Is Congress Secretly Promoting UAP Disclosure? | Richard Dolan Show w/Allan Lavigne

Transcript

Greetings. Welcome to the Richard Dolan Show. Welcome everyone. Thanks for joining me today. There's a lot happening behind the scenes right now when it comes to the UAP or UFO issue.

And I think most of it we're not seeing, the public is not seeing. Uh hearings have stalled. We did have a hearing a couple of months ago, but Congress is distracted. Congress is shut down. The government shut down.

Uh, but there is a steady current of testimony, investigation, maybe you could call it quiet maneuvering still going on in Washington. That is the strong opinion of my guest today, Alan Lavine, a very good friend of the show and a friend of mine. Uh, Allan has been following that world very closely. Just want to mention before I bring him on, Allan's background uh in federal law enforcement and counter surveillance as well as being an excellent artist. He's done the illustrations of my USO book series.

So, there is that. But Allan's got a very very uh extensive background that I think gives him a perspective that is valuable in this discussion. and he's been in touch with people in and around uh the intelligence community and congressional staff that are watching this process unfold from the inside. So, we're going to talk about what he's hearing, rumors, realities, maybe the reasons why this topic is remaining so sensitive. So, Allan, welcome to the program.

It's good to have you back again. >> Thank you, Richard. It's a pleasure to be back. >> Yeah. So, maybe we should start off.

I'll I'll just let folks know you and I we correspond um behind the scenes and you have been saying a few things to me about what you think is going on behind the scenes and particularly I'll just say this you have said things that uh you've said that things are coming to a head behind closed doors so I would really be interested in you expanding on that and what do you see as the main pressure points are we talking is it media exposure or internal whistleblower momentum or something else. What What's going on and why do you say things are coming to a head behind the scenes relating to the UAP topic? >> Well, I think skeptics are gleeful over u what they heard during disclosure day um which I call Groundhog Day because we seem to be going over the same thing again and again. Um that uh disclosure is dead. Well, rumors of disclosure being dead have been greatly exaggerated. Uh things are moving.

Um they've been moving at a fast rate. Um the UAP bill though in its new uh legislative form did not pass. The original UAP bill did pass uh back in the the 20 24 >> right? >> Yeah. Uh thing four of the six major provisions passed. The challenge with that uh uh was the enforcement provisions within the bill were not um codified.

So uh if someone disobys and and doesn't do what the bill says to do, there's no enforcement mechanism. But things are moving along. The National Archives has been collecting documents from government offices since uh and releasing those to their website since uh April of 2020 um five here. Uh and if you go on their uh website, just look up UAP and they have a whole host of documents, new documents. Some are the community would be familiar with.

Uh they have some very good highresolution photographs that are seldom seen today that a lot of people, new researchers and stuff probably aren't familiar with, but they have a lot of new documents and a lot of new information from all the uh different government offices. And uh it continues well at least it did continue up until the shutdown. Right now, the National Archives is shut down >> uh because of the uh uh things going on in in Congress with the uh budget, but um it doesn't mean that Congress who was sent home is uh just twiddling their thumbs. Uh members of the task force uh are still receiving information. There are there were whistleblowers testimony already taken uh uh and there was plans to possibly do another hearing before the end of the year.

That doesn't look likely now. Um but most recently um and one of the ones who were would have likely will or will likely be in this next one is Dan Sherman who Jesse Michaels just did uh >> an interview with. Yeah, we could chat about that later. I think that was that was a very interesting interview for sure. Over three hours.

Very detailed. >> It was it was a a mic drop moment. I mean, if you had that in the uh the the Congress's hearing, I think it'd be very influential. And there are others equally um sensitive and important um uh that can be extrapolated on that are still working with law enforcement as well. >> Uh I want you to keep going.

I I because this is very important, but are you able I don't want you to give up sensitive sources who are you talking to? I understand. What can you give us at least an idea of why you are I guess I'll say confident in saying that there's actually still a lot going on behind the scenes and I mean are you able to say like are there certain committees or staff offices that seem to be driving this like senate intelligence or armed services or some kind of mix but also how are you getting your information about uh any of the inside momentum Um, and also uh before we're done, I I you mentioned uh to me uh that transcripts or and there's transcripts will be declassified. >> Uh I think >> or made public in some way. >> Okay. >> Caveat let me caveat that because this >> just you just go I would just answer those.

This is the just position that I have between the UAP bill and and what I believe the method should be taken. And I would share this with Danny if he was here that this is >> Yeah, Danny Sheen. This is really the the the way we we need to go after this. The UAP bill um I is to me very similar to how Congress responds to many uh issues in the national consciousness. They go, "Oh, we'll make a new law and we'll settle this with a new law." The laws within the UAP bill like eminent domain already exists.

The federal government under um uh title 18, US code 831, 832 already have eminent domain to seize any unregistered nuclear material, weapons of mass destruction or anything uh that threatens the national security uh health and safety of of the general public. That's always existed. Ask Bob Lazar. He's been raided twice. So to say, oh no, they can't go into a private company and and start searching it and turning up.

Absolutely they can. And and if you get >> I just want to mention I had this conversation on global disclosure day uh groundhog day as you call with uh with Carl Nell uh Colonel retired colonel of the US Army. Some people have probably heard that some others haven't. But Carl pointed out like his position, I don't want to misunderstand him, but he said, "Look, the eminent domain part of that law was important because we don't really have any legal examples of of private companies having extraterrestrial technology." And I I guess like I think that was an important element of why he felt the eminent domain clause was significant because it I think it was just to make it clear to these companies that this this could happen and that the federal government needed to have a a means by which to access this technology. You're saying it's already implied or that the US government already has felt it was it was important to put in anyway.

Uh Schumer said in his um after the first UAP bill, again, the first one passed. It was stripped down, but it was passed. Uh in his um conversation with reporters afterwards, Schumer said it was intended as a shot across the bow to those involved that we know who you are and we know what you're doing. So in that definition, what Schumer was saying and what the bill was saying is we know you have extraterrestrial or non-human intelligence technology. >> Well, okay.

That that doesn't prohibit the federal government from seizing anything uh uh that was given to them that comes under the statute. non-registered nuclear materials, weapons of mass destruction, which uh uh >> like what if there's like I mean what if there are covert legal agreements between the private entities locked let's just say locky Martin and the US government? I mean there might isn't it possible that there's something uh a covert legal arrangement that we just don't know about that might obviousate eminent domain? I mean >> you you have you know federal supremacy uh under the title. So whatever they wrote and then this comes up I mean we had this this the Supreme Court had to sell this last one uh with President Trump's um classified documents at his home in Mara Lago. Um the uh Supreme Court said no he has the right to you know declassify anything even with a thought it's declassified and the same thing has come up with because the DOE has provisions that you need certain um intelligence agencies to sign off on the release of classified information etc etc and the White House legal staff has said no because that's come up and they've said no you can if the president wants it, he gets it. If he wants it to classify, he doesn't have to jump through hoops or or anything.

And they've used the eminent domain for even minor things. Gibson uh guitar was was raided uh because they bought rosewood uh uh from uh uh Madagascar instead of India, I forget, or or vice versa. And that was against the um trade policy. And so they sent the FBI SWAT team in to forcibly seize the the Rosewood. So you think they wouldn't go in after a a a spacecraft? >> I it it's it's ludicrous.

