.

He said the same thing about the JFK files and didn't release them anyway, but maybe if he is re-elected and gets back in office, the public can remind him of this promise. That was one thing. The other thing is Lou Elizondo going on Comedy Central.

I mean, talk about bravery. If you're going on the air with comics, you know the kind of stuff that's going to pop up. You expose yourself to potentially being really embarrassed. But Lou went on that show. It was very funny. And the great thing is that that show reaches an entirely different audience. This isn't the same audience on X or on Instagram that follows UFOs religiously.

It's a whole new crowd who were exposed to things like Lou saying, Roswell was real. It was a crash. It's not us. And that the topic is really serious. I think that was a really positive thing and a new audience that was reached. So I want to comment on each of those things. But I want to start with a shout out to Michael,

the Wizard of Oz, of weaponized, because he is now experiencing George Knapp breaking the law. If you hear it clicking in the background, I have taken every pen away from George Knapp that clicks because when he talks, he clicks that thing obsessively. My God, how did you get more clickable pens, George? There he is. Just click, click, click. Just click, click, click.

Look at you, man. I got to get you some space pens, some Mars pens. Anyway, yeah, the things you said. So first and foremost, it is quite possible that Trump got briefed again on the, UAP issue. I'll just leave it at that. It's quite possible. Second thing, what you're talking, didn't he his running mate say something about journalists with knowledge on this issue, a senator or congressperson said, yeah, is running mate? Didn't he say journalist? Senator Vance says at a public event, hey, by the way, any journalists out there

know about UFOs, we're really interested in it. Hey, Senator Vance, you're a U.S. Senator Vance, you're a U.S. senator. You can ask questions. You can pursue it. You're a sitting U.S. senator. You're a candidate for vice president. that you've got some poll here. You might as well dig into it and ask some questions. You don't have to ask journalists, although journalists would be happy to tell you about it. That's what I noticed, though, George,

is that journalists get more information. People feel way more comfortable. Whistleblowers feel way more comfortable coming to journalists. Then they do going in where they're going to be recognized or seen or spied on going into these offices. So if that is a real request to be briefed by journalists, I know one that would brief them, and that would be George Knapp. So I'm just saying, I don't know if that was a real request for more information,

but come on. Like, you can get educated on this. But I think it's important to ask journalists because we get information before everybody. We're the word on the wash. We got boots on the ground, man, and really fancy boots too. So I think it's a good thing. The last thing you said, to comedy, that's so important to me. Like, you know, comedy is a weapon.

it makes uncomfortable things considered. So I didn't know that Lou had gone. I hadn't seen this that Lou had gone on, but I actually got to see our friend Lou Elizondo and just talk with him for a couple hours yesterday. Got to share a beverage, hang out. It might have been an armed wrestling match. But the thing is, is that Lou had said that that was actually a really cool experience

because it's reaching a different audience. And it's not comedy like, ha, ha, we're laughing at anymore. It's comedy as a weapon to get inside an issue that is serious. So I'm really grateful Lou is spending his own time and energy going out and doing that. I know what it's like to promote a movie and it's exhausting. And the fact that he's doing it, that's a whole job in and of itself. But he had a real pep in his step. You know, he's on mission, on target and believes the American public can, should,

and needs to have this conversation and that it's an easy conversation. to have, if you're honest. So for... Comedy is like a blade with two sides to it. You know, it has been used for decades, the use of ridicule to embarrass people, to keep them quiet. The threat of ridicule has driven so many scientists out of the field and unwilling to do the research. But it cuts the other way, too. Joe Rogan is an example of that. He's a comic who has used comedy as a legend against people who'd want to hide this, hide this issue, hide the truth. Yeah, absolutely, man.

Absolutely. And just shout out to Dave Foley, because there's a comic that shit on the UFO thing made jokes. And I told him the first time he ever contacted me, I told him, hey, man, you got to repent. And has he been repenting or what? Can you tell me a little bit about Dave and his podcast and his partner who does the podcast with? Yeah, they have a podcast called Really?

Question Mark with Dave and Tom. I did a show with them. They invited me over to a hotel room in Las Vegas to record an hour. I was there for like four and a half days, I think. And they put out a couple of versions of it. It was really great. It was a great conversation. And I know they're making inroads.

They've got their own little audience that they've developed it. Dave was at the Emmys a couple of weeks ago. He sent a picture of him and all dressed up and fancy gear on his way the Emmys. He didn't invite me. He was probably going solo. Didn't invite me. I sent him a text immediately like, how dare you? He looks so dapper going to the Emmys. It was for his show Fargo, right? Yeah. Right. Yeah. So, I mean, Dave has used comedy, his wit with he and Tom and their podcast and to great effect. And, you know, he and Rogan both came around on the UFO topic. And thank goodness they did, because they've been really helpful in moving the ball down the field.

Yeah, and Tom Wheeler is Dave's partner in their podcast called Really, I think it's question mark exclamation point or something. But Tom Wheeler is also somebody really tuned into the details. Like your pal, Ernie Klein, that would be a cool thing for Ernie and Tom to talk with Dave as well. But you guys should all listen to that podcast. It's really cool. So listen, George, thank you so much. I got to say something really, really personal right now, which is every time. The jaw was dropping and people were picking it up off the floor in these meetings.

This whole week I was in D.C., I kept turning around, be like, hey, George, did you see that? And you weren't there? And I was, oh, man, it was a horrible feeling. I was literally like turning around to tell you, oh, did you see that? It was really an astonishing set of events that occurred in D.C. this week. And people will learn about them. That's all I'm going to say. But people will learn about them.

So that's very exciting. Wish you were here with me. divide and conquer, I guess, but I'm coming to see you in Vegas really soon. So thank you so much, George. It's a pleasure as always. And what a fun show of Weaponize. Yeah, I look forward to the DC download when you get here. Okay.

All right. Talk to you. Never has so few. Had so much to tell.