UFO Transparency Is Closer Than Ever - Will Trump Take Action?

In the 80-year coverup of the UFO mystery, there have been a handful of pivotal moments where public interest in the topic gained enough momentum to threaten the iron-clad, intractable code of silence adopted by military authorities and intelligence agencies. The 1952 overflights of Washington DC, the insider revelations unveiled by Major Donald Keyhoe, the outrage emanating from Project Blue Book’s ridiculous “swamp gas” type explanations, and the 2017 New York Times report about secret UFO programs and the Tic Tac incident each inspired demands for truth and transparency. But in each of those and other episodes, public interest eventually waned, in part because of clever cover stories, media manipulation, and debunking efforts by civilian “experts” who willingly espoused the themes crafted by secret keepers within the CIA, US Air Force, and a handful of defense contractors. Right now, as 2025 comes to a close, another opportunity has arrived. A blockbuster film, Age of Disclosure, has broken through the indifference that is common among major news platforms and has grabbed the attention of a broad audience, including members of Congress. At the same time, a dramatic interview with UAP whistleblower David Grusch was broadcast worldwide on the Fox News Network. A new book by Dr. James Lacatski, a career intelligence analyst for the DIA, has revealed the extent of AAWSAP, the acronym for the largest acknowledged UFO investigation ever financed by the US government. Because of these and other factors, at this moment, the UFO topic has grabbed public attention in a way not seen in years. Is this a pivotal moment in the history of the UFO/UAP mystery? And if so, what are the factors that led to this and what might the proponents of disclosure do next to make sure the moment is not another missed opportunity? In this episode, Jeremy and George are joined by three longtime researchers (and observers of UFO World) to get their input about the current state of public momentum for transparency, the impact of the new Age of Disclosure film, how the increased interest among the public and media might influence the Trump Administration to act, and what is likely to happen next. The panelists include Ryan Robbins (known for his insightful commentaries on his YouTube channel “Post Disclosure World”), Danny Silva, former editor of the Silva Record publication, and Joe Murgia, aka UFO Joe, who produces highly detailed reports and interview transcripts on his X account. Joe Murgia’s reporting on X at https://x.com/theUFOjoe Ryan "UFO Jesus" Robbin’s reporting on X at https://x.com/PostDisclosure Danny Silva’s reporting on X at https://x.com/SilvaRecord GOT A TIP? Reach out to us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠[email protected]⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ••• 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 ••• You can now watch all of Corbell's movies for free on YouTube here : BOB LAZAR : AREA 51 & FLYING SAUCERS https://youtu.be/sZaE5rIavVA HUNT FOR THE SKINWALKER https://youtu.be/TczkJ6UAQ8A PATIENT SEVENTEEN https://youtu.be/gDVX0kRqXxE ••• 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

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Indeed. You're ready to level up your business, but the pressure to find the right person to make that happen is intense. Indeed sponsored jobs can help carry the load. It boosts your job post to help it reach quality talent fast. Cut through the chaos with Indeed sponsored jobs. Get a $75 sponsored job credit at indeed.com/podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring now? Then this is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs.

• 0:27Speaker 01

  Now at Kroger, your points add up to more ways to save every trip. Use them your way to take dollars off groceries at checkout or save at the pump. You can even save up to $35 on your next fill-up. Same points, more choices. And with low prices on fresh, quality food, plus digital and personalized offers tailored to how you shop, your dollar goes further. Redeem your points online or in the app. Kroger, fresh for everyone. Restrictions apply. See site or store for details.

• 0:59Jeremy Corbell?

  Watching Age of Disclosure, I saw how people could come together to create a, I'm going to say a narrative that was easily digestible by the public. But anybody that knows the true history of how these UFO programs that George and I have reported on, and George has reported on this before anybody, we have a problem.

• 1:23Speaker 03

  I think once people start, if people are new to this and they go, oh, this is really interesting, interesting, I'm going to start digging deeper. And then they discover Skinwalkers at the Pentagon and they discover ASAP, they're going to say, this movie isn't accurate. And I think Danny, you brought it up, something we know about, we know this isn't accurate. What else do we not know about that they're talking about is also not accurate? So it's going to, you know, it's going to put that out there and it's, we want this, we want transparency and truthfulness. And I understand not wanting to go there because it gets really messy with orbs and, you know, the biological effects and what Jay Stratton and his family experienced.

• 2:01George Knapp?

  And you're calling for disclosure and honesty. And we want to know the truth. Tell us the truth. We can handle the truth. We want transparency. You got to live up to that standard, too. And OSAP got the 22 million. That's the money that Reed got for it. ATIP came later. It grew out of it. It did not have a budget that we know of. Lou Elizondo and Jay Stratton were involved in it. But they have had very vigorous, I'll put it that way, vigorous disagreements about what program did what. And the people who were involved directly with OSAP, who are here in Las Vegas, are not likely to come forward and raise a stink about it. There does not. But I can tell you, they watched this and they were pretty upset about it.

• 2:44Jeremy Corbell?

  It was Jay Stratton, who's, he has been so straightforward about this. And I really respect the way he talks about it. But I think he was dancing around something. He says, "We bumped into the legacy program." I'm sorry, I'm not buying that for one second. I don't think he bumped into it. I think that Jay Stratton, you know, had direct knowledge of the legacy program.

• 3:06Speaker 05

  This is Weaponized.

• 3:16George Knapp?

  This is Weaponized, kind of a special episode. I'm George Knapp, hiding here in the bunker in Las Vegas. Jeremy Corbell, my friend and colleague, how you doing?

• 3:24Jeremy Corbell?

  I'm great, man. I'm very excited to talk to our buddies today.

• 3:27George Knapp?

