WEAPONIZED with Jeremy Corbell & George Knapp - Weaponized Silence - The UFO Disclosure Dilemma

Episode Date: August 12, 2025

What looms on the UFO horizon? Will the upcoming Congressional hearing break new ground? Are hands-on witnesses and whistleblowers too intimidated to step forward? In this episode of WEAPONIZED, three longtime researchers and commentators on all manner of UAP issues return to the podcast. They were once known as the “Young Guns of Ufology,” though they’re not quite as young as when they started out. Joe Murgia (UFO Joe), Danny Silva (The Silva Record), and Ryan Robbins (UFO Jesus) join Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp to discuss current issues, problems, and roadblocks in the UFO conversation. What would truly constitute “disclosure”? Is Congress following the guidance of newly appointed Congressional advisor David Grusch, whose testimony at a 2023 hearing electrified the subject? What do we know about the potential witnesses for the next hearing slated for September? And where, exactly, are the “goodies” stashed? Is the public ever going to see undeniable evidence? This conversation explores the disinformation tactics in play, the cultural impact of non-human technology, and the personal sacrifices made by those pushing for the truth. This is an insider’s war council on how UFO Disclosure will be won or lost. GOT A TIP? Reach out to us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠[e-mail]⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ••• Follow Joe Murgia’s reporting on X at https://x.com/theUFOjoe Follow Ryan "UFO Jesus" Robbin’s reporting on X at https://x.com/PostDisclosure Follow Danny Silva’s reporting on X at https://x.com/SilvaRecord ••• Watch Corbell's six-part UFO docuseries titled UFO REVOLUTION on TUBI here : ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://tubitv.com/series/300002259/tmz-presents-ufo-revolution/season-2⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Watch Knapp’s six-part UFO docuseries titled INVESTIGATION ALIEN on NETFLIX here : ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://netflix.com/title/81674441⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ••• 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

Marvel Television's Wonder Man An eight-episode series Now streaming on Disney Plus. A superhero remake. Not exactly what we'd expect from an Oscar-winning director. Action! Simon Williams, audition for Wonder Man. I'm gonna need you to sign this,

assuming you don't have superpowers. I'll never work again if anyone found out. My lips are sealed. Marvel Television's Wonder Man. All eight episodes now streaming. Only on Disney Plus. Enjoy more ways to save at Ralph's, low prices in every aisle. And when you download the Ralph's app, you can clip and save more with

digital coupons every week. Plus, you can earn fuel points to save up to $1 per gallon at the pump. At Ralph's, you can enjoy more ways to save and more rewards every time you shop. So it's always easy to save big every day with savings and rewards. Ralph's SoCal for over 150 years, savings may vary by state. Fuel restrictions apply. See site for details. Coming up in this episode of Weaponized. know that you are very active in working with the committee staffers to figure out who could testify. The question is, will the agencies give up their data, you know? Yeah.

You know? And how do you know if they're not giving up their data? If it's hidden somewhere, you don't know. There are craft of unknown origin, likely to be non-human, and then you pick, you know what that means or where they're from, extra whatever, right? But I think what's going to disturb the public more than anything at all, no matter of what the phenomenon is, is that in our most trusted institutions, our governments in particular, we're willing to maintain a lie of this magnitude and gravity for 70 plus years. I think that is going to freak the public out.

This is weaponized. I'm George Knapp coming to you from Las Vegas, joined by my friend and colleague Jeremy Corbell. How you doing, Jeremy? I'm good, man. I'm looking forward to sit. I haven't talked to you in like what, a week, a month. That's right. I got you, man.

You've been moonlighting recording weaponized without me. What's the deal? Hey, man, you didn't show up. You know, come on, don't put the blame on me. Yeah, I got to talk with some friends who here about a second. Yeah, we have a fun episode coming up. Always love talking to these three guys. They're longtime friends of ours, and we used to call them the young guns of uphology.

I'm not sure we can call them the young guns anymore. Are they that young? younger than us. Yeah. I don't know, actually. I think younger than us, you know. Yeah, they're good friends. It's always great to hear, I haven't seen this episode yet.

The conversation you have with these guys, but it's always great to hear additional input from people who've been around the topic for a long time. I know they became the young guns. That was the title given to them and a few other people. Right after that December 2017 New York Times story came out, and suddenly the buzz around UFOs really got hot and heated, and they became really voices of reason.

and the whole discussion still are. You know, Joe Mercia, better known as UFO Joe, writes these big, long, intricate pieces on Twitter, on X. Ryan Robbins, UFO Jesus, very thought-provoking guy, always kind of looks for the bright side of issues, as you expect somebody named Jesus might be. And then Danny Silva of the Silver Record, we've been kicking around the idea of giving him a new nickname,

something with UFO in it. maybe we better not share the ideas we came up with. I don't want to get Danny ticked off. Yeah, man, they're great. And it was cool to see, I mean, it's kind of like a void of opinions in some ways on X. And then they just came in leading the charge like Knights. And it's really cool. They've sustained it since the 2017 era.

And I always like talking with them. This was supposed to be just a conversation I was having with them. And you're like, oh, come on. If you're having the conversation, just record it. I'll show up. Then you were a no show, George. Couldn't be there that week. And, you know, it's, they keep up with things that we don't keep up with.

They have their hands and tentacles in a lot of different groups. They interact with people that you and I don't really know in UFO world. So they have a lot of input and observations and things that we're not privy to. So it's always great to talk to. I can't wait to hear it. Yeah, they keep, you know, UFO Twitter, UFOX on lockdown. And really the conversation was I wanted to see. see what their opinions were on the current news.

You know, we had J.D. Vance talking about how in August he's going to study the UFO topic because he's obsessed with it. That's the vice president. That's a cool thing for someone to say in some podcast. Now, the question for me is, well, why doesn't he get a formal briefing? There's very specific things that he could be briefed on, you know, being part of the White House that would give him, you know, really good knowledge on this. So I don't know if it was just a fan boy thing on the UFO topic or if he's to

taking it extremely seriously as far as getting briefings on it. But in the same week, you saw the Tulsi Gabbard also talked about the UFO thing. So you get these kind of big statements from people within government right now, which shows a great interest, which leads us perfectly to what we're told September. There's going to be another UFO hearing. And I will say this. I have finalized all the nominations that I've made for that. So, it's not in my hands and I wouldn't like their job, but they have to sort through everybody that you and I gave them and see, you know, who would be best to testify and also who can testify about certain things. And that's something that I think we'll learn more about as we get

closer to the hearing. Yeah, it's not as as cut and dried as people might think. Just spill the beans. You're perfectly safe. And we will be learning more about that. I know that you are very active in working with the committee staffers to figure out who could testify. And I'm privy to some of that and have been in on a couple of conversations, but not as much as you. I hope they appreciate what you're trying to do for them because it takes a lot of your time. I know. Oh, yes. A full-time job when these things go. And sometimes there's not a lot of reward, as we saw with the last hearing. So, you know, it's just like, it is what it is, man. I'm trying to push the ball forward and get people, you know, who will say yes to talk. And then the question is,

much can they talk about and what impact will it have. And I don't know. We're just going to get the best people forward we can and go from there. I want to have one more note before we jump into the conversation you had with the young guns. And that's about our friend, Bryce Zabel. So Bryce is a good guy, a friend, a colleague, a trusted, confidant. We talk to him all the time. He's had this great podcast going for a while called Need to Know. And they're often on the same page as we are. We've had them on our podcast and with Bryce with Ross Colthart. But I guess Ross has left the show. And as of 24 hours ago, Bryce debuted his new co-host. And it's somebody we know really well. Yeah, absolutely. Rich Dolan. I was stoked to see that. I tuned in to see like, who's his new co-host?

They played it well. They wouldn't tell you before. And it was so cool to see that it was Rich Dolan. There's not many people probably other than you. And a couple of other people that have such a depth of knowledge of the history of where we've been with the UFO topic. So Rich having his own show has been really cool. But to bounce off stuff with Bryce, who's also extremely knowledgeable about the topic, yeah, I'm going to be watching the show. Yeah, well, those two guys have history, too. They wrote a book about F.D. After Disclosure that was really clever, smart, well-informed, and timely even now. I think it came out like 10 years ago. And they've done some shows together before. So it's a good fit. I hope people,

We'll check it out. I know I've started the first episode. Haven't finished it yet, but it really looks good. Anyway, let's move on. So you wrangled three friends of ours, the young guns of euphology, and having a conversation with you when they're trying to relax at home. And it probably went on for nine or ten hours. But did you enjoy the conversation? And do you want to kick it to the recording? Yeah, yeah. We'll move to the recording. It was really cool. It's just like catching up with three friends who've been in the trenches, some longer than 2017. But it's always cool to hear the word on the wash, what's going on in UFO X land, because I miss a lot of it. So here's the episode talking with our friends, the young vans of euphology.