Of course they would. >> Okay. Okay. >> Bob Lazar has been raided twice >> now. >> Fair enough.

All right. So thank you for that. >> So um so keep going here. I mean uh try to describe >> you asked about the transcripts. You asked about transcript.

Okay. So what are we talking about? Um when the UAP task force was assembled, they recruited and Carl Nell was part of this and Jay Stratton, they recruited uh David Grush as the lead investigator. Gave him a staff to go out and investigate. Hey, tell us what this UAP thing is all about and who knows what and whatever. And uh with uh Senator Harry Reid's help, David went out and did this.

He assembled and began bringing before the select intelligence committee witnesses involved in legacy programs, involved in private contracting, you had engineers, managers, scientists, etc. More than 40, according to David Grush's testimony before the Congress in public sworn testimony, he claimed more than 40 witnesses. Now we know since that time additional witnesses have been brought before the committee. Initially the select intelligence per permanent select intelligence committee uh with the Senate was headed by Marco Rubio. Now people go like oh Marco Rubio.

Oh yeah he's going to be in the U age of disclosure documentary here at the end of November. Well no one asks well how does he know this stuff? because he sat on on almost three years of testimony from legacy program uh uh operators. >> Okay. All that information was uh placed in transcripts along with their physical evidence which according to David Grush included signals data, radar data, film, photographs, videotape and even meta material. >> No doubt.

No doubt those transcripts are there. I don't know if it's normal for uh these committees to release transcripts of uh behind like closed door types of testimony. Are is this something that happens? I I don't I don't think that it is. >> Uh it it does happen. The last time it happened was 2014 uh when the Select Intelligence Committee released the uh sworn uh testimony of whistleblowers pertaining to the CIA torture program from the black sites overseas where they were waterboarding prisoners and stuff.

>> And it it simply requires that the 21 members of the committee have a majority vote to release and declassify transcripts. They don't have to get permission from the president or the executive branch. they just need to notify them within 24 hours that they are releasing it. And uh so it's it's an easy thing to do uh in speaking uh with people. The concern with the rank and file within Congress, not the Senate, but within Congress is the effect uh that uh releasing this type of information would have on the economy.

uh in general, not just for our national economy, but the worldwide economy. That's one caveat. And >> it's very seldom discussed and I agree with you. That's a very important consideration without a doubt. >> Yeah, the uh stock market hates uncertainty and you would be raising uncertainty.

uh even if there was nothing within uh our possession that we could use, you just have the spacecraft, just the uncertainty of what could come out about it. Uh how is it going to affect transportation, energy sectors, medical sectors, um >> there's a lot of money invested in a huge infrastructure worldwide that would affect many technologies. I would think future markets there's a lot that would be thrown into confusion. A lot of people might say great let it be thrown into confusion. It all needs to come down but uh we we all have to live through that.

So >> yeah. Yeah. >> And it would also destabilize I think a lot of governments because you're going to be asked okay do have you spoken to these aliens? I mean what kind of deals have we made? blah blah blah and some people are going to be very unsatisfied with the existing governments. They already don't trust most governments and if you know okay >> not much reason to >> Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. There there's going to be a lot of concern there. So it's something that uh governments outside the United States I don't even think would consider. Certainly China would never consider doing it. Russia and this goes back to something David Crush had said.

uh Russia was considering it according to him and he got that information through intelligence that he saw during his time at the NRO. >> Russia would consider doing a disclosure of some sort. >> Yes. >> I wonder about that. I personally don't think so, but you can't rule it out.

China, I'm I'm thinking absolutely no way. >> No. No. I I I don't I don't see them doing it. >> Russia >> Yeah.

Russia might leverage it to get uh industry going their way. You know, hey, we we got this information. Come to Russia and you know, we'll help you and you can help us and you know, which could stimulate their economy as we we'd go like >> Yeah, I'm doubtful. I don't think I think >> Yeah, that's what they were. Yeah.

And that was uh two years ago when David spoke uh at that private meeting in I believe it was in New York. >> New York City. Yeah. With all the hedge fund people. Right.

>> Yeah. Exactly. And uh >> that's where he talked about knowing of a craft that was uh larger on the inside than on the outside. >> Yeah. 40 feet on the outside, 400 feet on the inside.

>> Yeah. We've all kind of stopped talking about that one, huh? That's an interesting >> Yeah. I and it was creating a a trillo I don't pronounce or a trilowatt worth of energy >> right >> yeah and that is that goes back to Carl now okay why did Carl want the slow roll control disclosure uh Silicon Valley centric um it's not because of transportation is because of energy. Uh right now, and we're certainly seeing in California, and I imagine you're going to see it in your neck of the woods, too, utility bills are just skyrocketing. And that's not because uh it's more it's not because out here they've shut down all the nuclear power plants.

It's because uh they need to fund all these server farms that AI is producing. Uh the plan currently is to uh for these companies like Meta and uh Chat GPT and everyone who's who's building them is to have tiny nuclear power plants on location to to fuel them. But what if you had a nuclear accelerator that could fit on a coffee table to fuel these plants? uh one that could create a tr trillawatt worth of energy. It could fuel all the server farms all over the United States. That's the uh the golden ticket that everybody wants.

>> Yeah. Well, now is that is that a problem? I mean, I want to get back to what about Congress and behind the scenes, but this is too interesting to ignore. So, if there's like there's a lot of disruption that would come out of a disclosure. So let's say one of those disruptions is knowledge of this type of energy source >> that would essentially rewrite our entire global energy paradigm. My my feeling is there would be many more people that would want that to happen than the reverse.

You may have some entrenched energy interest, but you would have an entire financial community. Everyone knows cheap energy equals economic growth. Cheap energy means money in the bank. So I would think if such a thing were seen as feasible that that would not I don't you think that that would be a fast roll out type of idea rather than slow roll out? >> It's who gets it? Because right now you have u a prototype let's say um that needs to be exploited to make this a reality. uh whether it's the fuel that it uses or the material science required to build another one.

>> Mhm. >> Uh who's going to get it? Uh the old energy resources, the um military-industrial complex sees this as their property. >> The Silicon Valley startups and uh hedge fund managers go like, "Man, we'd love to get this stuff now. This is something that is just a prototype right now. >> Yeah, we're looking at a p behind the scenes power struggle here.

O over >> exactly. So, no the the roll out. Uh it's it's not the roll out, it's the acquisition. Who gets it now? They didn't want Bigalow to get it because he was an upstart. He wasn't part of the family.

He was a member of the club. He wasn't a >> We want to talk about this too. The whole 2008 2009 failed to transfer because I'm I'm firmly believing this thing. It looks like that thing. That's real.

That thing. >> Yeah. I mean, I shared >> Yeah. I shared the contract with you. It's all spelled out there.

It's It's open source. Anybody can take a look at that contract. Spells it out what they had and what they were giving them. So, there's no doubt there. Bring that up in Congress.

Have that put up on a a big >> That's a hearing that needs to happen. this whole uh Bigalow Loheed Martin CIA nexus of this failed transfer of of Lheed acquired ET tech probably a tick right a tic tac UFO maybe this is where Ross Colart was uh coming at when he talked about that that Tic Tac is Lockheed Tech >> um I'm guessing acquired tech >> exactly >> but but this whole thing this this was the purpose of OAP back in 08 or so they wanted to segue this technology to Piccolo and it failed. >> Yeah. >> Twice. >> And and and the CIA wanted to keep it in the family, wanted to keep it in the military-industrial complex.