  Yeah, we're joined by a cast of thousands today. And looking forward to having a really robust conversation. You know, Jeremy, for me, 39 years ago, this month, is when I jumped in with both feet into the deep pool about crash retrievals, reverse engineering. It's when Lazar's identity was made public. UFO's best evidence, that series was released. And at the time, it felt like I was way out on a limb by myself, crazy even by UFO standards. But you know, now it seems like there's a lot more people out on this limb. This movie that came out, Age of Disclosure, is a blockbuster. It's a huge moment for the topic. And I think it gives us a chance to pause and reflect on where we are and how far we've come

• 4:11George Knapp?

  and how far we've got to go. I know that, you know, there are going to be people who don't like it because we've already seen all that on social media. But we now have 34 different national security folks who are in this film, who've come forward to say bits and pieces. of the story that you and I have been telling for a long time are true, that this is real, that it's a real legitimate subject that we need to consider. I believe that age of disclosure, if you do a UFO show or podcast, you are now required by law to talk about that movie. And so we're going to meet the requirements of those statutes. But I think we might take it into a different direction, given the buried opinions that we've gathered here with our friends.

• 4:53George Knapp?

  Ryan Robbins, who used to be known as UFO Jesus, who produces these excellent vignettes and editorial comments on YouTube. Danny Silva, who was once known as the Silver Record, the reporter of a silver record, now wants to be known as a diva. And I understand he is, he's in the business of selling used hot dog equipment. And UFO Joe, Joe Murgia, who writes these gigantic compendiums of information and transcripts on Twitter that the whole topic appreciates. Jeremy, what did you think about the movie? Now, you saw, we saw it together at the premiere in Austin in the spring. You watched it again since then. Give us your take.

• 5:32Jeremy Corbell?

  Well, yeah, first of all, this is going to be a cacophonous cavalcade of conversation, George, because the cool thing about our friendship with the people you just mentioned is that oftentimes we violently disagree on fundamental aspects of this UFO topic, but we've maintained our friendship and been able to talk it through. And to me, that's a very special relationship. I really respect each of these people and their opinions. So I am way more interested in hearing their opinions because I know they have dissected things in ways that I couldn't or didn't. But just in general, like I said, you know, on other episodes of Weaponized, I am so happy that this movie exists. The ability of this movie to exist, it was well made. A lot of people we know, a lot of people we brought forward, you know, initially on

• 6:16Jeremy Corbell?

  this topic were shown and featured in such a cool light. It really is a huge endeavor to make a film like that. So I congratulate Dan, I congratulate his whole team, I congratulate, you know, Jay Stratton, everybody, Lou Elizondo, people that participated. Now, of course, I've got some bones to pick with the movie on factual reality, but then I also want to say we learned a lot of Things that were never uttered in this in the way that they were in this film before. So overall, um, man, I think it's really important that everybody watch this film. I think that you have to not just turn off your brain after you watch it. It should lead you to inquiry. Um, and it feels really good to have a discussion like this, um, kind of booming into the media. But we have to be careful.

• 7:00Jeremy Corbell?

  We have to be careful just after the last hearing, which is not featured in this movie because of the timeline of when the movie was made. Right after the hearing, you know, we had an assassination of Charlie Kirk. And the media took over and a lot of what could have been picked apart from that hearing wasn't. So we have an opportunity now to really push so that we can gain more understanding and put the pressure on people. Grind them down to make more disclosures. And I think that falls upon us and journalists in general to do that. So I see this as a huge opportunity and I just hope we don't lose it. Because of one little thing that can happen from an international event. That's how I feel about the movie.

• 7:40George Knapp?

  Yeah, I mean, you're right about the congressional hearing. Um, a lot of information came out directly related to the content of this movie. Um, craft retrievals, reverse engineering program, uh, people who'd come forward and spoken about it. Uh, we've interviewed, all of us, uh, in this group have interviewed and talked about and written about. The, the material that came forth in the movie in bits and pieces. The power of it is having all those people in one, in one place spill in the beans. I, you know, it depends on what the audience is, which audience you're talking about, how much effect it has for the UFO believers. Who already accept this stuff as, as truth. Uh, and people who are generally interested in the topic. I think it reinforces, uh, what they've believed for a long time.

• 8:25George Knapp?

  And that's a positive. For people on the edges of it who have a casual sort of interest. I think the PR campaign is maybe more important than the movie. Dan Farah was on Joe Rogan. He was on, uh, on CNN. He was on with Bill Maher. He's been everywhere and millions, tens of millions of people have seen those interviews. Who will likely not pay 20, 25 bucks to watch the movie, but got the message. There are so many articles that have been written about it. The headlines pack a lot of influence. People who will read that, read the headline, part of the article and never watch the movie, but it'll stick with them. And then, of course, you've got another audience of people who hate it, who don't believe it. And that includes UFO believers and non-believers. You'll hear

• 9:08George Knapp?

  them the same bitching and moaning. All right, you had a bunch of people talking about it. The programs are real. Yeah, they're big shots, but where's the proof? Where's the evidence? Where's the data? Same thing. And then the skeptics saying the same exact thing. Michael Shermer, Jeremy, you sent me an article that he had written. Yeah, yeah. Say all this stuff all you want, but where's the evidence? Well, you know, these, these people are saying it's classified programs, national security. We can't show you all that stuff, but we're telling you it's real. And they're the same position as the UFO diehards who say, I won't believe it until you show me the craft and show me the bodies, which is not going to happen, which is not. So I don't know, who wants to jump into this first? You know, I think

• 9:50George Knapp?

  the movie's a good thing overall, and it's powerful. And the PR campaign has been maybe more important than the movie itself. But we'll see. Ryan, why don't you start it off? What'd you think about the movie and where do you want to take it? What does it mean?

• 10:02Speaker 06

  Yeah, I thought it was a very excellent movie. You could tell there was a lot of effort and money put into it. It wasn't done haphazardly. It was well researched and well edited. I was, there was a lot of interesting developments in that, that movie, but I was really interested in Jim Clapper talking about a UFO program, studying UAP entering the training ranges, such as Area 51, maybe other training ranges. And my question is, like, what's actionable with that? How can you have the former director of National Intelligence and the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, who's, he had a long Air Force career. I mean, he's as mainstream and as credible as you get. How

• 10:44Speaker 06

  can he get on this documentary? Say there's a UFO program funded by taxpayer dollars, and yet Arrow, just as an example, our, our UFO program in the Pentagon's put up by, by Congress is saying there's nothing to see here. There's no evidence of extraterrestrials, as they like to put it, because they don't want to say non-human intelligence, and yet... James Clapper is telling us, wait a minute, no, there's a UFO program. Well, okay, well, if there's nothing to see here, then why is there a UFO program? Is it still going on? And just today, Chris Mellon, he had a video put out in the, I think it was the Disclosure Foundation, and he was calling for people to testify under oath to the Congressional

• 11:28Speaker 06

  Armed Services and Intel Committees. Four different high-level people, or three different people from the Air Force, one person, who's Don Merrick, I don't know how to pronounce his last name, the Deputy Director for Science and Technology at the CIA. So to me, if this film is going to count, then it really has to be actionable. So Congress should be inspired to do something. Subpoena people. Do what public citizens cannot do. You have all the momentum now, now that this film came out, so do something actionable. That's what I think about it.