All right, welcome to Weaponized. We do not have the G-man, George Knapp, today, but I do have three really, really good friends of mine who have been attacking this topic relentlessly for a very long time. not be each in a unique way. I think our audience knows you guys. And so Danny, Ryan, Joe, how are each of you doing in that order? I'm good. I'm not speaking much on your social media. And I'm just kind of taking a step back, listening to you guys. And I'm still tracking everything as much as possible. I just haven't felt the need to speak up because I like not arguing on social media. It's fun for me. So it's just as easy to track it and not always give an opinion, but I'm still here and I'm watching the great work you and George are doing and all the great

contributions that Joe and Ryan are doing on social media and other places. And I'm just kind of waiting to see and following the developments. Nice, man. Yeah, social media is a battleground for this stuff. And I know I've been watching recently, Ryan has had some really cool drops, some video drops. How are you doing, man? I'm doing good. Just trying to stay up to date with all the news. I feel like huge UFO news is dropping every other day. It's kind of crazy.

And I'm trying to catch up on some of the stuff I missed in the past few months as well. Nice. I want to ask you what some of the huge news is. But in the meantime, Joe, UFO Joe, what's shaking? Same issue. It's like Sunday. I'm like, all right, no UFO Twitter today. I'm going to just stay off.

and I wound up staying on for eight hours. It's like something, everything kept happening. It's like, we got a new Burrelson interview, we got a new rounds interview, we got this, we get that. So yeah, it's good. It's just, it's hard to keep up with everything. Yeah, it's a different time, right? We have so much breaking constantly now, and that has not the way that it was been over the last

decade. And now with the social media, you can engage each and every little thing you find out about it faster than any of the Congress people at times. So you guys are mentioned some big things. Maybe Ryan, you mentioned a, first, what are some of the bigger things you've seen happen and what do they mean for us at this time in the UFO space? Well, a few days ago, for an example, Vice President J.D. Vance said in a podcast that he's obsessed with the UFO issue and he wants to get to the bottom of it. I thought that was pretty big. In fact,

technically, as a fact, I don't think a vice president has ever broached UFOs, a sitting vice president has ever broached UFOs that way. And I think that is an indicator of where we are with this topic. Because I could, if you're, If something like that would have happened prior to December 16th, 2017, we would all be overwhelmed and we wouldn't believe what we're seeing. But it's like another Tuesday now and stuff like that's happening all the time. But, you know, I think George Knapp is kind of rubbing off on me, though, because, you know, he's very pessimistic about transparency. And, you know, when Trump came into office in the beginning, I was like, okay, you know, we got we got Marco Rubio and the Secretary of State. We got John Ratcliffe. He's the director of the CIA.

They've both been huge advocates for UFO transparency. Let's see where this goes. And like six months later, the Trump administration really isn't doing anything. So I'll believe it when I see it. Like, I'm very optimistic about disclosure because disclosure doesn't just come from the government. It can come from science. It could come from open contact. It could come from a leak to you, you Jeremy and George, you know, it literally could.

But I'm not sold on the Trump administration. you know, maybe I'm not being fair because it's only been six months, but I've kind of lost my patience, but I'm still very optimistic about disclosure because as Richard Dolan has said many times, you know, disclosure is impossible, but it's also inevitable. So I'm kind of watching the inevitable part. Right. So that is a big deal. I mean, just to have a vice president come out and say, I am obsessed with the UFO thing,

I'm going to take August and really look into it. I don't know if that's an official thing or him just like talking to people we already know or watching a bunch of podcasts. But it is encouraging, and that would be news alone. Now that's shown us that in our environment, people can talk about this much more openly. It's not ridiculed at all when he said he's obsessed with the topic. UFO, Joe, did you have an impression on that? Yeah, and I tagged him.

I said, give me a call. DM me, vice president. And right away, people get mad at me because you have the political divide, of course. But yeah, it's really good to see. And Trump, I mean, we could segue into Trump. What can Trump do in the last six months? Nothing has been really done. But, and I will go against what I said in the past.

When Congressman Tim Burchett came out and said, we don't need the UAP Disclosure Act, we just need a one-page thing, just get it declassified. And I kind of made fun of that. I'm like, it's not going to be that easy. But after seeing what Trump did with JFK, MLK, and RFK, signing in an executive order. If he did that with UFOs, that would help push the ball down the field. We wouldn't even have, we wouldn't have not, we would not have to wait for the UAP Disclosure Act to be passed if it gets passed. And right after the UAP, right after he signed that executive order, Senator Schumer tweeted, now do UFOs. And we're all like, yeah, do it. Just do it. Because if he did it, even without the UAP Disclosure Act, I think we would get some documents, some thought, some, some files. I don't know how hard. I'm sure they would still fight it. The various agencies that have records, but it would be nice to see what would happen if he did that. Yeah, it seems like

we're all wanting some sort of official acknowledgement beyond what we already have about the UFO reality. And I don't know how far we want it, like how much we want that will give, that will kind of satisfy us, because more and more as we go along, it's everything is less and less satisfying. everybody's feeling like just show me the goods tell me the truth danny do you have any impressions on the vice president talking about uap i'm uh mr skeptical and i'm always uh pessimistic on things um i've become that way over the years and um it's just hard to know i mean uh it's not a republican or democrat thing it's politicians in general they're hard to trust them when they say something is it just lip service you know it comes

kind of came off to me as Vice President Vance. You know, I'm worried that he's just saying it in his lip service and it's meaningless. And that's just kind of my view on everything that's said now. But I have to always remember when I started in 2017, like Ryan was saying, this was all amazing stuff. And now we're just kind of like callous to the situation. Like this would have been so huge, you know, seven years ago. And now I almost don't even care that much about it because I think always is saying that.

And, you know, but I hope something comes of it. I always have that in the back of my mind. But I feel that way a lot of even with the UAPDA or other things like that, I'm hopeful. You know, I want it to work. Or first I want it to be passed. But will it even work if it gets passed? We've just been let down so many times. Yeah.

For some of the people, I'm sure a lot of people that are listening know about that when you say UAPDA or the Disclosure Act. But let me ask Ryan first. Do you have an opinion on this? It's the third time they're trying to implement this and Senate's passed it through and they're going to have to have a vote in the House. And there's a lot of kind of, you know, split opinions about this. Like, is it a good thing?

Is it not a good thing? Do you have any opinions on this? Have you been tracking it a lot? I've been tracking it to some extent. I mean, I think it's absolutely a good thing. legislating UFO transparency is obviously a good thing. The question is, will it work? And a bigger question is, will it even get passed?

I know there's been opposition to it. I think Mike Turner was one of the people that was opposed to it. I don't think he is influential at this point in where we are right now. I know that Chuck Schumer and Senator Rounds have reintroduced it and they've spoken about it. rounds with recently was in the media and he was talking about um he was even he was even going into trans medium travel and talking about whistleblowers that have spoken to him directly i think now that it just came into my mind we we need more hearings i we need more hearings i think the more hearings we get the harder it is uh for the public to accept that the uap disclosure act is not

getting passed. And the more exposure these hearings get, the harder it's going to be for the public to be like, okay, there's all these people coming forward. They have nothing to gain. They're losing their jobs. They're being harassed. We're coming forward. So they're saying one thing. The government's saying another thing. Why not just pass the UAP Disclosure Act? What is there to hide? If people in the government know that there's nothing to see here and there's no enigma, I don't understand the, I don't understand the constant reluctance. You know, these long-held multi-decade rumors have been around for a very long time. And they're not going away.

But, you know, the closest we could get, in my opinion, to falsifying the UFO issue is to get to UAP Disclosure Act with the UAP Records Review Board, powers of subpoena, right? Throw the entire kitchen sink at getting to the bottom of this. obviously like Arrow that's BS because Arrow is like the Pentagon investigating the Pentagon. That's not going to work. It's like drug dealers investigating their policy. That's not going to work. So we need the UAP Disclosure Act, which is kind of external, external investigation, Congress getting involved. So, you know, to me, the fact that we struggle getting the UAP Disclosure Act makes me paranoid as someone who follows this topic.

And I think it should make every American paranoid. It's like, you know, it's in how much. is it's all cost. Isn't it like budget dust? And what do they pay on this? Like a single like aircraft compared to what it's going to cost to implement the UAP Disclosure Act. A B2 bomber versus the UAP Disclosure Act. I don't know. It seems like these

conspiracies are not healthy. If they're not true, then just put it into it, get the UAP Disclosure Act passed. And, you know, I'm going to be very weirded out if we don't get the UAP Disclosure Act passed this time around. I'm not going to understand it. How can you have constant hearings and new UFO whistleblowers coming forward? They're not even just, you know, they're not even like testifying under oath in the public exclusively.

They're also going to members of Congress in testifying to Congress. So there's just like this bizarre scenario going on. So I do expect the UAP Disclosure Act to pass because, I mean, I think the government's kind of in a hard spot. If it doesn't pass and yet this topic doesn't go away, what is their excuse going to be? Are they going to keep coming up? Is it going to be like 10 years from now? And new senators are trying to get some kind of UAP Disclosure Act passed. And then just like people are opposing.