>> This is this is lowhanging fruit, begging to be a congressional hearing. Seems to me. >> Exactly. And that's why I'm sharing this this thing with the u uh the transcripts release of these transcripts because we have three years >> we have three years of testimony and physical evidence pertaining to the legacy back engineering program. It's right there.

>> But the last time this happened you said was 2014. That's 11 years. So it's not like this happens all the time. >> No, it doesn't happen all the time. Um >> or even frequently.

>> Yeah, that's that's correct. But it doesn't mean it can't happen. Okay? >> I mean, this is this is >> this is why Marco Rubio knows what he knows. And all these talking heads you're gonna see on the uh age of disclosure, this is how they know what they know. I've shared this a number of times in posts and stuff.

If you add up all the staffers, the lawyers, um their synenographers and the actual principles within the select intelligence committee, you have over 200 plus individuals in the Senate in uh uh intelligence committee, armed services committee, uh inspector general's um community intelligence office, all of them have had access to this. Now, Luna, she now has title 15 and title 10 security clearance, uh, which allows her to look at these transcripts. Uh, she couldn't release them. That would have to be the Senate Select Intelligence Committee to release them, but she can look at them. Uh, whether she has done that yet, I don't believe she has.

Um but um they're available to her and this tells the entire story now. >> And if they were released, it would clearly be uh that's nuclear. That's just incredible information in those transcripts. >> And that's why I say you've you've only got you've got 21 members of this committee. You only have to convince a majority of them to vote yes to release it.

That's what I feel Danny's efforts should be placed for. And that's what I've encouraged everyone that I know that's in that circle. I've said this is where you need to go. I often get blank stairs when I share that and they go back to the UAP bill. I go like that's forget that.

Go after this is the evidence right here. Here's the evidence. This is a smoking gun. Have them release this. It's all there.

the transcripts >> the just release these transcripts. Now you can if there are programs other than the legacy programs involved in it that they found through a chain of evidence from this program to this program to this program. You can, you know, delete that part. You can delete names that are involved like investigators and things. But if you release what was testified to, you've got the whole nine yards right there.

You don't need Is this like is this an aspirational thing? Like I would love to get the transcripts released or is this something that you think realistically could happen? >> Oh, I believe it realistically could happen and I believe that's what eventually will happen. It's the the because if the executive branch, let's say the president announces uh makes an announcement, yes, we're not alone. uh he's not going to go into details. He's not going to show you a flying saucer. He's not going to um you know bring a dead body out or anything like that.

He's going to say, "Yes, it's true. Uh we got our best people working on it. We'll get back with you." That's it's not it's not going to go further than that. It's like like announcing a new stealth bomber or uh new uh like the Golden Dome thing. They're not going to give you plans about the Golden Dome.

They haven't even really spoken. >> The uh is it the Iron Dome? >> No, it's the Golden Dome. That's the That's for the United States. The Iron Dome is is what's in in the Middle East? >> Israel. >> Yeah.

Yeah. The Golden Dome is would be a similar project for the United States. And they're not going to give you any details. I mean, how many details do you know of the Star Wars program back during the Reagan year? >> You can go online and look at some strange stuff. They're they're okay.

like how are you going to do this? You just see icons shooting at different things. So the I if the president came out and say he's not going to give you the details is right now and this is a matter of prosecuttorial discretion. The inspector general's office that does have access to these transcripts already has probable cause to go to the DOJ and ask for warrants to be issued for people involved in illegally obtaining funds for these projects without congressional re review. Now, the reason that isn't done is if you ask for this warrant and an indictment, um, you got to line out, okay, what was the probable cause? Who was involved, right? All the details. Well, that's a disclosure.

You now you're giving it to the entire Department of Justice. everyone knows, you know, uh and that could be a sealed uh warrant and indictment, but which I imagine it would would have to be uh because of sensitivity, but they could do that now. There's enough there now to do that. >> Fair enough. But like who are the people motivated to do this? Are I mean I don't want you I mean as much as you're able to uh provide a judgment or assessment of this who what are the forces what are the uh departments or who are the people behind the scenes who actually are interested in making who would be interested in making this trans these transcripts come public.

>> The secret uh the task force is interested. Uh, in fact, as of 7 I can say I'm pretty sure it's been 72 hours. I was told in a interogatory right here on my little computer, >> yeah, >> things are moving along behind the scenes, blah blah blah. Very credible source. um someone who has spoken at length >> uh at at to to the congressional and to the senate um who I I someone that if I share more detail you would know immediately it's >> okay >> so it's this is one of the things and I said this about when they everyone was trying to guess who was going to be speaking before Congress I said no no No, don't do it.

And I I was on a couple of podcasts. I said, "Do not speculate because you're just you're just hurting the process and you're placing people in the firing line uh that are going to come under scrutiny now that they're going to try and either derail or people that have nothing to do with it or innocent bystanders who may know a little something, not something. They're going to be targeted as examples. So, it's not that I I want to be clandestine or anything like that, but it just hurts the process to say, "Oh, so just said this and they're doing that." Okay, we need to get >> I'm not trying to do anything like that to you. Yeah.

>> No, no, I know. >> If you say you have good reason and good people, then you know, I I'm willing to accept that. Probably many people listening will. Others won't be. They'll be like, "You got to show us the receipts." But I get it.

If you I'm sharing it with your audience. I'm sharing it with your audience because I I know Richard just given your credentials >> that you know a lot about this as well. We don't all go on in smaller guts about everything we know and everything we're doing and everything. It's just it's it's >> that's right. >> It's private.

It's private. >> That's understood. I just Okay. I'm I'm satisfied with that. I mean, you >> but I'm saying that that that that Senate release, the Select Intelligence Committee release is really where we need to focus our attention.

Not another because they're, well, next year we'll do the UAP bill again. No, no, forget the freaking UAP bill. The information is already there. Let's direct our attention to these 21 members of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee and lobby them through petition, through email, through phone calls, the same way you lobby your senators about anything about anything. They're these guys are voted to and they're coming up on on a very important, you know, the midterm election.

So, what better time than to approach him now? Hey, I'm uh, you know, such and such Republican or Democrat and, you know, you I want to see this and this this um, that's how it's done in a >> So, this is this is good. So, let's talk about realistic paths for this these transcripts and testimony to reach the public. one public pressure people writing to their members of Congress or senators. >> Right. >> Right.

>> Any other any other uh means by which >> secret >> the secret task force needs to get involved and and like I said Luna has access to transcripts. I don't know if um uh Berles has title 50 clearance but I know she does. >> Okay. Uh but uh David does you know he but he was in he was in all these meet he already knows >> David Gush you mean >> a consultant for listen. Yeah, >> I I think the uh this um uh Age of Disclosure documentary um is going to be significant in that you're going to see people within the documentary that are, you know, former members of the intelligence committee or current members >> talking about flat out, yes, we've seen this stuff.

We know we have it. This is what's happened. And that's gonna really fuel a conversation too. >> This is Dan Farah's uh Dan Farah is the producer of that I believe. >> Yeah.

>> And and that's going to delayed. It was delayed for what was coming out. >> Well, it wasn't delayed. It was just negotiated. You know, it's like it's Hollywood.