• 12:03Jeremy Corbell?

  Ryan, real quick, because when you say things, I gotta jump in, it's a big deal. So we had Clapper not only say there's a UFO program, he was not talking about OSAP, or ATIP, or any of that, or even Kona Blue. He was talking about an Air Force study, an Air Force UFO tracking program. Now, remember, last Air Force program we're supposed to have is Project Blue Book. That's kind of an atom bomb, because what, Arrow didn't find that? Didn't reveal that to the public? Huh, weird. Maybe they should have called James Clapper. So that's pretty crazy to begin with.

• 12:34George Knapp?

  Let me add a little other element here. James Clapper is no friend of UFO research. When OSAP was trying to become a special access program, what's not been made public is he fought tooth and nail to kill it. He was whispering to, I think Ashton Carter at the time was the Secretary of Defense, and of course, it did get killed, but he was adamant about, this is useless, worthless, no value here, kill it. And it was killed. But I don't think that's ever come out before, as far as I can recall. But it's interesting, now he's out on the forefront of spilling the beans.

• 13:07Jeremy Corbell?

  A little bit he is.

• 13:08Speaker 03

  A few, a few years ago, he did an interview, I think it was on CNN, and I think he mentioned how he may have been part of the problem of like, more people don't know about this. I don't know if he was referring to what you just said. But yeah, he was out there. But that was one of his, his few interviews. I think it's the only interview he had given on UAP before the movie.

• 13:28Jeremy Corbell?

  He should keep repenting then, because it's really good to hear. And George, he specifically mentioned that they were seeing UFOs over the test site, over Area 51. So he's not talking about our black projects. Just think about that for a second, right, everybody? He's, he's not talking about our black projects. He's talking about some foreign technology, something that's not ours, UFOs over Area 51. Can you imagine, George, why there might be UFOs over Area 51?

• 13:55George Knapp?

  Must be secret programs that planes were building or something. I read in the Wall Street Journal, it was all made up. They made up the whole thing. They, they started that rumor because they had some fake UFO photos and everybody fell for it. So maybe Clapper is one of those who fell for it too.

• 14:10Speaker 03

  Jeremy, you mentioned OSAP. What is OSAP? I've never heard of OSAP. I saw the movie. What is this OSAP you speak of?

• 14:19Jeremy Corbell?

  Right. So, so I guess, um, you know, one of the things about watching Age of Disclosure is I saw how people could come together to create a, I'm going to say a narrative that was easily digestible by the public. But anybody that knows the true history of, of how these UFO programs that George and I have reported on, and George has reported on this before anybody, um, we have a problem. Houston, we have a problem. The absence of the acknowledgement of OSAP was troubling to me. And maybe like you guys can pick apart why you think that might be troubling.

• 14:57Speaker 03

  I think once people start, if people are new to this and they go, oh, this is really interesting, interesting, I'm going to start digging deeper. And then they discover skinwalkers at the Pentagon and they discover OSAP, they're going to say. This movie isn't accurate, and I think Danny, you brought it up, something we know about. We know this isn't accurate. What else do we not know about that they're talking about is also not accurate? So it's gonna, you know, it's gonna put that out there and it's, we want this, we want transparency and truthfulness, and I understand not wanting to go there because it gets really messy with orbs and, you know, the biological effects and what Jay Stratton and his family experienced. I get that, but you could have mentioned ASAP, the paranormal connection and said,

• 15:42Speaker 03

  we're gonna address, somehow we'll address it in another movie. And I know Farah has said that in interviews, he mentions ASAP, but for the movie, it may create a credibility problem, which we definitely do not need.

• 15:54Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, I'm just gonna say, man, it didn't seem like it was lost in translation. It seemed like they wanted you to believe that AATIP, you know, was correct and the New York Times had received the $22 million that funded this whole study and it just, and it ran for that long, and that's just not true. And that's, you know, I think that's okay in some ways, like I'm looking big picture. But George, I wanted to know what you think, because you reported on all this from the embryonic stage, you know, you were in there reporting on this before anybody ever knew about it. You gave that wink and the nod in Hunt for the Skinwalker in my movie, saying something big is about to happen. So it's gotta kinda, because you're friends with all these guys, so it's gotta kinda irk at you. So can you give me your perspective? I think our audience deserves to hear it, man.

• 16:40George Knapp?

  Well, again, I don't want to be a turd in the punch bowl or rain on the parade of the movie, because it's a great movie and it is important. But that is a pretty glaring omission. And it kinda, I was glad to see Lou Elizondo and Jay Stratton on the same stage, even if they weren't entirely, being entirely truthful. But if you're making a movie and you're calling for disclosure and honesty, and we want to know the truth, tell us the truth, we can handle the truth, we want transparency, you gotta live up to that standard, too. And ASAP got the $22 million. That's the money that Reed got for it. AATIP came later, it grew out of it. It did not have a budget that we know of.

• 17:21George Knapp?

  Lou Elizondo and Jay Stratton were involved in it, but they have had very vigorous, I'll put it that way, vigorous disagreements about what program did what and, and who was in charge of what that they have expressed for a number of years. The fact that they've come together and found some common ground that both are able to agree on for purposes of the movie is probably a good thing. Having the movie out without a bunch of internal squabbles is good, but eventually Jay's gonna have his book come out. I think it's still wrapped up in the dofter process and I don't think it's going to toe to the, the line of, of the sequence of events that we heard in the movie. I just don't and because they

• 18:02George Knapp?

  aren't. And the people who were involved directly with ASAP, who, ASAP, who are here in Las Vegas are not likely to come forward and raise a stink about it. They're just not. But I can tell you they're, they watched this and they were, they were pretty upset about it.