It just makes no sense to me. That's really all I have to say. Study and play. Come together on a Windows 11 PC. And for a limited time, college students get the best of both worlds. Get the unreal college deal, everything you need, to study and play with select Windows 11 PCs. Eligible students get a year of Microsoft 365 premium. And a year of Xbox GamePass Ultimate with a custom color Xbox wireless controller.

Learn more at Windows.com slash student offer. While supplies last, ends June 30th, terms at AKA.m.m.S. College PC. So it's been three years since they first introduced it about three years. And we were all like, you know, we know it's not the be all and all, but we're hoping if it gets past, we're going to finally get to see some data that we have not seen before. And then Rounds was being interviewed on the South Dakota ABC affiliate. And he's asked, he goes, and even David Grush said at Seoul two years ago, he's like, guys, if this doesn't pass, it's going to be really bad. I'm paraphrasing.

So Rounds is asked, if the UAP Disclosure Act passes, do you think the public will get to see more data? And Rounds goes, I would hope so. I'm like, that's not the answer we want to hear. I would hope so. It's like if he's, I mean, if he's skeptical that we're going to get data, how am I supposed to feel? So that was really, that was disappointing. I did not expect him to be that. And I know he's, he's really conservative, but still disappointing.

I think he's also experienced the mercurial nature of looking into the UAP topic. You know, we had a really good interaction when I was at the last congressional hearing afterwards. And, you know, he said it's really hard. to get straight answers on this topic. So I think there's a sense of frustration too. He's high up on the food chain and he's getting denied access and understanding himself. So he's probably saying, I hope the public will learn more because it's probably been hard for him to get in through certain doors, even with the role that he holds. You know, what in your opinion, Joe, or Danny or any of you, what is it going to do?

Like, that's the question I'm coming to. So we need something to happen. So we're going to have hearings. and that's not for UFO land. Those hearings are for mass public. I've been fighting to get them public open hearings rather than just facilitating people to tell behind closed doors,

which happens way more often than the actual hearings. We want the public to hear what's going on. Some of it, you know, eventually we're going to be like, well, I knew that, you know, as a UFO fanatic, you know, I knew that. But general public bringing that level of awareness up, I think it does help. And it does help with getting things like the UAPDA

forward. But what happens if it passes? That's what I'm unclear on. What actually happens if it passes? Do any of you know? I mean, I know what. It says that the information, they're going to ask the agencies to give your information to the UFO review board. And then those people are going to look at it and decide if this gets declassified or this does not get declassified. And then he gets to the president and he has final say. And then if he approves it, then we get to see data records. I think that's the basics of what we're going to get from the UAB Disclosure Act. The question is, will the agencies give up their data? You know, and how do you know if they're not giving up their data if it's hidden somewhere?

You don't know. Unless you have people telling you specifically where that data is and what it implies and you have specific places to go and get information, which I do know that they have specific detailed instruction of where some of this information. and hardware is, and that was given to him a long time ago. But it does just seem like a lot of these, you know, transparency kind of groups are running around trying to, you know, hit the head against a wall. I don't know what's going to do it, but I know we got to take these steps.

I know we got to have hearings. We got to fight for the UAPDA to pass to try to get more transparency on it. But it's just an uphill battle. George said, I think, the last episode we were on, you know, no matter how pessimistic and discouraged and frustrated I am, we never could quit. And George said something along those lines and I thought that was really,

not only, I mean, it's obvious, but it's important. And so I try to keep that in the back of my head. Another big story that happened that maybe wasn't broadcast is you, Jeremy, dropping the locations. Oh, yeah, yeah.

I thought that of the hardware. Yeah, so I was kind of creating breadcrumbs out there because I was really annoyed that day, which is that there are people that said, well, where do we look? And I'm like, there's a whole legacy program that came from Lockheed and Burbank. And when that was closed down, that was transferred. So I was trying to push people on the inside to go look at Plant 42. That's one of the places that on the inside, everybody has openly talked about, holds some of this hardware.

It's like not hard to find out where you're supposed to go look. Not that they're going to be shown anything when they go look. but that was something that centered around said, well, where would I go look? Exactly. I start with platform. Yeah. Exactly.

I mean, correct. And that's what we need. Yes. He must know that those, I would hope he would know that those locations had been mentioned before. For him to say, where were I? Who would I ask? I don't know who to ask.

I'm like, are you kidding me? So it's a little disingenuous to me that he's saying that. Once again, I don't know that for sure, but I would think he knows, even if it's old information, like he said, you can get new information. Talk to people, you know?

Well, I guess he has a lot of things that he does in his current role. And one of the benefits of passing the UAPDA would be that it would be designated, you know, that people would focus on this. Because right now I can't imagine all the things he has to deal with. I'm actually impressed. The Schumer has been pushing this act because just how many other things they have to deal with. So I think the dedicated group that would be kind of, you know, created by the UAPDA is really where the hope lies. You know, whoever is in that position, they could focus on this topic, right? Yeah.

I sometimes I'm too hard on them realizing there's a lot more to their jobs than U.S. So, yeah, I appreciate that. I still get frustrated, but I appreciate they have a lot to do. Yeah. What do you think, Ryan, about Representative Burleson and a lot of what he's been saying on podcast and everything over the last months? I absolutely love what Representative Burleson's been doing. He has been so clear and repetitive about the need for transparency and that the public has a right to know the truth.

And I honestly, and maybe I'm biased, but I would love if more representatives would do this, senators and people in office would do this. because I do think it pressures the U.S. government to be transparent. I mean, out of mind, out of sight, out of mind. And he's just like he's hammering at home. He's reminding the public that this is important and we have a right to know. I absolutely love what Burleson is doing. And he just doesn't shut up about it. And I hope he continues not to shut up about it.

Yeah, he's got a lot of spirit or a lot of hope, you know, when he's going into it. He doesn't always get it right. You know, UFO land, as you guys. guys know, it's a briar patch and it's really hard to get a foundation sometimes. I imagine for someone like him probably hasn't been into this for a super long time. It's got to be also pretty fun. I mean, here's a guy who's limited time in Congress and he gets to run around and check out these like NASCAR mummies and check out, you know, talk with a bunch of people. I'm not saying all these things have the highest value system, but I'm saying it's got to be kind of fun for someone like him.

It's got to be kind of pumped, you know, to be able to do this. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, and and if we ever do get disclosure like all those sound bites are going to be pretty pretty out in the open it's like i wish more representatives had bigger egos and and did the uh the calculus that hey let me say something a big about it because if we ever do get disclosure like these sound bites will probably ripple out for for history one of the things he said was he said there are witnesses they're looking for the next hearing he goes we're looking for firsthand witnesses to non people have said they've had contact or interaction with non-human intelligence. He said there are people that have gone on news shows,

but they will not testify in front of Congress. And I'm thinking the only three I could think of, Jake Barber from Skywalker claims he picked up a craft, multiple craft, or at least one craft, Jay Stratton, who has talked about seeing non-human, not bodies, because I've got on people for saying that non-human, what do you see? He said non-human craft and non-human.

What? Say again? Beings. Things. So non-human beings. And the other one is our favorite Dr. James Lekatsky, who you and George, one of my most enjoyable interviews, because you asked him, would you testify and

would it take a subpoena? He's like, let's cross that bridge when we come to it. I think he would. I just think they need to subpoena him. I can't think of anybody else who has gone on shows who has claimed first-hand knowledge, either seeing a craft or beings. I can't think of anybody

else who would, you know, fit that category. I don't know if you guys can come up with any other people. Well, I noticed he said on national news and only one out of those three have gone on national news. So that would, you know, limit that pool to my guess of who he's talking about. Now, I'm not sure. Would Jake Barber not testify? I don't think he has been officially asked in my knowledge. I'm working closely with the teams doing that, you know, nominating people bringing them in. And look, it is difficult for people to say yes to that because sometimes they're limited in what they're can say because on one side you have these special access programs that are a national security issue and they don't want to you know they're not going there to fuck up the government or the

United States of America they're going there to tell what they can about the UAP topic so there's sometimes there's a limiting factor of what witnesses and whistleblers can say under their own moral code um or what they've been told is is okay to talk about and what is not okay i know that's frustrating but that is the truth that is that those are conversations that are happening right now is how far can I go without damaging national security? Because if you can't say it, it's going to do no good to anybody, right? So if you're doing a public hearing, you don't want a bunch of those, let me answer that behind closed door situations, right?

So trying to get people up there that can give the most robust description of what it is that they've had, you know, close interaction with, that's the goal. And sometimes that's limited by how much someone can say. But, you know, everybody that I know is doing their best. to wire that perfectly so you can hear the most from the best people. But, you know, I'm not in charge of the decisions. I can just nominate, bring people in, you know? So, maybe that.