It's Hollywood and people aren't doing this for free. You know, they're they go like, "Hey, this is important and and it's gonna make a lot of money and and that doesn't take away from it all." Yeah. I mean, you you they didn't do this for free. You got cameras, you got traveling, you got you got to get your money back. And uh so when this come out, this is going to embolden a lot of conversation.

It also, I believe, will embolden a lot of people that are on the fence about coming out and speaking openly. I think it will give them cover. Uh, and it it those some that haven't spoken, it might give them license to come out and start speaking. It's going to be it's going to have to be a prepoundonderance of the evidence as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt >> because you're not going to get to see a flying saucer. I'd love to that they roll out something from a hanger.

Um, that's not going to happen anymore. Then, like I said, you're not going to get a tour of a nuclear submarine either, okay? They're not going to take you from council to council and show you how all this works or publish plans to a nuclear trigger on, you know, YouTube or something. It's that's not going to happen. And this is above top secret. This information is so sensitive and so could be so destabilizing internationally that they're they're only going to let you get your toe in the water.

But even now if you look at the stats 43% of the globe the people on the globe believe that we are in communication with nonhuman intelligence. >> Yeah. >> Okay. That's the latest. >> Yeah.

It's the latest 43 >> we are in communication with NHI. >> In communication not just that they believe that we are in communication specifically. You could ask that for what it's worth. You can ask any AI. >> Yeah.

We poll. I didn't I didn't know about that. >> Yeah. Yeah. So that's >> you're you're you don't have to go a lot further.

I think those that are in doubt or the skeptics skep some of the skeptics you're never going to you're never going to convince them. There people that believe the earth is flat and that we didn't go to the moon and that men can have babies and you know there's there's a lot of a lot of things out there that people believe that uh you know u don't pass the muster. you know, so uh you may never get them to believe. Um >> let me ask you, um a couple of just u kind of related questions here relating to behind the scenes. So any any kind of push to uh let's say release any of these transcripts? Is this bipartisan or is one side of the aisle carrying this more strongly? And also do you uh what do you think are the biggest obstacles right now like uh classification barriers or bureaucracy or behind the scenes pressure or what do you what do you think? >> Fortunately >> and also if if these were to come out what what do you think we would learn? I just throw that I just want you to answer that.

>> Yeah fortunately uh this has been a bipartisan push from the very beginning. uh people are fascinated with, they're interested. Everyone's those that don't already know, and like I said, there's already a lot that already know for certain. Those that don't know, they want to know. They don't want to be left out of the loop.

That was the biggest uh bee in the bonnet for Congress is u the general rank and file couldn't hear what Grudge had to say because they don't have the clearance. They don't even have come close to the clearance. So, >> they could tell it really bugged them. It really annoyed. A lot of them talked about this quite openly.

>> Yeah. And it of course it's annoying because they're supposed to be oversight, but they can't hear it because they're not they don't have the clearance. Now the task force does. Um what what was the other part of the question? Okay. >> What would hold >> or like >> the obstacle is its effect on I would say number one follow the money.

The obstacle is how's this going to affect the economy? Now, despite what, you know, pretty pictures they paint on the nightly news about how the economy is doing well, the stock market's doing well, when you actually crunch the numbers, you look at just look at one trend, the rise in gold. Okay. >> Exactly. >> That should be the canary of an ounce. >> Yeah.

and it could go to to 6,000 before the end of 2026. >> U same with Bitcoin. Although Bitcoin has been down a little bit since the uh the uh shutdown, it will raise back. >> Still looking pretty good though. >> Yeah.

Oh yeah. compared to a year ago. It's >> Yeah, it's um those are signals that not the economy is not where want uh the Brex nations are dumping u dollars and buying gold. Um the unemployment rate is much higher than anyone admits. Same with the inflation rate.

And the Fed has said that these are the best numbers we can put forth, but they don't reflect the actual inflation rate. Everybody knows that you don't even include fuel in that inflation rate. >> No, there's a lot of structural problems that just can't I don't think they can fix these anytime soon. >> No. And so, uh, to to go, okay, on top of this, we just want to let you know we have extraterrestrial technology.

We don't really know what to do with it and it could affect a lot of things. Oh my god, who wants to do that? Okay. >> Well, I just wonder there could be long-term uh positives out of this, but I do agree with you like short to medium-term. Oh, that could be a mess. >> Yeah.

And and who wants to be the bearer of that news? Now, the I think the Senate would wouldn't mind if the president came up and said it. Hey, it's on his plate. If things go south, he's the one that released the information. If they do it, the fingers will be pointed at them. Hey, look what the Senate The Senate, it's just like when when you think Bush was happy about them releasing the CIA transcripts about the water boarding stuff.

>> No, certainly not. So, uh, would he would the executive branch be happy about them releasing all this stuff? You know, if if Dan, uh, Sherman's is correct, if his statements are true that we not only u are involved in communication with extraterrestrials, but we're involved in abducting American citizens and monitoring it. comp complic well because I read his book a couple of times. I by the way I'll just go on the record here and say I every time I've read Above Black by Dan Sherman I found it riveting and I found I find him credible. I'm absolutely say that.

>> Yeah. And he comes with receipts uh you know >> well a lot. He's got his DD214. You can read that. I mean we know what he's done.

U I just wanted to say what relating to government knowledge of abductions. Yes. that is in his book. Uh but I didn't get the idea that the US government had any control over any of that. It is basically uh unless I misread it, but ET giving information about these abductions, letting the US government know this is happening, that one's happening, and so on.

>> That they were monitoring it. And that's complicit. If you're monitoring monitoring a kidnapping, >> whether it's by aliens or ISIS, >> you're complicit. >> Okay. >> No question.

>> So, so that and he's not the first one to share this. Many uh military abductees have shared that they saw human military personnel working with with extraterrestrials. Absolutely. Absolutely. >> And so that's you're going like, okay, this does make sense.

>> Uh if that's true, >> that would >> talk about lawsuits and and it it would be so I completely understand why they go like, well, it's one thing if the CIA gets in trouble for waterboarding terrorists, that's pretty limited. But if the Pentagon gets in trouble for for uh monitoring abductions, the >> I don't know where that would go. >> Yeah. So, you can see why they'd be reluctant to do it, but you have a wild card. lot.

My understanding from the people that have spoken directly to some of the whistleblowers who haven't spoken out yet, they're obstensively young uh and idealistic, >> which is a problem uh to old-timers because you go like, "Look, kid, you don't know the kind of bear you're poking, you know?" Yeah, you got guys like Latsky who's an oldtimer who knows the system, but I'm glad you brought this up. A lot of these whistleblowers you believe are young and very idealistic and so what's motivating these people to take any risks are do you think that they are the ones that are pushing this or they >> because they don't want you know everyone talks about oh you know like Laskkis I'm not gonna risk my pension okay you're at that age okay you're You know, I can understand why you don't want to, you know, uh, risk your pension. These people in their middle to late 20s, early 30s, the pension seems like a long way away. >> There's Matthew Brown who spoke with George Knapp and and Jeremy Corbel. I mean, he would be one.

He's very articulate. He's young and you could see like he has a lot of passion when he talks about this issue. >> Absolutely. And I I was going to mention him as an example who has been out and he added it himself. >> Um and they don't want to live under the sword of Damocles for the rest of their life.

>> Doesn't make any difference what the job is. Oh, this is really cool. Like Bob Lazar still says, "Oh, gee, you know, I regret having said anything because it wouldn't have been cool to continue to work on this, you know." Well, >> yeah, >> that's he didn't at that time because he had different mindset. He was much younger and much more idealistic and going this isn't right. And that's what we're hearing from these guys.