• 18:16Jeremy Corbell?

  Okay. So you, we've done right for, you know, your friends that actually ran ASAP and did all that work. It's got to feel like they're a little bit robbed, you know, not having that told, that part of the story, but let's, um, maybe it's not like that it's a matter of truth. Maybe it's just a selective telling of a part of history. I think it's a nicer way to say it because I think it is true. For example, another thing in the movie is when they say, um, it was, it was Jay Stratton who, who's, he has been so straightforward about this and I really respect the way he talks about it, but he, I think he was dancing around something. He says, "We bumped into the legacy program." I'm, I'm sorry. I'm not buying that for one second. I don't think he bumped into it. I, I think that Jay Stratton, uh, you know, had direct knowledge of the legacy program. I think Lou Elizondo probably

• 19:00Jeremy Corbell?

  has a large history with the UFO thing that, that is not public yet. And I'm sure he's dying to tell people and just maybe like can't legally because he's always said he's telling what he can legally and a lot of people come from that. I, I know like even Dr. Lakatsky, I mean, I am convinced, George, you know, not out of belief. I am convinced that he was right into the legacy program.

• 19:23George Knapp?

  Well, sure. Sounds like it from him being inside of a craft and then sharing that information with a number of notables. Sure. Sounds like it.

• 19:30Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah.

• 19:31George Knapp?

  He's a stickler, as we both know, very much to our frustration. He won't go further than he's allowed to go. And I suspect the same is true for uh Jay Stratton and Lou Ozondo too. They'll say what they can up to a point. They'll drop hints. The fact that they find a common ground to tell part of the story in advance, what they know is part of this movie is good. But eventually you have to come clean and tell the accurate story.

• 19:57Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, yeah.

• 19:58George Knapp?

  I think Danny.

• 19:59Jeremy Corbell?

  I love, I loved it. I loved Lou in it. I love Jay and all these people we hadn't heard from, but now retired Danny, just curious. Do you know retired from the UFO thing? Do you have any thoughts on all this? We were beating a dead horse here, but it's important because it's historic fact. Do you have anything you you want you think about this?

• 20:14Speaker 07

  So I'm retired as a blogger and I I feel bad when you guys say I I'm running a blog still, but I it's still there. If anyone wants to check it out for prosperity, I'm not retired from the uh from the UFO subject. Always be interested and luckily I have uh everyone on on this uh live right now to uh hear so many great ideas from. Um, I don't think the uh issues that we're bringing up right now with the movie play to the general public, public, as you were saying, Jeremy. Um, as important as they are and as important as they are to the people involved with the programs. Um, I think ASAP and A tip kind of get combined, which we've seen ever since the New York Times article, and we've seen it in public presentations.

• 20:59Speaker 07

  Those two programs just get combined and they're once again combined in this movie for whatever reason that is. Um, the movie and but you know, that is an issue, but at the same time, I just don't know that the public, uh general public is going to care. The um, but as Joe said, maybe they will eventually when they start reading the books and digging in it. And if they're really interested in it, the movie itself, um, I'm as pessimistic as I am these days and how um jaded I am and hard it is for me to get excited about things. I was really excited about the movie. I was smiling and I really loved it. I thought it was great. It was um. Great recap of what we've all kind of lived through um since 2017 um and the progress that's been made.

• 21:43Speaker 07

  They they recapped everything. It was also a great uh State of the Union, I felt like um of where the UFO subject is and some of the problems it's running into. Um I really liked how uh Lou kind of drove the movie. It was cool to see him doing some narration. They had him at the uh with the piece of chalk and everything that was kind of.

• 22:04Jeremy Corbell?

  I love that. The chalkboard scene reminded me back of the Lazar when George is filming. Yeah.

• 22:10Speaker 07

  I thought uh Hal Putoff stole the show. They gave him a lot of airtime. Um he did great. It was amazing to see him uh talking at length, which we don't always get to see. We've heard him, you know, get interviewed by George over the years and uh but his interviews aren't that common and we really don't get to see him talk a lot. So that was really cool. I thought um he really did steal the show. However, my favorite quote in the whole movie, you know, when I wrote it down was from Stratton when he said, he was talking about the legacy program and he said it's so bad that we really aren't going to make progress until someone shines a light on let them talking about the legacy program.

• 22:50Speaker 07

  And I feel like that it may be kind of where we are uh with the whole disclosure thing right now. And we really need to hammer down on the legacy program myself. I was also kind of surprised that they gave so much uh attention to the legacy program in the movie. And uh we always talk about this, the the progress we've seen since 2017. When I was talking to people years ago, they didn't want to talk about biological effects. They got really nervous, like they weren't allowed to talk about it. During um the original To the Stars Academy TV show, they really didn't even want to talk about uh, you know, aliens or non-human intelligence to like the later episodes in the show. They weren't really focusing on that. I mean, it was implied. It just wasn't a big uh thing that they could really talk about.

• 23:35Speaker 07

  And now kind of the bandaid has been ripped off, it seems like, and we've seen that um in the show. However, if you notice, there was no mention of, at least that I remember, um ab- abductions. So I don't know if maybe that's off limits.

• 23:47Jeremy Corbell?

  That's the next, next level, right? Cause I remember James, George, remember this James Fox? He was, you know, going out on a limb to make a documentary about a being. I remember he was really scared about it. It's gonna kill my credibility in the UFO world as a filmmaker and we're all do it, do it. But even as a, as a filmmaker, documentarian on this, James Fox was having those heart palpitations. He's gonna start getting into beings, into aliens, you know? And now we're in a different place where we're having these conversations about creatures, about pilots. And we'll get into that a little bit later today, but it's kinda neat how we're now facing it. We're getting past the, uh, the stigma, right? Is that what you're saying?

• 24:26Speaker 07

  Yeah, absolutely. And, and I don't know if it's, if it's stigma, I think it's stigma, but it's also, I always wonder why did these people? I felt like whatever it was, they felt like they, maybe they would get in trouble talking about certain things.