So, you know, there was a really interesting part of the Matthew Brown interview that you and George did that really caught my eye. Matthew Brown was saying that he went to organizations, as I recall, that are geared to help whistleblowers. And he reports that they did not help him, even though that's what they're designed to do. And I think he might even suggested, you correct me if I'm wrong, that there might be some intelligence community ties to those organizations. And I'm just thinking, like, what is going on here?

Why don't, look, I'm not denigrating any organization. I have no idea. I'm just going off what Matthew Brown said. But like, why are they not, if there are not organizations out there to assist whistleblowers, however they can, because these whistleblowers, they're paying such a huge price. Not only, I mean, not only are they putting their life on the line, potentially, but they're losing their jobs, they're losing their pension, they're losing their careers. Like, okay, you know, everyone says they want disclosure.

Maybe we need to help these people more. And I don't know what the answer is. But if the organization's geared to helping these whistleblowers are not helping them, as I think Matthew Brown was conveying, then we have a serious problem. Yeah, I suspect that is something that, you know, I do suspect that at the right time, Matthew Brown will talk more for himself. I encourage him to do. He should start a side.

and just start interacting with people. He doesn't have a job that he can just jump back into. His life has dramatically changed. I think people should hear firsthand what that's like. I know that he did seek help. He did seek help from these whistleblower groups, we'll just say. And he did not get it. And in fact, he had an opposite type of experience.

But I think he needs to talk for himself on that. You know, who did he go to? What non-help did he go? get, what does he think about that? And is there a better way? Because the truth is from the people that I directly have been speaking with for years, numerous people who are thinking about coming forward or are actually coming forward for the next hearing that you don't know, which is going to be cool if it all works out. The problem is they are alone. They're on this kind of island, right, where it's easy to threaten them. Their faces are not public. A lot of them have perceived

threats or I'll just say direct threats to them to shut the fuck up and to not break from the fold if that is true and I do believe it is true. And we're talking like police reports and shit that prove that these odd things have happened to people. Then we have a real

problem on our hands. Then we have less motivation from people who haven't quite poked their head above the parapet yet to really come forward because they see how and what is happening to other people who have come forward. So Matthew Brown, is there support for someone like that? What does support look like? Is it, you know,

here's money for your rent or here's a job that you could, will help you get because we understand your situation. Think about David Grush. He's probably in history, the first or only that I know of, whistleblower who is officially acted as a whistleblower from the United States government who got a job back in government to oversee some of, to help advise for this upcoming hearing. I mean, that was huge. That show. That show. that we are treating whistleblowers with more respect. That shows that we are trying to help people fall more on their feet after doing that. So for me, that was a huge thing that Burleson's office hired him as an advisor.

He's the best advisor on planet Earth about all this stuff because he basically wrote the book on whistleblowing that he gave to the ICIG, right? So I don't know. I'm just, I guess, doubling down on your point, Ryan, is that it's hard for me to see. It's hard for me to see these people that I've learned to care about go through all of these personal dramas because they don't know the path forward and there seems to be no safety net for them. And I don't know where that puts them. How about you, Joe? What do you thinking?

I'm thinking last night I was thinking. And then I don't know how this would work, but we need some sort of community funded GoFund me for whistleblowers. How much could we raise? How much would we need to raise so we can say, hey, you've been through a lot. he's $30,000 to get you and your family through this year. I don't know, half a million dollars. I mean, yeah, half a million, a million for 10 whistleblowers just to take care of them. If they go through that, that's an idea I had.

I don't know how that would work. We've had Michael Herrera who claims he saw an octonald craft on the ground, I think hovering in Indonesia. He said he's telling the people he knows with potential witnesses. slash whistleblowers to not come forward because he's like, look at what it has done to other people in their lives like you guys are talking about. So that's disappointing, but I understand it. I understand if you're, I can't put myself, I'm not really in their shoes, but I can imagine you're working all of a sudden you can't work anymore. You can't pay your bills. You can't take

care of your family. So it's understandable. So yeah, you know, it's, it's, I don't know how we get past that right now. That Herrera thing was weird to me, by the way. Like, you know, I don't know. He said, I've been trying to testify for so long here or something. Yeah, was he just upset that he didn't get asked to testify? Like, you know, and then says, well, I'm not doing it. No one else should. I really don't know. I don't know the guy. And I don't know much about his case. But that was an odd thing. I think for a lot of people coming forward is their only choice. Because right now, they feel being anonymous has what has allowed all of these, these threatening and negative things, these reprisals, come at them, for them, for people to say, don't you even think about

stepping forward, you know, and that has happened a ton. So I think for a lot of people taking that step forward, putting their face out there's the last shot they got at live in a normal-ish life. Well, let's hope they're listening to you. And no offense to Michael, hopefully they're, they still come forward. I mean, you obviously have your gear to the ground. You know what's going on with witnesses. Yeah, yeah. People are coming forward. It's just a matter of if they're slack. to come forward publicly or if some of what they're coming forward with is described as more of a national security issue that needs to be kept behind closed doors, which sucks, but I don't make that decision. I can just bring people forward and then they hopefully they can tell as much

as they can. Are you able to say like when they're like, listen, you can't talk about that. Is that almost always propulsion related or are there other issues? No, it's propulsion related and program name related. And because, you know, you look at something close. So look, none of this UFO stuff exists. We're not reverse engineering anything except for the fact. I've been in the meetings where they're like, that is a no-go place because that is a strategic advantage. If you're talking about, you know, reverse engineering propulsion systems and we're doing it and that's part of what you're here to talk about.

You should probably just let us do it. That's kind of the sentiment you get from real patriotic people. And I totally understand that. But I think what we're all fighting for is we don't. have to tell people like again how to build a nuclear bomb but we can admit that there's a nuclear program and nuclear physics and i think that's the biggest thing if i look at what disclosure looks like it's just an acknowledgement of the basic facts that there are craft of unknown origin likely to be non-human and then you pick you know what that means or where they're from extra whatever right

that acknowledgement itself just flat out i think is for me disclosure. As soon as we get that, then I'm going to feel like we've crossed the Rubicon. But I would like to ask each of you, what does that look like for you? What does what is the best dream scenario in your mind right now? What is disclosure to you? What happens five years from now if everything goes right? I'll just jump in and say disclosure is the acknowledgement that we're not alone. You know, adding to what you said, Jeremy, regarding like nuclear physics, And I know that David Grush spoke about this when he was interviewed by Ross Colthard. He's like, you can study, you can go to university and study nuclear physics,

but you're not going to learn the designs to like a nuclear ICBM, right, or anything like that. So it is integrated into society, even though simultaneously, you know, you have the Department of Energy, where some of the biggest secrets the U.S. governments has is how does nuclear power work? how does nuclear detonations work. And so you can have it both ways. You can study UAP and maintain classification on the stuff that's dangerous for society. And former rare admiral Tim Galadette, you know, he just recently sent a letter to the science advisor to President Trump. His name is Michael Cratios.

Michael Cratios. And he was outlining exactly what you were just saying. Why is this not a national priority? It's so insane. So to me, disclosure, I mean, you first have to acknowledge we're not alone. And then everything else will take care of itself. I don't like once the world learns we're not alone, you don't need to persuade scientists to pursue this. They're going to be frothing at the mouth as will everybody else.

So it's like it's mind blowing that we live in an infrastructure of reality where there are so many interests from so many different disparate places. is all aligning with the goal of keeping it secret. And, you know, that's when I have sympathy for skeptics. You know, I don't agree with skeptics, but when you look at it in that, through that lens, it seems implausible. There's, how many nations have smoking gun evidence of UAP? Right. Yes, the U.S. allegedly has craft retrieval programs.

I think it's likely, but then China has them. Russia has them. The five eyes are all read in on this and talk about it. It's like it's so universal and yet all eight billion of us are walking around completely oblivious. So yeah, disclosure is just acknowledgement. We're not alone. You don't have to do one other thing. You don't have to start an organization.

You don't have to persuade anybody of anything. Once we know we're not alone, everybody from every field is going to be frothing at the mouth. And it will be go time. And that's it. It's over. Danny? I think about what I would think of disclosure, but then also what would work for disclosure, because where we are now in today's world, there's a lot of wild things that are said, and a lot of people are really controversial, like President Trump is extremely controversial. I mean, we've had high-level politicians, not the president, basically saying that they believe in the UFO subject and that it's real. And the public, generally has kind of brushed it off.

So I'm just wondering, even if President Trump acknowledged it, would it be kind of accepted? So I would let my best case scenario would be they need to show some kind of proof also along with it. You know, everyone's always talking about a wheel out of craft or a body or something along those lines. So that would definitely be my best scenario that it's not just words. It's something more official. And I think it does change from maybe politician to politician, but people just don't know what to believe these days.