And I don't I don't blame him. What in perspective? Do you want to live the rest of your life that that if you say the wrong thing to the wrong person, even a family member, you could be whisked away to a FISA court and end up in Colorado Max, uh, with, you know, a half hour walk around an enclosed track each day while you're basically buried alive. Uh, so do you want to live your entire life like that or do you think you can reasonably fight the system and divorce the mob and come out without, you know, without uh getting your head cut off. Uh, now that's the problem that Jake has shared. Um, and he's been open about it and he even published one complete transcript, a conversation he had with a member, a Senate member who was threatened physically who asked for his uh, protection.

And Jake has said, and again, this is open source, so I'm not >> Jake Barber. Yeah, >> Jake Barber. I'm not saying anything that he hasn't said publicly that when he did speak to the intelligence committee that several of them in open session asked, "Can you protect us if we come forward?" You your your head's got to spin. >> For real. >> Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. You go like, "Are you kidding me? You're the Senate Select Intelligence Committee. I mean, you're afraid of these guys. you're afraid for your lives.

Uh so when people ask me, well why haven't they come forward? Are you kidding me? This is >> how peaceful to protect members of the Senate. I don't even understand how that's even feasible. >> Yeah. I mean, what it's not like you're passing uh an add-on to Obamacare or something like this. It's not like you're you're getting adding on more money for school lunches or something.

you you're you're really really smacking the the the hornets's nest here. Uh and this may not this may be outside the Pentagon's control. I've often wondered if these uh like what Mike Herrera saw isn't part of an international cartel that these aren't, >> you know, that these guys don't answer to the Pentagon that they have their own little militia that they're I mean, we know that drug cartels, people think of them as, you know, what they something they've seen in the movie. These guys are really sophisticated. They have their own radar centers, you know, on the board.

They have they have their own uh sophisticated submarines >> and uh very like expensive infrastructure. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Let me ask you one other thing. Um you I did you say to me >> uh in an email I'm trying to get this right that federal law enforcement is investigating criminal uh activity associated with these legacy programs.

>> Yes. >> I I think that you Yeah. So what are we talking about in terms of I mean there's a lot of crimes that could be associated financial, human rights, uh maybe security. Are there certain things that you know that they're >> Can you get more specific about this in any way? >> Yeah, the the >> withouting the particular branch, right? Okay. They're looking at um uh targeted assassination, uh threats to members of the Senate and Congress, and financial shenanigans, you know, stealing money.

The >> Okay. And these are federal are these federal law enforcement? >> Federal law enforcement. Yeah. >> So, you want to get any more specific than that or >> H? No. No.

>> Okay. >> No. >> All right. Well, that's that's uh >> look, man, that's pretty that's pretty heavy duty right there. >> If this if this is true, >> it is true.

And and it and you >> again because I had not heard this before. Is this new >> or was it this been this been going on for for at least through the summer? At least through the summer. >> I didn't know that. >> Okay, think think about this. If if if you're a member of the Senate and someone breaks into your house and threatens you, maybe draws something on your wall or does something crazy.

Um, let's look at Matthew Brown. They broke into his house, >> you know, made threats, took his grandfather's ashes, dumped outside. You think he didn't talk to federal law enforcement? >> Okay. You think they didn't launch an investigation? Uh, like I said, if members of the Senate are asking Jake for protection, you think they haven't talked to different arms of the federal law enforcement family to, hey, look into this. And you think they just blew it off? Hell no.

>> Hell no. Of course they're going after >> they have resources. They have resources that Arrow doesn't have. You know, air we talk about arrow and arrow is just they just collect documents and interviews. They don't have mobile labs.

They don't have air force contingency. They can't they don't have helicopters. They don't have scuba divers. They don't there are federal agencies that have all these things that have labs all over the country that have resources that have money specifically for this type of stuff. >> Let me ask you this last question on this.

So would any of these federalbased investigations be visible yet even indirectly? I don't know sealed indictments or any any other kind of >> my no uh okay indictments have been filed. You you'll know that because it even if it was a sealed uh sealed thing it'll it would make news you know that it had something to do with the UAP stuff. Um but I know now uh everyone knows that the inspector general's office um has under the old inspector general it's when David Grush now everyone conflates David Grush's complaint of whistleblower protection with the actual investigation of the legacy programs but they're two different things. When the the inspector general said that his investigation was um uh credible and urgent, they weren't talking about his whistleblower protection complaint. They were talking about his investigation into the legacy program.

Well, that inspector general was fired. We have a new one in place. how far they've gone because that's another investigative branch, federal investigative branch, I don't know. But other ones have gone and have talked to witnesses and um sub suspects and that's ongoing and um it's it's not going to stop. I said this early on, you steal from Congress, you're stealing from the mob.

They don't forget and they don't forgive. You're talking billions of dollars. Even if they need a sacrificial lamb, somebody is going to jail. It's you just don't go like, "Oh, well, we lost it. We just lost the money.

Somebody somebody is going to jail." Particularly in a time when money uh within the federal government is they're looking at every dollar, you know. um closing off spickets and and reigning uh departments in uh we had here just in California we have two investigations indictments were filed of the the homeless funds $24 billion that you know most of it can't be accounted for two people have just been indicted uh on stealing millions of dollars from that >> 24 billion dollar in homeless >> fun 24 billion Can all of that not be accounted for or most of that not be accounted for? >> Most I think the the quote was like $19 billion they don't of the 24 they account for. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And when you look at some of the these two these two indictments >> they were just fullout scams.

They just >> Well done California. >> They just submitted false documents to get the money. It was it was like the COVID money. You could pretty much just send any document and they were just giving it to you. >> Man, you know, we're so far past the point of we're we're just in you said it yourself, mafia.

We are in uh we're in it's the Godfather, but it's the government. >> Good fellas, but it's the government. It's all it is. >> Yeah. Yeah.

And and keep going more questions, but keep going. >> No. Well, I just saying you've got to rein that in. And uh Katherine Fitz, who you know, you know, she sounded the alarm back in the early 2000s, >> years ago. >> Yeah.

That that they were stealing this money through HUD. And um >> that's when they went after. >> Right now that's right now that's shut down, you know, because of the the government uh being closed. But everyone's looking at them where that money, what happened to that money? Uh and all these things are just really white collar crime type, you know, scams. They're just like there doesn't seem to have been any oversight.

How you you think, oh, it's that easy to get millions of dollars from the government just by sending false documents. Doesn't anybody check these documents? I mean, you would think you that that bank >> transcripts and stuff, you you check it with Wells Fargo like, "Hey, this is a real company." You know, >> Katherine wrote a really good piece on this many years ago. It's one of the best titles. She just called it the myth of the rule of law and she was talking about this whole structure. It's like law does not apply to certain groups of people and we all kind of know that.

>> So, related to the the Senate and Congress, I just want to ask one. Do do you do you think the leadership within the Senate or Congress actually wants this the UAP issue then and maybe the transcripts and all of us out in the open or is it mainly being driven by staffers or or mid-level allies and also um like how serious are people like uh Kirsten Gillibrand or Marco Rubio or even Burchett or or some of the others and and who do you who do you see as the primary source opposing any kind of openness. You said financial worries, but do you have any specifics that you're thinking of? So, who who's actually who wants this out there and who are the people really fighting this in your opinion? >> Well, I think the task force sincerely is fighting. I mean, that's whether you attribute it to ego. >> Who are the members of the Do we know? Well, you have Luna, you have uh I I don't have all that.