• 24:40Jeremy Corbell?

  Oh yeah. Biologics being off the table for a lot of people and also just not a lot of people are exposed to that within these programs. It's a very small thing.

• 24:50Speaker 07

  Yeah.

• 24:50George Knapp?

  It's like the history of UFO world, you know, for so long, people were willing, ufologist types and UFO organizations were willing to agree. These craft in the sky are coming from somewhere else, but don't tell me they're flown by somebody else, uh, you know, some aliens or something. We don't wanna hear that stuff and abductions. That was a verboten topic for a long time at a MUFON conference or something like that. That's just crazy talk. So now when you wanna follow the evidence where it leads, that exposure to these craft and, and beings really do happen, that people get sick. Serious injuries are caused by it and that they start seeing werewolves and stuff. You know, I, I can understand people not being willing to talk about it.

• 25:31George Knapp?

  Even the folks who were at Skinwalker, they kept some of that wrapped up for a long time as, as crazy as it sounds. It, the woo factor does affect your credibility when it, when it comes out.

• 25:40Jeremy Corbell?

  You know, Bud Hop?

• 25:42Speaker 03

  But Bud Hopkins said when he first started looking into abductions, he started getting the reports. If he would get somebody who had a repeated abduction, like the second time, he would throw the case away. He's like, no, this is. No, that's not, that's not something that's very believable. Now it's like, that's really part of the story. Um, they had Terry Lovelace and Bob Jacobs in the movie. Talking about craft and Jacobs talking about the, the missile with the dummy warhead being shot down over Big Sur. Both of those folks have talked about their abduction experiences. Um, Jacobs was in Robert Hastings. They have a book together called confession. They both talk about their experiences. So I assume Farah did interview them about that, but didn't.

• 26:25Speaker 03

  You know, probably didn't have enough time to go there, which I understand if you're an experiencer, you're probably a little upset about that, but. You know, once again, people will see the film, hopefully come to people like us and we'll say, there's more to the story that you didn't. You didn't get to see in the movie. So, yeah, but I, I loved it. I went to see it. I saw it online and then I went to LA on Sunday night, saw it, I saw the panel.

• 26:49Speaker 03

  Great audience reaction and I think the general public is really going to like it, but I don't think the general public, as George mentioned, is going to pay. Right now 20 bucks to see it. You know, I would love over Thanksgiving for that to be the most discussed topic. But if I tell my family, they're going to say $20? I'll wait until it comes down to like the four bucks or five bucks.

• 27:11Jeremy Corbell?

  Oh man, everybody should gift people the movie that, yeah, I'm sorry, that kills me. People pay $20 for such crap these days on Amazon. Just buy the damn movie. Everybody should watch this because it is an A to Z estimate of the situation about UFO land. And everybody can see it. I mean, come on, buy the movie.

• 27:30Speaker 07

  Another big takeaway from the movie that I think will probably affect the public the most in my view is, um, Marco Rubio. He was really candid. Uh, he was just very candid and or else he was edited that way, one of the two. But because of his stature and position in the government right now, uh, I think he was probably the most important voice. The movie, uh, maybe not dropping the most bombs for us, but as far as what the public sees and to draw people in, he lent the most credibility.

• 28:00Speaker 03

  If you're, if you're, if you're a member of the media, how do you not have a show on Sunday with Clapper? And Rubio is your guest talking about this topic. It's like, how is that not happening? Is it gonna happen?

• 28:12Jeremy Corbell?

  The movie just released, the movie just released, give them, give them, give them a beat. You know, usually there's a two week thing where mass media will pick up. You know what, you know, we're doing in this kind of field, but um, give them a week.

• 28:24George Knapp?

  I think it's a number one, right? On all the streaming services and movie rentals and stuff. Ryan, did you just see it now this, this past week or this past weekend? Or have you seen it? Hints of it before?

• 28:36Speaker 06

  Uh, the, the movie?

• 28:38George Knapp?

  Yeah.

• 28:38Speaker 06

  Yeah, I saw the whole thing. Uh, one part that I thought was really well done and fascinating. Is when Hal Putoff was talking about the, um, the warp bubble and how the technology works. I, I mean, I just found that endlessly fascinating. How, I, I don't know how certain they are. This is how the technology works, but. Based on his description, if you're inside the warp bubble, time travels differently. You experience time differently than if you're outside the warp bubble. And it was really fascinating. How Hal Putoff said that this may be why people experience missing time. If you get abducted and you go into these craft, well, you may be there for 30 minutes, right?

• 29:18Speaker 06

  And that beings on that craft are doing whatever they're doing to you for 30 minutes and then they drop you back off wherever it is. And you look at your watch and it's been six hours. It hasn't been, well, it, it was 30 minutes for you. It was in the, in the craft and it was six hours for you. Outside of the craft, which I can't even understand. Uh, but I found that really interesting and I just love the, the imagery and the graphics they use to describe the, the, the technology. Uh, it's just, it's like, it's unbelievable. The space time engineering component of, of the phenomenon of the craft. I'm really happy they included that because just from a scientific, uh, standpoint, I, I found it really fascinating.

• 30:00Speaker 07

  By the way, that story was broken when there was a clip of Lou Elizondo. Being interviewed by a guy named George Knapp on eight news now, if I'm not mistaken, many years ago.

• 30:12Jeremy Corbell?

  I mean, Manny, is that, I mean, I would argue, and I think I've got a very compelling case to argue, that the entire concept of how these craft work is exactly as described by Lazar in 1989. And I will defend that because I took exquisite notes on this, exactly what was said in the documentary. But it describes the five observables because if, what they are saying by a bubble, Ryan, is a gravitational distortion, a time-space distortion, that is exactly what Lazar described. In fact, it describes the stealth aspect of a lot of the craft. If you were really listening to what he said, I'm sure you were, Ryan, and you picked up on why it would describe that observable.

• 30:53Jeremy Corbell?