Everything is really conspiracy driven, and that could be a good thing or a bad thing. But we need really something tangible, especially if when there's so many people in the world that only believe something from someone they like. And if it comes from the other side of the aisle, they're automatically not going to believe it or think it's fake or they're doing it for whatever reason. So we're just so divided and we need proof and we need something tangible is my answer. What about you, Joe? I think first we would need, for me, multiple firsthand witnesses who come out and say, listen, we spent the last four years together, this team working on a craft that we have concluded is of non-human origin. And this is why we believe that.

And then another group comes in and talks about the bodies and why they believe they're non-human and nature. And then the next day, ladies and gentlemen, come back to Hangar 57. We're going to show you a craft and the bodies are going to be there on display. You can ask whatever questions you want. That's like my dream scenario. And then the day after we go to Lockheed, we check out their TikTok. You're right. We should talk about that.

Yeah, we should talk about that. But yeah, no, that's also. I hear what you guys are saying and I feel the same way, which is that you can have people talk about it, but you have to have something to show for it. Yeah, you need a smoking gun. That goes without saying. Right. And the thing is, is that I wonder if there are, there's a lot of politics behind that, right?

We know we live in a super secure secrecy state when it comes to exotic repulsion. We know that these are special access programs that contain and work on anything that's advanced tech to begin with. So you'd really have to get some sort of fundamental shift within our power structure to say it is beneficial. beneficial to us to tell the world about this, right? And it's beneficial to us to show not only our friends, but our enemies too, what we got, because that's what you'd end up doing if you really let people in to see the craft and that sort of thing. So you'd need some sort of monumental shift within the power structure to even decide that's a good idea. Because right now it's not like me, you know, I have a craft in my backyard or something and I can just bring that out.

We're talking about if this is all true, you know, retrievals at the high. highest level of secrecy within our government. So what is going to push that button to get that type of transparency to the American? And then you can't help it, the global public. That I don't know. That's like a major paradigm shift within the way that this has been treated and maybe covered up for a long time. It would change everything. It would be like, how would the world handle it?

And I know people are like, the world can handle it. Well, I don't, as Chris Mellon, I love this quote from Mellon, and he may have changed his mind since then. But in 2015, he said, John Podesta says, the American people can handle the truth. And Mellon goes, how can you know if they can handle the truth until you know what it is? He goes, what if they're flesh eating arachnids? He goes, kind of doesn't make any sense.

So, yeah, what's, like, what's it going to take to get? that to happen to bring out craft and bodies, would it be enough if a dozen firsthand folks came forward? I don't know. It's like, as George always says, the more, the closer we get, the harder it becomes. And those people who are in charge of keeping this secret, I got to give them credit. They've done a really good job. They've, and it's, it sucks what they've done to whistleblowers, but it's, it's really working so far. You know, we have not heard. And hopefully the three people you talk about, I don't know if you can tell us anything more about those people. people who may testify in September, the people you talked about who have firsthand knowledge?

No, no. I think everybody should see if they're going to testify. And it's more than three, by the way, that I've officially brought in. So let's see who's going to testify. And if they don't, I think they're already coming public. They've already recorded me and George anyway. So there will be, you know, people will come forward on their own time. But right now, let's try to use the system and do it right. The government said they're going to help. Let's let them help. I want to push back a little bit to what Chris Mellon. stated, I remember him saying this. And, you know, Melon is an absolute awesome disclosure advocate. So, you know, I support him hugely. But I don't think it matters what it is. And I'll tell you why.

Because this is a lot of people probably won't agree with me on this, but I think what's going to disturb the public more than anything at all, no matter what the phenomenon is, is that in our most trusted institutions, our governments, in particular, we're willing to maintain a lie of this magnitude and gravity for 70 plus years. I think that is going to freak the public out. And I think those in power

know that. And I think that's a huge motivation as to why they don't come clean because they're just covering their ass. They know there's going to be all hell to pay once we get the truth. You know, we have

religious people in our world. all kinds of religions. They believe in God. They believe in Satan. They believe in angels. We already, like, we already believe in weird stuff. You know, you know, and in fairness, you know, knowing for certainty is different than belief.

I think Carl Nell pointed this out during a soul interview that it's one thing to believe and it's one thing to know. So that's a fair rebuttal. But I still maintain my perspective that disclosure is going to freak people out first and foremost, Because, like, think about it's not going to just be us, you know, standing around the water cooler talking about it. It's going to be our smartest, most influential minds losing their, you know what. Neil deGrasse Tyson and people like that, scientists, engineers, philosophers, like they're all going to lose their, you know what. And they're going to, you know, they're going to look like me. They're going to be ranting in front of the camera on CNN, on Fox News, on MSNBC.

And so they're going to be like this huge signal. And then the rest of the world is going to be going to receive that signal. Because let's be honest, our intellectuals influence how we perceive reality. That's just the way it is. That's why, you know, the skeptics for so long have gotten the red carpet on CNN, Fox News. Look at the recent Wall Street Journal article, like the news agencies for the longest time. They love giving credibility to the skeptics and their viewpoint. And then when it flips, all these brilliant minds are going to go on all these news stations.

They're going to write op-eds. There's going to be in the newspaper. And they're just going to say this was not only completely immoral and incomprehensible and unthinkable, but it was tragic. And then what does that do? That's a signal that the rest of civilization is going to receive. And we're going to feel that. And we're going to integrate that. And who's going to take the fall?

Who is going to take the fall? It's going to be governments. governments are going to take the fall. And that's what's going to freak people out, not because there's flying saucers. Because the bottom line is, yeah, there's flying saucers and there's probably abductions, but that's been happening forever. So what? It's happening right now.

Does it change the equation? Does learning about it actually change what is happening in the world? No, it doesn't. But learning that your government's been lying to you, something you couldn't even conceive what's a possibility, something that you're supposed to understand, not non-human intelligence, which is esoteric and other words. worldly, but like there's so many people who don't even believe governments would be willing to lie on this level or that they're capable of lying on this level. And what happens when all a billion of us

learn that governments were willing to lie on this level and are also capable of lying on this level? I think that is what's going to be more disruptive than learning about the phenomenon. But that's just my opinion. And the next question would be, okay, what else have you lied to us about? And that's always been people like, why do you want disclosure? I'm like, because for me, one of the most important things that I talk about is human beings have abilities that we've been told we don't have like PSI. So if it was proven that UFOs are real, we have a non-human intelligence here, it's a lot easier to say, hey, now that

your mind is open and you realize you've been lied to all these years, these are some other things which we have evidence for that you should really take a look at. As far as whether or not people, I agree. I mean, people are going to be upset. And the people, George said, I don't know, like six, seven years ago, he goes, people are going to go to jail. People are going to go to prison for some of what they did. Whether it's murder or hiding funds from the American people billions of dollars.

So, yeah, and as far as how they'll react to abductions or, as George says, they can see us any time without us seeing them. They could see you in the bathroom. They could see you in the shower. I don't know how people will react to that. For us, we'll be like, it's pretty cool. But like Ryan said, belief is. And Nell said, belief is a little different.

Knowing is a lot different than belief. So I don't know. But at the same time, disclosure doesn't have to reveal everything. You know, those details about seeing us all the time and abductions, like we have a long time to start meandering into those topics. Disclosure is exclusively going to be, oh, there's a presence here. It's non-human intelligence. And we don't know much. You know, our government's actually going to like start broaching.

abductions and the other stuff. I don't think so. But it's the first question, though. It's the first question out of a report. Yeah. And what are they going to say? They're going to say, we don't know. And then they're going to turn to people in the community and they're going to say, you know what? They'll leave it. Right. They'll leave it to the community. There's evidence that abductions are real, whether or not physical or not. And so, yeah, it would be let's, let's hope we get to find out in our lifetimes. I'm skeptical that we'll get there, but who knows. I mean, in a way, you know, we've already had a level of disclosure. When you have people, you know, top people saying there are craft,

they seem to be operating in a different world of physics than we're aware of, and they're admitting and acknowledging that and say it requires further study. I mean, that is the first step. That's like the tipping point to acknowledging that something is occurring that is outside of our scope of alleged scope of understanding with physics. But you guys remember that Larry McGuire, he's the, he's a member of parliament, in Canada, and he wrote that memo to the Five Eyes and talked about the foreign technologies division. And if you read that report that George and I put out or listened to that show,

when we accessed all that information and reached out to McGuire himself, what we learned is that, you know, he was saying, we're going to lose the trust of our population. That's the whole tone of that letter is that, you know, another country is going to disclose this first. Canada has to get ahead of this. There was a sense of urgency. And I found that really interesting because he must know something that says, hey, this is important not to lose the trust of our populace because we're going to be behind the eight ball on this one. If you guys remember the memo, that's the tone that it had. 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. 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, I have a question for you. I'm just wondering because, you know, some of the whistleblowers have come forward recently, including Matthew Brown, Michael Herrera and Jake Barber. They all agree. They all perceive that the back engineering efforts have been somewhat successful. But I will say someone like Jim Semivand, he's skeptical they've been successful.