>> They they're pushing. >> Yeah, they're they're definitely pushing. They they've gotten out there. And like I said, you know, well, it's it's it's ego. They just, you know, they're trying to get reelected.

Well, everybody has motivations. I mean, yeah, I mean, that that's >> that's as good as anything, you know, to me. If if that's going to get you elected uh uh or not, yeah, you have an incentive to go after it. That's why I'm saying that that we need to petition the select intelligence committee because yeah, just like Luna and Bett and Burlson, these are all elected officials and you talk to them about, hey, you want to get reelected, release these transcripts. We want to see that released.

You can put as much pressure on them as you can the the task force. There's no reason not to. Um, and just see where that goes. That's why I say it's someone like Danny who is is is just his pedigree and his intelligence. I I've heard him talk um about his theologian background and >> theology and I I go like wow this guy is he's not just playing an attorney on television.

This guy is smart. I mean he he >> is one of a kind. He's so unique. He's he is quite brilliant. He's very brilliant.

And that's why I would share with him, don't waste your time with this UAP bill. Go after the the easy lift. Just release these transcripts. Everything is there. That's petition.

You got 21 people. You don't have the entire Senate. You don't have the entire House that you have to convince. You got 21 people and you only need a majority of them to convince to release. >> So, who's who's blocking it? You know, I remember in the last hearing and I think the one before that too, there were these vague statements by uh at least a couple of members of Congress about these basically dark forces essentially in the way here.

So, who and what are the dark forces? What do you think? Well, that's the million-dollar question is what Herrera saw an arm of uh black ops within the American government uh a special forces branch within the American government or are these you know a pirate cartel that's acquired this technology and have the ability to blackmail governments uh collapse elections um um human trafficking, arms trafficking, those would be kind of like side gigs really for them if they had this technology. Um so, you know, who's really, you know, mining the store that we don't know. Um I I if you would have asked me even a few years ago, did did I really believe in ARVs? I was said, h maybe something similar like the TR3B, a similar technology, but it's not really anti-gravity. Now I'm not certain. Now I'm thinking maybe someone does have it.

Maybe it's limited. Probably limited due to fuel if um um the fuel is off-world. Uh, and I know Bob said that Los Alamos only had 500 pounds of it. If that's all there is and we can't synthesize it, it could be that they only use these vehicles on a need to basis, you know, that the fuel's limited and we're not, you know, one chip is good for 20 years or whatever. Still, 500 pounds is not a lot.

So, it could be that. But my guess is what's going on with these threats is possibly a pirate cartel because if the Senate is threatened, I don't think they'd be sent threatened by the Pentagon. Heck, I mean, the president can fire any of those generals. Just tells Pete, "Hey, fire so and so. Fire so and so.

They're gone." you know, and the the Senate and Congress can, you know, twist the arm of the commander-in-chief to get rid of someone. Uh they can swear out a complaint to the DOJ >> with probable cause to indict someone who's stealing >> I think I agree with you. I mean, I think we're talking about something beyond the US government. uh we don't really have a good sense of the structure of of the entire broad management of the UFO UAP problem. Is it connected to the US government? Yes.

But it clearly goes beyond that which you know you're alluding to. Well, >> and I think that's what accounts for seeing these like triangular craft outside of of restricted airspace. I remember when I saw um a video of uh out of Texas, this guy's backyard. This thing was so low. It was hitting the treetops as it went by.

It was again one of these things where you went out to smoke a cigarette and walk the dog 3 in the morning and this thing was so close. It was at night, but you could clearly make out the details and it's actually hitting the trees as it's going. And I go like, there's no way in the world that you would take an experimental aircraft into an urban area like that uh that's either extraterrestrial or it's, you know, extrajudicial, you know, it's some pirate cartel who's doing some shenanigans. Uh um I think that's what people see in these >> right >> spontaneous areas where they just it pops up at somebody's picnic or whatever that is the US government just doesn't do this. They don't >> Yeah.

You quantity is is way more than I think what people realize. That's why I I have a hard time with the whole black budget answer to all of these. I I don't dispute that that there are covert aspects that we're doing that may account for some of these, but it's just vast quantity and it's global and it's like every day. >> Yeah. And you're not going to risk this technology over unfriendly or unprotected skies.

Why? Why would you risk it? You don't need to. I mean, you could travel across the country over areas where you'd never be seen. I mean the only reason you would go to an urban area would be that you had to >> there there's no reason you know uh other than that um recently and who disputed oh was on weaponized uh they were talking about a recent uh journal claimed that in fact and I I'm I'm taking credit for this that uh uh uh the New Jersey tri-state uh flap uh was admitted to by a u a drone manufacturer and I agree with that totally. It was Petronix uh was the drone. They had a contract in 2019 which accounted for the Denver flap with the US Navy and they were George and Jeremy were laughing.

Oh, they they could be how many could they have? Well, they had 300. They had 300 craft that the uh Navy wanted. Uh that accounted for them flying from the sea to land because they're u AI controlled. So they have to program to fly and that's why they were in mass coming on and they were only operating between 6 at night and 12 in the morning. >> Aliens don't go off ship at 12 at night, you know.

Oh, hey. And and drone swarming technology has just impro improved so radically even in the last few years. So that's not impossible. >> And that particular drone, the Petronix drone morphed. It it could go from a fixed wing to a a quadcopter in flight.

And what what they were seeing is at a distance where it was in quadcopter mode, all the the landing lights and safety lights are so close together, it just looks like a bright orb to a camera. And then when it unfolds, it looks it definitely looks like a uh a regular fixed wing aircraft. And the largest one was really large. They had three sizes. So even though Jeremy and George laughed at that, no, that's true.

And I I was going to write them and tell them no. >> Yeah, there's a lot of the whole signal to noise ratio in those sight in the drone flap that was still troubling me. It's like you really didn't know during that whole business just like a year ago. Um a was it really just only focused in the New York uh New Jersey tri-state area? No. We had claims it was going on all over the place, including over parts of Europe.

We had the whole um uh over Britain and over Rammstein and Germany. So I mean it was really hard to know like what what is the drone flap and what is not the drone flap? No doubt there a lot of those were drones but were all of these drones. I still don't think that we have a good answer on that personally >> and and we don't but but you do know the answer because of of your historical knowledge. Uh and we've talked about this before. There are some at least at minimum 50,000 good reports annually coming.

>> This is my estimate and I I think that's probably right. >> And so on any given day, on any given night, anywhere in the world, I mean, you're likely to see something that someone would call that's a drone. That's a drone. And when it's not a drone, okay, it's it's might be an orb, some type of we see those all the time. And uh um although right now we got Denmark and Norway claiming, "Oh, there drones.

Okay, show me one." I still have not seen a single video >> about the so-called Russian drones. Is that what they're >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I watch >> I don't believe that at all.

I think that's uh >> Oh, no. >> Someone's operation. >> Yeah. I sent someone >> Yeah. I sent uh and I'll copy you on this because it was really comical because I always hear about oh how advanced the Russian drones are.

I sent them some pictures of some Russian drones that they're using in Ukraine. >> Dude, their drones are good. They they are advanced. They are sophisticated. >> They are sophisticated, but they're not they're not what you imagine them to be.