  You know, Hal said that, you know, the structured fields were beginning to be able to see, due to sensor system platforms, the energy signatures. So that's exactly what he said, if I remember. And that is true, that what you're, what you're capturing with these new systems is the actual signature of the energy, not necessarily the craft themselves. But this is exactly, exactly what Lazar described in the back of the day. But what is missing in this documentary's description, it's not the documentary's fault. It's, they're not willing to talk about it, which is the amount of power that it takes. What would be the fuel source? How would you tap into that much energy to create something that which we know can exist in our physics, right?

• 31:37Jeremy Corbell?

  And they talked about the implications of that, how much energy it takes, 11 billion watts. It sounds like Back to the Future, but 100 times more than the daily power generation of our nation is what they said in the film. But I think the real key misunderstanding here is how, what would the fuel source be to enact these physical principles that we know can exist? And, and we observe them existing in UAP. So I'm glad you brought it up, Ryan. I'm just saying, this is not a new concept. If you just look all the way back to the first times this was described to us, or am I wrong, George?

• 32:11George Knapp?

  That's that's first time I ever heard it is back then and I would agree with the the other guys about the importance of Hal as a witness in this movie Hal and put off and Eric Davis have said some of these things in the past Joe you will recall since you probably transcribed it but they went on the coast to coast with me back in 2018 three or four months after the New York Times article came out and we started asking them about crash retrievals and how many craft we might have and Hal answered it and it was a I asked him the question there was a really long it felt like two and a half months of a pause and then he he spilled something about it it's great to see him where he's now free and able to describe more of the details and Eric of course

• 32:56George Knapp?

  if you get him going he'll tell you everything I really found Jim Semivan to be really important too and you know talk about woo and stigma the things that have happened to Jim and his wife are way out there they're they're pretty dramatic but I find him to be one of the most credible witnesses of all and and you can make a whole film just about Jim and and I go why

• 33:17Speaker 03

  Just back to the warp bubble so you guys saw the movie Interstellar where he gets he decides to go down to the planet and since the gravity is so strong it's gonna slow time there or trap time will be different back on earth and when he gets back everybody's basically 90 years old so I think that's the same concept they're talking about so if you go in a UFO and you're abducted and you stay for a year when you get out everybody's gonna be I don't know how much older and I don't know the difference in gravity between a warp bubble and a planet but I think it's the same theory if you guys know anything different I don't know correct me that seems like the same theory on the on the warp bubble and gravity no

• 33:56Jeremy Corbell?

  Right or there's something we're not understanding when it comes to you know the actual I don't know the right word I'm not a scientist but the momentum of those bubbles like where it's traveling through our time and space might create the differential not sure we should get some really smart physicists on here sometime but you know this this basic idea that you've got this isolated you know pocket that is a gravitation Field and that's the thing that they wouldn't just say it in the movie with warp bubble. What does that mean? It's working space and time. It's a gravitational field around this craft. Man, yeah, it does explain a lot of the observables and also the witness testimony. Joe and and all of you guys, you probably have taken testimony from people where they're like, it was really weird.

• 34:40Jeremy Corbell?

  I was seeing these pilots of this craft, but it was like as if you took a VHS and fast forwarded it. And they were like moving all around. And that is something that has been described to me at nauseam. And and people that have seen beings is that there's moments where they seem to be in fast motion and you're sitting back. That would also describe what is happening within that time dilation of that warp bubble. I don't know. I'm not a physicist.

• 35:08Speaker 06

  Yeah. And how put up also said this might account for stories where people are abducted. And they say they they go into this small craft. And suddenly, when they're in the craft, the the the thing's enormous. And as far like the space they're experiencing is far bigger than they perceived from the outside, which was also very interesting.

• 35:26Speaker 03

  By the way, Lou Lou Elizondo is really good on camera. I mean, really, really good. I mean, I've had my differences with Lou over the last few years, and now we're pretty good. And I would say that no matter what, he's really good on camera. The blackboard scene is really going to be a great way to explain it for newbies as far as what might be going on. So I am gonna, that's a good idea, Jeremy, buy this as a gift for Thanksgiving and Christmas. It's a really great idea.

• 35:58Jeremy Corbell?

  It'll make you less of a weirdo at the dinner table.

• 36:01Speaker 03

  That is not possible.

• 36:04Jeremy Corbell?

  Not possible. I can't wait to hang with you. Well, like, I want to say this about Lou too, like, um, you know, he called me right after the movie dropped out. And, you know, you could, I could see Lou has like, like Grusch, Stratton will be attacked, but like Grusch has been attacked. Lou's been attacked, and I'll tell you just from a personal character standpoint. You know, Lou is an authentic person. He is fighting for a good fight and he is doing his best. I know that. That to be true. I have seen him squeezed at times. So no matter what these little differences are as we all talk about UFO land. I just gotta say as a character reference, I have found him to be a really credible, straightforward, good human being.

• 36:45Jeremy Corbell?

  Now, maybe I've got different experiences than a lot of his haters, but I think it's important for me to say that because that has been my experience with Lou and I'm really, you're right. He's a great communicator and we're lucky to have him.

• 36:54George Knapp?

  I think it's hard for people like Lou, maybe harder for people like Lou who basically have been good guys their whole life, fighting the good fight, putting their lives on the line, being heroes for our country. They come out and talk about this and then just get pummeled and beaten relentlessly. I mean, he's taken a lot of crap over since the 2017 New York Times story and continues to take it from friends and foe and people on all sides of this issue. He gets beaten up pretty good. So it's a good moment for him and he deserves it. I'd love to, I'd love to ask you guys, I mean, we didn't see Dave Grusch in there, but we did hear from Dave Grusch. An interview Jeremy that you helped set into motion

• 37:35George Knapp?

  on Fox News and I'm, I'm sure people look at this like it's all being, you know, managed, stage managed that the movie comes out and then Dave's on this and Fox does a week long of series and Bill Maher does interviews and it's all being manipulated by some invisible beings or something. But, but that interview happened a long time ago. Dave would have been a valuable addition to the movie. Why do you suppose he wasn't in it?

• 38:01Jeremy Corbell?