You know, he thinks there's been derivative technologies. I think you also think they've attained derivative technologies. But have you, you or George, changed your mind. all about the proposition that there have been some actual replication technologies where they can actually fly, fly and stuff like that. Yeah, I'm really open to having my mind changed on that because I remember it being a very sad day when I came to the definitive conclusion, you know, from where I was standing then, that we have not made significant progress in any way. Now, I've heard a lot of stories about a type of reverse engineered craft, particularly

triangles, right, that operate with some of this technology. The evidence is there that something exists as far as propulsion leaps that we've taken, but I don't have significant evidence that it's anything on an industrial scale or that we've really mastered this. Again, I would love to be wrong. And there's a lot of people that probably have a lot more information than I do on it. But I see also the nonsense and the bullshit, like trying to claim that in 2004 the Tick-Tac was made by Lockheed. That is inherently false from any scope of my imagination, from anything that I actually know. I also know that that is a narrative that I told everybody this. I told everybody this years before that this was going to be a narrative that is pushed because I saw it coming in as

passage material from the CIA. And so that is something that they reached out to Commander Fraver about. That was something some good friends of mine who were on the programs told me, tried to warn me that that was going to be something coming out of that agency and infiltrating into popular culture, which it now has. So that is also a signal when you're trying to pretend to people that we have greater capability than we do, which is a great thing for our enemies, right,

to make them think we've got things like Tic Tacs at a Lockheed. The thing is that anybody I've ever talked to on these programs flatly says, I wish that was the case. So no, my mind hasn't been changed, but I'm really open to it being changed. change with good information. You know, and it's my friend Michael Vye, who was a former Intel defense contractor, he said, he texted me like last week, he goes, if, if we have that tech, he goes,

there's no way they're going to let it out like that. They're not going to go to a reporter and say, we have this tech because there goes our, there goes our technological advantage over an adversary. So he believes if we have it, because he's definitely on the side of thinking we do, they wouldn't let it out. On the flip side, and it's only an anecdote, but it's one of my favorite anecdotes. Commander Will Miller, who did a lot of briefings in the Pentagon, he briefed Admiral Wilson. He was the lead, even though Stephen Greas said he was the lead, but Will Miller was the lead to brief Admiral Wilson. He said on his last, he was working with a guy who worked over at Area 51,

and on this guy's last day, or Will's last day in the command, this guy said to Will, he goes, hey Will. He goes, you know those craft that you got your friends at C. SETI, C in the air where they're doing 90 degree turns and going mock nine? And you guys think they're extraterrestrial? He goes, yeah? He goes, well, they're not. And he goes, and the guy just walked away. So it's an anecdote. Obviously, it does not prove anything. But it makes me wonder, it's always making me wonder, do we have that? And in the end, I don't know, because it's mixed. Eric Davis, no way we have not done it. Other people, oh yeah, we've back engineer.

We have triangles that can go anywhere, any time in the universe. I don't know what to believe. Yeah. I mean, forgive me, Jeremy, if you've answered this before. What do you think was our recorded that night

when they went out there? What do I think he recorded? I think he recorded a test flight of what it is that he knew was working out there because it came up at the same time every week. I think it was a guest. it was probably us flying something that... Oh, right.

Yeah, that I still don't know. Even to this day, that's something that Lazar has really grappled with because he just doesn't have enough information. He found it extremely odd that you could kind of talk with a pilot inside of one of these things with a radio. He's like, none of that makes... He was questioning it when it happened. He's like, none of that makes sense from how I understand these craft operate.

If they do have a gravitational propulsion. system radio waves ain't coming in and out of it. So he already thinks there was some kind of ploy to misdirect him during the operation of that craft. You know, for all we know, it was a non-human being that was in there. Maybe it was a human pilot. Maybe it was an autonomous craft. There's just no way for us to know or speculate. Even Bob doesn't know. That's one of the coolest parts of that story to me is that they get that video of whatever they recorded. Yeah. And everybody out there that might have talked to I think every single one except one that was out there during that filming.

And they all said it was a disc. I mean, you could see it with your eyes. You know how you could see much better than a 1980s like camcorder in the dark? Like with their eyes, it was a disc, a disc-shaped craft. Let me take the conversation another way. Last time we all got together, it was the winter. And the UFO community was extremely excited about Skywatcher. and Jake Barber basically, you know, he made a claim that they were going to have.

He used the word undebunkable, and he also basically gave about a year's timeline. So we're in the eighth month of the year. We haven't seen any proof. How do you guys feel about that? Are you a little bit more pessimistic if you were positive on it? Or how are you guys feeling? Well, I'll just say that, you know, when he said that, I was, you know, excited in the sense that I hope he's right.

But look, I'm given the stage. You know, I give him the stage. He has what? A few more months to go. So I hope him and his team can get some smoking gun data that proves we're not alone. That would be great. And we could just move on to the post-disclosure world. But, yeah, I mean, I don't know why he made that statement to me.

Even if you believe there was a good chance, you'd be wise. not to say it. It's just why put pressure on yourself like that? Why put yourself under scrutiny? You know, it's like just allow your work to show itself to, to communicate its value. So I don't, I think it was a mistake for him to say that. But if he, if he brings the goods, then more power to. And they talked, he talked about their ability to vector in a craft, summon a craft and bring it down to the ground, which is amazing. Oh my God. Disclosure. So now we're seeing their videos, which they're okay. Their videos are interesting.

But I want to see the craft being brought down to the ground. If you're going to make that claim, do it. Why can't you just do it right now? If you have the ability to bring craft down without technology using a psionic asset, using their psychic abilities, do that. And then this question about whether or not we're alone, assuming, well, that's assuming that there's something inside. but that would be momentous.

And so I am skeptical, but, you know, I'm patient. They still have time. I'm frustrated because, I mean, I've seen people tell me they've got these extraordinary capabilities. I've never claimed that I do. I tried to bend a spoon with my mind with Dr. Edgar Mitchell, and I failed dramatically. I have no psionic ability. So I haven't seen even somebody who's been able to demonstrate that to me in a very fundamental way. so the claim that you can bring something down,

have they claimed that they've done this before, that they've brought down WholeCraft with their minds? Have they claimed they've done that? Where were the camera? I'm pretty sure they, yeah, I'm pretty sure they have claimed to have done that. And I don't know if it was where they were doing that,

if they were doing that along with the government in the government program. And that's why we don't have video. But do it now. Like, you know, you're out of the program now. Do it instead of wasting our, not wasting our time, but instead of showing us videos that are, you know, they're not really definitive.

Bring down a craft. Bottom line is this, guys, it's going to take, so I'm going to give the dude, I don't know the guy that much. Like, he's nice, talked a few times, but I think given everybody a little bit of grace here, like I'm not going to put somebody on a clock, they shouldn't put themselves on a clock either. You know, it's like, I think if we have an asymmetric approach to studying this,

like obviously we all think this is real or we have enough evidence to satisfy within ourselves that this is a real and important phenomenon. So that's where maybe the four of us are coming from. But I think what we can do is try to enroll the curiosity of more and more people through an asymmetric approach. If we have hearings, that's great. I think you're right. I think it was Danny or Ryan, you said, if we get those hearings, then that'll push us towards maybe the legislation having more fuel and more steam. Absolutely.

I absolutely agree that. That if you have the endeavors of Skywatchers, you have the endeavors of the Soul Foundation, you have the endeavors of whistleblowers coming to me and George, we have people talking about it and doing journalism on it like you three, all of that together. I think we're going to find ourselves in a different location in, you know, eight months from now than we are today. But I will never put a clock and push it on one person is going to bring us absolute disclosure on this topic. I think we have to work all in tandem, if not together. Does that make sense? And I think there's another issue, too.

George Knapp speaks about this a lot with Skimwalker Ranch. like, you know, you had NIDS, National Institute of Discovery Science or whatever it was. Yeah. And they spent years trying to document the phenomenon and had all kinds of brilliant people trying to document it. And this was one of my criticisms early on when Jake Barber said he's going to get the evidence in a year because I have this bias that the phenomenon picks and choose who it gives evidence to. I mean, you know, it's been stated they're the architects of the secrecy, and I think that's true. And if it is true that all these corporations actually have parts and pieces and crash retrieval programs are able to get these craft, I don't think it's a statistical anomaly that no one else is able to do so. So in that sense, you know, I know it sounds spooky and conspiracy oriented, but I fail to see a good counter argument.

It seems to me that the phenomenon is kind of controlling this trajectory and this kind of the scenario we're in where allegedly governments and corporations, the intelligence community and militaries have smoking gun evidence of various kinds, whether it's radar data, visuals, or even craft, the pieces of the craft, tracking the craft coming in and out of the water. But yet, is Avi Loeb going to get this? Are other scientists going to get it? I don't know. It depends. I mean, if the phenomenon wants them to, yeah, it's inevitable. But I'm just not convinced, and hopefully I'm wrong. I'm not convinced that you can necessarily just put your best foot forward scientifically.