They're not >> We have to agree to disagree. I think I think they are um >> I'm sorry. I'll let you talk. Go. Oh, I was just going to say they're they're um because I have pictures of the Chinese drones they're buying, too.

They're they're not going to waste their best stuff to blow it up. What What you're talking about, people don't understand how simple creating a drone with an explosive or shape charge is. It's it's not when we think of sophistication, we think of like the the newest one that that that we we're manufacturing. It's called the bat. It looks similar to a manor array.

And this thing looks so space age. I'll send you a picture of it. And that that is a very sophisticated high-end drone. And Russia does have those. And China does have those.

A lot of the stuff China has. You're saying the Russian drones, the >> Russians are have perfected mass production of very effective drones for warfare. And uh my understanding is they're now incorporating genuinely incorporating artificial intelligence into these things. Uh they they've got a very very capable drone fleet, but I I do not believe any of those went into the European uh area. if you and I'll send you these pictures because you got to see what we're talking about here.

And I'm not dissing the effectiveness of the drones that they're using or they're manufacturing. I >> This is a longstanding American thing to this is why they've caused all these problems with the Russians because they always discount uh Russian technology and they always underestimate the Russians every single time and we see the result of it again. I I what I'm sharing is what pi what people picture because they look online and they see the latest drones and the latest what people are manufacturing the picture. Oh, these are the drones they're using in Ukraine. No, they're not.

They're much simp they're just as effective, but they're >> using power drones in Ukraine now. >> Oh, if I can go to uh Well, I'd have to go on because we don't have any hobby shops around here. I can buy a a jet engine online right now, an RC jet engine. I can actually go on YouTube and they have TYA. >> Yeah, but they're mass- prodducing them and they're like >> they're not quite effective.

>> This is my understanding of they are effective doesn't fit the picture of what you're you're you're going to see. Okay. Because you're going to look at this thing and you're like, well, that doesn't look very sophisticated. >> I don't think off track here. You're right.

>> Yeah. Yeah. It it it does it doesn't need to be. I'm just saying that it's easier to do than you think. That's all I'm sharing.

Not that it's not effective. It is. And the reason it is so effective is because it's cheap and easy to do. It it doesn't take billions and billions of dollars. You can turn these things out really quickly.

It's just like in the Middle East with uh Moss and they, oh, they have 5,000 rockets. Yeah. They're being built in garages on simple metal lays and stuff. It's not that hard. U But they're Are they effective? Oh, yeah.

They're very effective. You don't want >> I think I I diverted I diverted you. So, uh my apologies. >> No, no, not at all. >> I mean, we're gonna I want to wrap this up soon.

Anyway, we This has been very very uh valuable. But there's one one thing I I believe you mentioned to me as well that I just want to uh discuss here because I think it's important. I think did you I think you wrote to me that the legacy programs >> that are dealing with the subject UA UAP uh were dangerously unattended because of the government shutdown. >> Yes. >> So are there certain security or management failures that you are most worried about here? What what is the great concern in terms of security or whatever? Well, if I was to run the one of the programs would be theft that someone's going to run off with some meta material or or some artifact and take it to the press.

You know, you you just don't have the management oversight. Um well, like for instance, let's just look at something that's right out there in the open. National Archives. Okay, they're basically closed right now. >> Okay, doesn't mean there's nobody in the building.

There are people in the building, but there's not the oversight that you would get on a busy workday. You don't have as many security personnel. Um, you don't have anybody monitoring clock people clocking in and clocking out what they're coming and going with. Um, and even the most sophisticated uh security procedures as we just saw with the Louv can be easily thwarted in minutes. Now, >> well, maybe for the same reasons.

You really get the idea that the French are just like, are they even able to have a security infrastructure that's worth anything anymore? Really, I I wonder uh and it might be something similar going on here. Yeah, I saw >> with the shutdown >> when the pandemic began um we started, you know, not just shutting down institutions throughout the Bay Area, large institutions that had a lot of public access and some at before the shutdown had very high security protocols. Immediately they start scaling back the security as well. Well, it's closed. We're just locking the door.

They had nobody monitoring it. And you go like, you know what? You can't leave this building unattended because there are people that want to blow it up. You know, people in it are not. You know, if you're all gone and you know, that was a big argument and debate during the pandemic, who's going to get what and how much security and physically and are we going to stop inspections? because that was one of my jobs was to go out and and counter intelligence surveillance detection was to find out who's monitoring what who's watching >> the watchers. >> Yeah.

>> And they go, "Oh, no. We don't need it. We're just shutting everything down. We're locking all the doors." >> Well, that's what's going on in in in the Virginia area right now because, oh, we're all going home. You know, we have no money.

We're not getting paid. We're not staying here. Everyone's going home. So there's no one watching the heads and that's that's that's what happened the first time when people started going to the S select intelligence committee and spilling their guts. No one was >> disconnection co >> Did we ever talk about this on the air? I don't >> during that you you've argued >> CO was a significant player >> absolutely >> in getting this this subject moving forward the UFO subject UAP >> and maybe similarly the government shutdown might be having a similar effect could you just clarify that a little bit better you kind of did but >> well when you you don't have any leadership in place and they're the first ones to go because they're the most expensive they're not getting a paycheck so they go home you don't have anyone watching Joe at the you going like, "I'm not getting paid.

I'm not going home. I have to work." Blah, blah, blah. They're gonna, you know, well, I heard this guy is asking questions about what we're doing. I'm going to go talk to them. You know, it it's you give them too much.

If they're not busy, idle hands, you know, the old saying that they have time to think about it. And um during that time, people just took the opportunity when leadership wasn't there to go talk to David Grush and knock on his door. And David has again said this openly that so many of the times people came to him. He didn't have to go to them. They came to him and shared, "Hey, department's shut down.

This is what we're doing." He's he's spoken about this openly. Yeah. We're in the same situation now. And the fever is much higher to get this out. People are much more emboldened when they see everybody else talking about they go like, "Well, my story is you have you saw u Dylan Borland talking about how many people in the operation he was involved in, uh, which was an overseas one." >> Yep.

>> Uh, came to him when they realized he had been dissed. Uh, and they they were they came to him. Oh, well, this is what happened to me. Well, now that that he's talking, there's others I'm sure they're going, "Oh, you know, >> he's very he was very uh compelling." I think everyone who watched him, Dylan Borland, thought this guy, he was very, very effective, I thought, at the hearing. and he's he's spoken to these federal law enforcement agents, >> okay, >> and given names and dates and places and what's happened because a lot just just the retaliation under the whistleblowers act, that's a crime in itself.

That's a punishable act. And he clearly was retaliated. They pulled his security clearance. Uh David went through that. They did the same thing to him and he got his clearance back.

Uh so these are things that can be addressed and are being addressed. Uh it's slower now because no one's getting paid. The law offices are being shut down. So it hampers investigations um with all federal agencies when you you know cut the you know you're going to cut that even though there are people willing to work with during the pandemic. My salary was cut back.

I was they said hey here you can either go you can either come in four days or you can take a salary cut and I said I'll take they'll just take a salary cut and come in because it's not a job that you can just go like well you know the terrorists aren't gonna the terrorists aren't cut back to four days you know so >> some people might have taken the four days and you you're having less uh coverage. Yeah. And some did. Some did. Some were told to.