  Well, I, I think he, you know, he definitely chose not to be in it. I remember helping to make that connection with Dan so that they could have that conversation. You know, I think Dave has a kind of different

• 38:15Jeremy Corbell?

  tactic to getting out what he knows to be true. Dave is a true whistleblower. This is not a managed message with, with, with Dave. Not that it is with the other guys, but it is at least authorized with, with Dave. You know, he really is working on a fundamental attitude that nobody has the right to hold this back. So let's go to his interview for one second. Yeah, I helped in just trying to get, you know, him in touch with a network and a producer that would be able to hear what he had to say and treat it properly. I mean, we could have done the same, George, but you know, President Trump doesn't watch Weaponized

• 38:54Jeremy Corbell?

  as far as I know. So, um, yeah, so David Grusch talked again, and I was really glad he decided to because he's not all over the media. I, I, I do think that he has a difference of opinion, and that's for him to talk about. Um, when it comes to this stuff, you know, he really thinks everybody should just open up and say what they know. For example, he thinks that if Lou Elizondo was part of the legacy UFO program, that he should just say it, go out on the limb and just say it. And, um, so I think that's the difference of opinion. I think, um, the, the film would have had Dave participate if Dave had agreed, but I think that he was, he's just on a different path. Am I explaining that clearly?

• 39:37Speaker 06

  Yeah.

• 39:37Jeremy Corbell?

  Kind of. Okay.

• 39:38Speaker 06

  Yeah.

• 39:38Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah. So what did he say? What did he say in that Bret Baer interview that was kind of, um, interesting to you guys? Because there's a few key things that I'm not sure if everybody really gets, but now they said it, I'm gonna spill the beans too. What'd you hear?

• 39:51Speaker 06

  I think the bombshell for me at least is he said that, uh, well, first of all, obviously, he said that he had some degree of access to one of, to some of the legacy programs. He, he, he was reading official intelligence reports, which is completely different than interviewing, uh, legacy program witnesses. That's a totally different animal because he's being officially briefed into those programs by the official government, not speaking to people that were in the program. So I think there's a big distinction there. So that would make him, in my opinion, a firsthand witness. I don't see how anyone could say he's a secondhand witness when he's reading the official US government intelligence reports that are highly classified, giving him information on these classified legacy

• 40:33Speaker 06

  programs. And then he said that he, Bret Baer asked him, like, did you see photos? And he's like, yeah, I saw photos. And that, and the, in the context of that was, as I, as I could tell, was that he saw photos of the beings from when they were retrieving the craft.

• 40:48Jeremy Corbell?

  Oh, you got that right. That's been a hard thing to, to bite a tongue about. You got that right.

• 40:54Speaker 06

  Yeah, so he's a firsthand witness. I mean, he saw photographs of the beings. I mean, okay, if you want to say it's a psyop, fine, then then fine. If you want to go that route, then he's a firsthand witness of a psyop, but he's a firsthand witness, period.

• 41:07Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, I agree, Ryan. In official capacity, access to the briefings, he didn't say he just read them. They were visual as well, and that was always kind of intimated. If you really look back at what David Grusch said, you're right, he is a firsthand witness because in official capacity, he saw alien beings. And those are the words, those are the words that, you know, our government would use. NHI wasn't so hip when these alleged photos were taken, but he saw photos of beings, bro. And so I agree with you. If that is true, then he is a direct firsthand witness to internal government documentation where they call.

• 41:40Speaker 03

  So I will, I will, I'm playing devil devil's advocate. I agree with what you just said. The problem is, in your interview with Lukaski, he said, and he said it was on April Fools. He said there were, there were photos that he saw that were going around of a craft from a certain country. It was a UFO that they had at one of their air bases. And he said it was shocking. It wasn't obviously fake. It was identified as fake, but it was a good job. Then you have Kit Green, when he talked to Dolan a few years ago, saying he was shown photos of aliens. And he said, I was convinced they were real. And I later determined, in my opinion, that they were fake. They were a hoax. That was in a Pentagon facility where I had that briefing. And then I had other non Pentagon facility briefings that videos were sent to me,

• 42:25Speaker 03

  and I determined all of those were hoaxes. He called it, um, what did he had a word for it? Active measures. So I'm not saying that happened with David Grusch. I'm not saying that's what he saw. But I just want to include that. For me, I want people who actually saw the craft with their own eyes, not a photo. Is a, I don't know if you guys, is a photograph going to be enough for the general public if they do release photos of craft and bodies? Or we are we gonna need them to wheel it down, you know, the aisle during a hearing and say, here you go, here are the people who examined the bodies. Here are the reports. Here's the craft. Here are the people who examined the craft, who worked on it day after day for five years. This is why they believe it's a non human craft. I think eventually that's what we'll need. I

• 43:09Speaker 03

  don't think in my lifetime we'll see that. I could be wrong. I never thought we'd get to where we are right now. So.

• 43:18Jeremy Corbell?

  I hope you're wrong, but of course, Joe, I mean, we all want like the absolute evidence and the proof. But what we got right now is an intelligence guy that went up, raised his right hand under oath, and he was dancing around it then, but he said it very clearly on Bret Baer, that he had direct access to intelligence reports with photographs of.

• 43:34Speaker 03

  Yeah, and Dan Farah said, he goes, I'd rather have intelligence folks coming forward, speaking and telling what they know over photos because they can be faked, or people can say it's AI. And I agree that right now, that is really good. But in the future, we're going to need more. I'm not, and I'm not saying these folks need to do whatever they can to steal, to steal the craft or the bodies. I'm not saying that. I realize the classified issues, you know, over classification. So I'm not saying that. I'm just saying, just trying to look at it from all views, all viewpoints.

• 44:08Jeremy Corbell?

  Last things Gresh said, and then I'll hand it over. I just, just make sure to hit these two points. You know, he did say in the Bret Baer interview, which I'm really glad he came forward and started talking about it. He says that, you know, President Trump is aware and well briefed on the issue. I would personally postulate that he has direct knowledge that President Trump is well briefed on the issue. By the way, hopefully we'll find out more about that. Look, Trump has position to know and not be obfuscated from. We cannot say that for prior presidents. If you look at the way the film broke it down, where it's like they could be on a need to know basis, the other presidents, oh, President Trump ain't having none of that. So he's in a position to know and not be obfuscated from.

• 44:51Jeremy Corbell?

  That's very different than the Clinton era, I would hope. So I just think that's very interesting that David Grusch also said that, and I think that will ring true.