And if you do the right thing, you'll get the smoking gun because the phenomenon might be five, 10, 20 steps ahead of their efforts. And at the end of the day, they may just get to pick and shoes. So it is plausible that if when Jake Barber was in any programs, in that scenario, the phenomenon is willing to show itself with more clarity and in a more documentable way. Now he's in the public sector with Skywatcher. The phenomenon might not cooperate in that scenario. You've brought up one of my biggest issues. So with the general public, the videos that we see people sharing are basically useless. no offense to people shooting the video.

And then we have Christopher Mellon, and you and George saying some of the videos you have are amazing, Christopher Mellon saying they're 4K, then we got up-closed stuff. So why, and it could be a censor issue, but why is like we never get to see that, but somehow the intelligence community, the government, you guys are getting stuff sent you,

why is this such a disparity in what we're seeing publicly and what allegedly exists privately? And it's a really good point for skeptics to say, or debunkers, like, because it doesn't exist privately. You know, your video that you guys released of that disc going through the clouds is one of the most, that's the video we've all been thinking. All right, there's a craft that we've heard about, a flying saucer. Other than that, nothing else we've seen looks like what we've heard about over the years. You have any?

Yeah. What do you think? Yeah, no, totally. And I think that that has been a difficult thing with. with me and George is we'll get what we feel is our best evidence that we can put out at that time without endangering other things, you know, sources, national security, basically, those two things. And, you know, we have to be careful, dude. People don't like doing this job.

I'll tell you that much as obtaining things that sometimes appear like they could be dangerous. So it's always like this idea is, is it going to push the needle, right? If I had the perfect, all-powerful video and it would change the world, I would. would not hesitate to drop it, but everything is nuanced, Joe. You know that. So even this last one that our government has said, this is a disc, this is a disc UAP, and it's still classified a disc. You know, to me, it's the best we've seen so far, but it is not like the perfect video. And if I had the perfect video, you know I would push to get that out immediately. But everything is nuanced. A lot of this footage, you say 4K, well, look, when stuff gets leaked to me and George,

it's obviously people are like filming a screen in a room. It's never going to be traditionally 4K. So I just don't know what's going to be what's going to change the attitudes, but a long durational kind of like putting things out as we can and trying to up the ante each time better and better evidence. And we're going to do our best. But again, this disclosure thing is not in our hands. There's people that would be much more adept at being able to, you know,

kind of convince the world about the truth about UAP. All I can do is my small part, but that's the thing. I think that if we each do our small part, I really feel that collective push is what we need and how we're going to get anywhere. Hey, Joe, I have a question for you. Why do you think Trump hasn't signed an executive order for UFOs?

He's did it with JFK and Kennedy. What's your perspective on what? I mean, the legacy that, I mean, he has an ego. the legacy he would have for that is is incomprehensible. What is stuff? Allegedly he didn't put out the JFK files because Mike Pompeo told him it would be a bad idea. And he agreed with Mike Pompeo and he did not put out the JFK files. The only thing I can assume is if there are probably people around him saying,

you cannot do this. You want to have the economy tank. You want to see the stock market tank. It'll be on your watch. That will be your legacy. That's the only thing I could think of why he wouldn't do it. but I'm speculating. I don't know. Hopefully he does. It's like, I wasn't expecting it. I wasn't also negative on it. I was just, let's see what he does. And he still has time, but you're,

you're right. His legacy, if he put it out and we got this amazing footage, he would be, he would go down in the history books. People would forget about Epstein and everything else, you know? So I'm not hoping it's going to happen, but you guys, I don't know if you guys how many ideas why he would not do it? Oh, I'd imagine they'd say, we're just going to shoot you in the face like Kennedy, if you even try to do that. I mean, that's the way that you'd get someone not to do it. It's just, you know, tell them, this is what's going to happen to you.

These are our national secrets, and you do not let that out, or we're going to shoot you in the face. I mean, that would stop most human being from doing it, right? And there's always debate whether the presidents have access. Do you have any insight on that, Jeremy? Yeah, I don't think there's a lot of debate on that. even Clinton came out and said, you know, wouldn't be the first time I was lied to. When I asked, they didn't really give me anything on Roswell and whatnot.

So I think from the people I know that have done presidential briefings on the UAP topic to the people in these organizations that have been studying it and trying to push information with the White House, I think it depends on twofold. One is the interest of the sitting president. And then if the sitting president does ask, you know, look, they can be lied to and obfuscated from just like anybody can. can be in a bureaucracy and America is definitely a bureaucracy. So it's not everybody's read in in the same way as what I, I don't think that's up for debate. It just appears that way.

Can I ask you a question? Yes. So have you or do you know of anybody else who has claimed to have spoken to the witness I described earlier, somebody who claims to have worked in a program for a decent amount of time and who had hands on a craft said, yeah, I worked on it. And my conclusion was after three years or whatever, this was a non-human craft. Yes. I know people in official capacity who have interviewed with people that exactly fit this description. And I have pushed on them being like, what is it going to take for someone like that to come forward publicly? And by the way, that was part of an ICIG investigation where people of that level were communicated with.

And I know exactly who is doing that back and forth. And here's the deal, ma'am. They said to me, what would be the motivation for someone like that to break from the fold and destroy their whole lives just because they were called in to come talk with me? It's not going to happen. It's just not going to happen. There has to be somebody who's so upset with something surrounding this that they're just like going to try to burn it all down.

And usually those people never make it to the starting point, you know, if they're coming from that attitude. people that work in those programs are so highly monitored with polygraphs and, you know, their family lives, making sure they're stable. If you remember all the way back looking to the czar, why did he get not called back for the program? It was because they found out his wife was cheating on him and he became a security risk. That's how security clearances work is you have to have a stable family life. So people that would break from the fold that are feeling all that type of pressure and just try to burn the whole house down, dude, they're going to find out they're in that mental state way prior to them ever be. being able to get to the starting point. So it's a long way to say, yeah, man, the Holy Grail, yeah, I know about those conversations.

I've talked to people on both sides of those conversations. The thing is, there's no indication that people like that are at this moment willing to come forward. And in fact, I can't go further than that, but in fact, if people were willing at one point, I don't think it's possible anymore for them. And just to be clear, you're talking about other people have had the conversation. with those whistleblers? Or not you. Yes.

Well, what I'm admitting to is that in official capacity, there are people doing this investigation that have conveyed to me their direct official debriefing with individuals in those programs, like working on the technology currently, non-human technology. So I know these people have had those investigatory roles and had those. briefings and took the information because of the ICIG, you know, reports. Cool. Yeah. I wish I could help more on that, guys, you know.

Something that would always, that would bother me because I've seen this happen if I was a whistleblower. We've seen stories and we've come out and we thought they would be bigger. And so it's like we're battling the public or public perception, I should say. I always go back to the Stars Academy when they put out the Tick-Tac. I think they were all probably thinking that was going to be disclosure. And it ended up, it pushed the ball. I mean, moved the ball greatly. It was amazing.

But, you know, it wasn't disclosure. If I had known about that story before it came out, I would have thought that was it. So we're always having to one up the previous stories and battling public perception and how the public is currently operating with news stories. And with the public being, I think, more pessimistic and just the state of the world right now, it's getting harder and harder. It's an Erlson in his interview that was put out yesterday. He was so excited. He goes, you know, the hearings are a little slow, but overall, behind the scenes, we're making progress.

And he's really excited. And I'm like, a few years ago, somebody privately told me, hey, members of Congress are being briefed. They know the entire story. And this person was very excited. And I'm like, okay, but I mean, we got Grush. Grush came forward because this person was like, people are going to come forward. The American people are going to be scared. Some of them are going to be excited.

I think this person was talking about Grush and maybe Nell. Well, they came forward. Nothing. People don't even know Grush now. Some people did at the time. It was definitely, I walked into a pizza place when he had, right after he had testified. And I go, somebody goes, how are you doing? I'm like, well, we just had a congressional hearing.

He goes, David Grush. So, yeah, some people. did know about it. But for the most part, if I ask people in my family, 99% of them do not know who David Grushes. A hundred percent do not know who Carlinel is. So yeah, it's public perception. People, compared

to what the people we talked to, somebody I talked to behind the scenes, they're like, here it comes. The public's like, yeah, nah, I don't care. Yeah. I think it's just going to be slow and steady, you guys. And let's wrap up this way. First of all, it's great talking with you guys.

I'm a kind of fan of each of your styles of engaging people. I like watching the Twitter wars. It's more entertaining than storage wars. It's so cool to see what you guys uncover. And the way that you, you know, thoughtfully engage people and each of you have your own kind of skill set. So I just want to say everybody should follow you guys on social media because I do and I learn a lot about what's going on in the UFO world. I don't always tune into social media, but I'll follow your guys stuff. But let's end this way. I guess what I'm saying is I'm optimistic still. I think that we're We're going to have the best hearings that we can legally have at this time.