Yeah. It wasn't their choice. There's some people that would have came in, but they were told, "No, >> we're because we're locking the doors." >> Well, this is I'm not I'm not crowing about that that I did that because there were a lot people that did that took the hit and did it anyway. And uh uh what I'm sharing is that even now with the shutdown, there are people that are working no salary to see that justice gets done and the people are protected. So, >> but it's it's a very that's a really good um kind of insight and observation I guess about the relationship of of COVID to the uh kind of transparency disclosure push of the early 2020s and then maybe a connection today with the shutdown.

So, I think it's worth watching. Um I don't really know what else to ask you for this uh for this program, Alan. I mean you this has been I'm really glad I'm very glad that you came on to discuss this. There's always um I think a lot of pessimism that we all of it myself included will have about the disclosure process if we even call it that. Um I think Jeremy and George just did a a video is disclosure dead and you know I first thought thought was like well was it ever alive? Were we ever in a disclosure moment? But we're in we're in a kind of we're in a movement of sorts and and it is meaningful like the things that are happening within Congress do matter.

They are important. Uh our members of Congress have gone uh further on this issue than at any point in the past of congressional history. There's no there's nothing that compares uh the level of public discourse that we have on UFOs or UAP, whatever you want to call them. uh we're still there's still so much that needs to be said but we are way way beyond uh where we have been in the past publicly and then culturally as well I think just look around on on YouTube I mean there's UAP podcasters all over and and they're excellent so many of them so there's a much higher level of discourse so that I think what's happened in the last few years does matter and so for you to come on and to say there are things happening this isn't dead. There is there is a lot to be uh looking at here and I think your uh focus on the transcripts that that's new.

I think that's important to keep in mind. So, I'm just glad that you you brought all of this up. I'm going to send you uh a list of the names of the uh select intelligence committee uh that if you want you can put it in the uh show notes that people can write to their offices and ask them to release the the transcript and send it to Danny. Okay. Someday I want to get get with Danny and talk to him about the Carter days because he's he's >> there's a lot we could go over there.

Yeah. I I would let's let's uh I'll talk with Danny Sheen about that. I think that would be a really interesting it's historical but uh you and I did a show on this. You had your own background through at the APRO organization where you talked at length about a President Jimmy Carter late 1970s initiative on let's just say disclosure that never happened. There is not there's not a whole lot of historical uh documentary support for this, but there is your personal testimony on this.

And Danny has his own connection to the Carter White House. >> Yeah. And and if you look at the data points connecting the dots, what occurred from his initial uh task in 97 to uh what what happened to me in 79, the whole nine yards, it's all there. you know, this was going on. And you can also see it in the press, you know, with Carter's press secretary talking about they were that, you know, they wanted to release this information.

Of course, Carter saying that he wanted to release information and going to Bush and asking him, "Hey, what do you know?" >> Yeah. >> It it was all there right beneath the surface. And I really think that Carter learned. >> There's a lot we can say on this. Yeah.

>> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Let's uh so people will now that we've talked about this here. Now I'm going to have to follow up.

We're going to have to do I look forward to >> two. Everyone is asking about volume two. Volume two USO. >> Okay. So I'll just do a quick update.

So you as as the illustrator of all three of the USO history volumes uh have a right to know. So I've just completed all of the writing. That means all of the words that go into the second volume of USO history are done and I'm happy with them. So that's those two things. And um so it's now I just have a couple of little things to do.

I've got to create for the first volume in addition to your illustrations. I I had maps. I had a little map for every every case and I I've got to put those in there. I haven't done that. Um it's just basically formatting and the index.

I have to do the index. So, I think you know it'll be before Christmas and maybe I'm not doing AI indexing. No, not do that. I I have certain automated systems that I'll use, but no, I'm basically doing it manually, >> but it won't take that long. So, I'm thinking we're we're speaking in later part of October before November's out.

I'd like to have it out and published. I I don't think that's impossible. I have an a very very good audiobook reader who I don't know if he'll be done by the time that I've got them out, but um I'm in touch with him, but that's that's on the way. >> I'm looking to to have some some easy lift Christmas presents to give out to >> Oh, that would make me happy as well. So, I would like to try I think it's I think it should happen.

And then the third volume, as I've told people all along, uh all of those cases are done, but you know, I I tend to like I be I'm a little bit of a perfectionist. It's true. Over the language and then over uh the chapter introductions, which I will have to write for that book. That'll take >> Well, you are who you are and that's why everyone loves your work. That's why Gary Nolan says you're the the one, you know, person that that leans to.

Uh and couldn't have better praise for that. And and I agree. your your work is impeccable and uh that's why everyone's so excited to to hear it because >> about it. >> The second volume will be out very soon and then the third volume will be out in the definitely in the early part of 2026. >> That sounds >> definitely and then that'll be done and it'll be good.

So, uh it'll be a project that'll be >> Well, thanks again for inviting me today. I I hope that people uh Lord said Disclosure is not dead. I'm sure the gatekeepers want to get that out there and the the their bots and stuff. Oh, it's dead. It's dead.

It's not dead. It's it's ridiculous. >> We all love to We're all like um you know the Boston Red Sox fans before 2004 or any other sport team. I'm I'm near Buffalo and Buffalo Bills fans like they just they're afraid to be optimistic anytime something bad happens like oh here we go again. And I think I think uh disclosures like that.

So it's very we want we there's a part of us that wants it to happen but every time there's an obstacle we're like ah there we go again it's never going to happen but one day it will happen. >> Yeah something a positive mindset. If if you think it's dead it's dead because you're not going to make any effort to go any further. Uh but if you run to a roadblock those who will be successful are the ones that are going to okay this is a roadblock. How do we get around it? What do we do now? What's next? And this Senate uh declassification is an easy lift.

21 people. You only need the majority of them to say yes. And they could do that. They're the Senate's still there. Instead of trying to vote on opening the government again, they could vote on this.

>> Well, I I I I don't I want your level of optimism. I I'm not saying I'm total pessimist. I'm not a total pessimist. I tend to go down that road more often than not though. But I'm This is why I'm glad I'm I'm genuinely glad that you are bringing in a um a different perspective and I think your argument seems very uh rational and uh you know people will comment below if if they uh if they agree with you or not, but I think that's what this is all about.

I'm glad that you were able to put this perspective out and uh I'm I'm sure you and I are going to talk about this again. >> I have no doubt. >> Great talking to you. I hope you're settling into your new digs there. You're everything is going well.

>> Yeah, the office looks kind of similar to the old, but I put the same map back there and uh set it up. But no, this is better. I've got I've actually got some good room to work with here. Finally. >> Is Yates settling into her new digs or >> Yates uh the Wondercat is doing just great? Uh I don't usually let her in the room when I do the recording here, but uh she's she's she and Tracy are we're all doing great.

And uh yeah, thanks for asking. >> All right. Well, anyway, I want to thank everyone here for being along with Allan and me. Allan, uh if you want people to write to you, I could we can do your email. I put put that below along with the uh the list of the people if you >> if you're up for that.

>> Yep. >> So, that's it. Alan Lavine, thank you again for being here. uh >> everyone who's been uh here with us, thank you again uh for your support of this channel. And which by the way, if you like this video, please hit the like button, hit subscribe if you haven't subscribed to my channel yet, and um hit on notifications.

And that's it. I'll see you the next time. Let's keep fighting the good fight. Later.