I think we're going to, you know, push the envelope a little bit more open. If they choose just three of the people that I've nominated to Congress, I think we're in a good place to continue the conversation. It's not going to bring disclosure in September, but I think that paired with good journalism, honest journalism, which is sparse these days. And it comes to the UAP topic. And then also just relying on the information that comes to journalists such as videos and that sort of thing. Let's just do our best, get everything out, talk about it, raise the bar a little bit more of the discussion so vice presidents can come out and openly admit that they're UFO fans. And I think that we're going to make progress. Whatever this disclosure plan is, let it be from the beings or just from the willful army of people that want the truth.

I think that we're making progress. And it might not be fast enough for everybody. But we are sitting in a different world today than we were in 2007. team. Final thoughts? I'd be remiss if I do not mention the work of, I don't know if you've talked about it, or you've seen it, Jeremy, but the work of astronomer Beatrice Villarreal, very interesting, showing basically in plates from before Sputnik when there were no satellites, there were these transients that would show up on these plates, and then a half an hour before or a half an

hour later, or a little around that time, they would just disappear. And what the evidence shows is that there's a statistically significant amount of these objects are disappearing when the sun is in complete shadow. So it suggests that they're reflective and they may be in an orbit. What's it when the satellites are geocentric orbit? They may be craft. There's like hundreds, possibly hundreds of thousands. I don't think there are that many if they're craft, but people should check out her work. Beatriz, Villarreal, I think I'm saying her name correctly.

Yeah, fascinating step forward if that proves to be the case. Again, it's not going to bring the ultimate disclosure as Ryan described it, but it is going to be another kind of step in the direction of understanding the phenomenon if it is true. Any final words from you guys? I'll just say that I'm looking forward to the hearings and I'm looking forward to the trajectory we're on. I mean, yeah, I would like disclosure to happen in the next five minutes, But barring that, I look forward to all the developments that are going to happen that, you know, let's be honest, if the December 16th, 2017 year Times article never came out, we wouldn't be here right now. We would not be having this conversation, let alone seeing so many interesting news pieces coming out on the regular about the UFO issue.

Danny? I would say, you know, back when I had first started writing, and of course now I'm mostly retired, but. I would talk to George and get journalism tips and I bet he doesn't even want me to say this but one of the tips he gave me was don't compliment him because he doesn't need it and he was really

blunt with me and he was always really incredible I would always be able to ask him questions and bounce things off him. With that said I still no matter how frustrated I am or skeptical of the politicians and just the process and things like that

I know that we're in the best hands with Jeremy and George, and you guys are doing the most that could possibly be done at the time. So I think that a lot of people would take that for granted, and I think you guys are the undisputed best UFO reporters for many years you've shown that. So I would just like to remind people of that.

Maybe everyone already thinks that because they're watching this podcast. Or they hate us, and they love watching the train wreck. There's always a lot of contraferzy going on in the UFO community. And, I mean, you guys are the best at what you do over and over again. and I would just like to thank you guys for what you're doing and I'm looking forward to the next hearing and what you're doing after that and everything along those lines. So, you know, we appreciate it.

Awesome, man. Yeah, I hope that we get someone you have not heard from before that can give you more insight to the UFO thing when it comes to their personal testimony. I'm very optimistic that's going to happen unless there's some sort of rug that's pulled out underneath my feet. We're on the right path for people to hear from people that they have not heard about or heard from yet.

And again, that's just a step forward. So, you know, keep the hope and just keep up the good work, you guys. And thanks for joining me. I'm sure everybody on weaponized will be stoked to hear your perspectives and be able to follow your work. So, and I think George says he missed out on us this time, but he'll probably do an intro and an outro for this show. Okay. Yeah, and thank you for all the hard work you've done, Jeremy, on the hearings. I know a lot of people don't realize, but I know it's not easy.

So I really look forward to September and it's going to be, it's going to be interesting. There's a lot of people involved, right? A lot of people and staff. Remember, Representative Luna set this in motion. So she has the opportunity because of her task force to hold hearings. And so all I'm trying to do is facilitate people that want to be able to speak with Congress, whether publicly or not. But there's a lot of people working on this. Some really great staffers who are spending time and energy, a lot of like video calls. So there's a lot of people working on this. Again, I don't hold any of the cards of who testifies, but all I can do is nominate. And I And I've done my best for that. And so let's see, you know, if we have good hearings or not, it's just a matter of who's talking, right? Yeah. And you set the bar. Let's see what happens. You made, you didn't make any promises.

You said, do not expect disclosure this time? It's just going to move the ball forward a little. And that's all you can do, you know? That's right. That's right. All right. Well, September, we can't come fast enough. But hopefully you guys have a good August.

We'll talk soon. Thanks for joining the show, ma'am. 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.

Wishing you could be there live for the big game, soaking up the atmosphere of the crowd. But too often, life gets busy. Or the price holds you back. Priceline is here to help you make it happen. With millions of deals on flights, hotels, and rental cars, you can go see the game live. Don't just dream about the trip.

Book it with Price Line. Download the Priceline app or visitpriceline.com. Actual prices may vary, limited time offer. Well, that was fun. You had fun. Yeah, it's cool to talk with those guys and they're really thoughtful and we have different opinions, but it's cool to hear everybody's opinion. And I got to say, they're really tuned in to like what's happening now. So I suggest everybody go, like, look at their social media and kind of follow what they do because you're going to know, you know, before anybody if you do that. So we are now less than 30 days of when we presume the congressional hearing is going to happen.

And I know there are a number of names that you have. have proposed to them. There are other names maybe that they've considered some names that maybe have been suggested by other folks on Capitol Hill. But what are your expectations? And what can we convey to our listeners about the legal implications of somebody coming forward, spilling the beans about something to which they swore an oath and signed non-disclosure agreements, what their legal jeopardy may or may not be? I mean, it's not cut and dried and a simple thing that if Congress calls you in, you're free to talk about whatever you want. It's just not that way. Right. Yeah. People don't understand the process so much, which I get, like, how would people? But it's not just like we give them names. You know, we do years of vetting on people. We create different categories of exposure to this sort of thing. And we bring them these different levels of people, you know, firsthand for sure. But the question is like, to what level have they been exposed? Was it accidental spillage on documents or was it seeing a craft?

So we also then have to provide the time that Congress can, in their own way, vet each person. And we make that job very easy for them, but they have to do their own vetting as well. And ultimately, they're creating a kind of event where they feel it will have most impact based upon the ideal of the hearing that they're creating. And this one is about transparency. So, or whatever that means that it's, you know, it's about, it is about transparency. So I don't know what to expect. I think that wholly depends on who they choose and how they set it up. Maybe in the UFO land, people are going to be, you know, I've heard this before.

I mean, there's definitely going to be people you haven't heard from. But to the general public, the idea is to get the big aspects out there. However, there are people that I think they have to be throttled a little bit with what they can say. And I don't know a lot about the legality. some people have signed NDAs. Some people have said, I'll never talk about it. Some people, by the nature of their employment, are never supposed to talk about it.

So I hope that some of those people can share in a public open hearing. And that is the goal for everything to be public. None of these closed door, I've set up too many of those, closed door hearings or closed door briefings, and it's like it doesn't help. And so now this is the idea,

is what can we get public? And I don't know all the legalities, but I hope we can have someone on the podcast that can help. us with that. I think I got someone in mind who could help us sort that out. For the people who could become witnesses, it's not as easy as UFO observers think. I mean, stepping forward and testifying at a congressional hearing before the whole world, in essence, it changes your life. You never go back. I mean, you can never change coming out like that. They could probably never work

in classified programs again. They have to worry about legal ramifications and possible prosecutions, And believe it or not, there are risks to their safety and to their families. And I know people think that that's all made up, that there's no way they'd be taken out or suddenly disappear because they testify or spill some beans. But they believe it is very real. And I tend to believe them on that point as well. Yeah, I think for some people, the greatest self-defense is to go public, is just to come out. There's a couple cases like that of people that we've proposed that would testify. You know, and look, there's other people who are. just active duty right now. And surprisingly, some of them are willing to openly testify about their personal experiences, which is, you know, goes against the idea of protecting yourself with your career. Hopefully there's nothing, no repercussions for them within their careers. But you never know. I think everybody is taking a risk to some degree, but some people feel it's really important to get their experiences documented on congressional record. They feel this topic is so

important, they're willing to break from that fold. So we have a whole variety of different people, people that are active, people that are not, people that have signed oath, people that haven't. Let's just see who Congress decides to utilize. And look, any UFO hearing is a good hearing, but the idea is to elevate each time and create more information in the public sphere. Well, I give kudos to these staff members. They are diligent about it. They're really doing their homework, trying to make it right, making sure that. they're not putting on someone who maybe doesn't belong there and coordinating with you, getting opinions about what kind of bang for the buck they'd be getting if they called

witness X or Y or Z. So I look forward to it happening. I look forward to learning more about the legalities. And I look forward to the next time we get together and talk for an episode of Weaponized.