• 45:00Speaker 03

  He also said one other thing, Jeremy. He said, and maybe I'm reading too much into this, but he said on Origin, he said, I did not see that data, and I'm not conversant in the high confidence theories that the US government had. So the United States government, according to that, does have high confidence theories on Origin. I would love to know that. And if they do have that, that should not be classified. That's not propulsion. That's not sources and methods.

• 45:29George Knapp?

  Agreed. Well, if they have theories plural, that suggests that they still don't know for sure.

• 45:35Jeremy Corbell?

  Right.

• 45:36George Knapp?

  Um, so where do we go? It's a special moment here. Uh, there is some momentum. The public's attention has been caught for the moment because of the movie and, and subsequent publicity and the credibility of the people who spoke up. Where does it go from here? Uh, is there something that Congress can act on? Who should they call? And, um, and how do you get over the problem of members of Congress not having security clearances and not being able to hear what some of these witnesses would be able to tell them?

• 46:04Speaker 06

  I think we need to get Trump to do an executive order to, uh, remove the NDAs or modify the NDAs of these witnesses so that the members of Congress and the congressional committees can actually hear what these witnesses have to say. I, I, I think it might come down to some act by the President of the United States because the barriers are just so high that it might require that at the end of the day.

• 46:29Jeremy Corbell?

  We, we've already had that. That, that's a problem. See, I, I've been part of these meetings. So has George. Uh, let me tell you a problem. There has already been, uh, an opportunity to bypass all of these NDAs that, that were, you know, signed and to come in and give full testimony. Some people did, people that, that you, people do not know about yet. They did it to somebody that, that George and I know was running that show. We facilitated people going in to do that. Here's the problem. A lot of people, most people were too fucking terrified to go in there and break from the fold. When they talk about in this movie, the legacy program as a monolith and that there is actual danger

• 47:13Jeremy Corbell?

  to doing that, a protected secrets, that's not BS. That is true. So let's say we do get this executive order, and I agree, Ryan, we should get that. But then how do we motivate people who truly have been in these secret circles and have seen what has happened to other people? And

• 47:32Jeremy Corbell?

  How do we get them to come forward? Maybe they, maybe they don't think the public should know. How do we, we have to force them. My opinion is we have to force them somehow. Because just opening that door didn't work. And you know what I'm talking about, George, when, when people would, when there was that opportunity and we helped with that.

• 47:47Speaker 06

  So I know Grusch spilled everything he knows, but you're saying that firsthand witnesses that like worked in the legacy program could do what Grusch did. They had the legal room to do that without being prosecuted.

• 47:58Jeremy Corbell?

  Behind closed doors?

• 48:00Speaker 06

  Behind closed doors, right?

• 48:01Jeremy Corbell?

  Yes.

• 48:01Speaker 06

  Okay.

• 48:01Jeremy Corbell?

  There was absolute ability to.

• 48:04Speaker 06

  Then it's just, then it's just a fear issue then. Then it's just a fear issue because if they have legal immunity, then they, then the only thing stopping them is they're worried about losing their jobs and their security clearances and, and.

• 48:15Jeremy Corbell?

  You know.

• 48:16Speaker 06

  Consequences.

• 48:17Jeremy Corbell?

  If Trump comes, okay, yes, i- i- the way you phrase it.

• 48:20Speaker 03

  If Trump comes forward and says, you know, he does say something, you know, this is real. And I am giving my blessing right now for the people who worked in this leg or work in this legacy program. You can come forward. We will support you. We will protect you. You can come forward and behind closed doors, tell us what you know. I don't know if that will change their mind. And I, and I'm not gonna ever blame somebody for not doing it. Because I'm not in their position where I'm getting death threats, you know? So besides that, to get to that point, we also need the media to ask the president about what David Grusch said. Repeatedly, you know, ask him. Hold him to, you know, hold him to it and say, we want an answer. Were you briefed about crash retrievals?

• 49:06Speaker 03

  You know, and in his last, one of his last interviews last year with the, on Impulsive, he was asked and he said, I think it was June of 2024, he said, I have pilots coming to me and it's really impressive and there may be some stuff. But me personally, I'm not convinced. Was that after his briefing? That he received? I don't know, you know?

• 49:26Speaker 06

  I think he's just avoiding the issue because if he's been read into it, he's just trying to pretend like he doesn't know as much as he knows. And I'm baffled why, you know, Trump with his ego and the common sense of having an unparalleled legacy by being the first president to break this open, what is stopping him from doing this? He'll talk about anything. He'll do Instagram posts and go all over the place.

• 49:55Jeremy Corbell?

  Anything but the Epstein files.

• 49:56Speaker 06

  Well, yeah, you're right about that.

• 49:59George Knapp?

  Depends on how bad things get from the files. If they come out with photos, that might be the day we either invade Venezuela or he has a news conference about UFOs. I mean, look, he makes an announcement, it then dominates the rest of his administration and he'll be asked more questions. You can try to limit what you say and how much you release, but he'll be asked about it for the rest of his days. I think he'd have to be in a corner to go ahead and do it. And I think he has been briefed, but his interest level is about that deep. It's not about him.

• 50:31Speaker 06

  And I wonder if he's been advised to not talk about it, like have people been like constantly using all kinds of tradecraft persuasion on him to just get into his mind and be like, nah, you don't want to go there. Here's why. X, Y, Z. They have all these answers set up for him, knowing his psychology. Like if they're doing that, well, okay, people are malleable and that sucks. But you know, that's why I think someone like the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, maybe he needs to start saying, you know, publicly like, why is the president not talking about this? You know what I mean? Or if he doesn't want to be that abrasive, just say, the American people have a right to know, we should really break this open.

• 51:11Speaker 06

  And then people will automatically start pressuring the President of the United States if he doesn't want to reference him specifically.

• 51:18Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, okay, three things real quick. So there is going to be pushback. I am specifically aware of how there's going to be an official pushback to influence high level of government and even Congress. And it's terrifying. And I'm gonna, I'm gonna try to see how it, if it does pan out that way, or if there's gonna be honesty. You're right, Joe, we do need somebody to go at the White House Press Corps and specifically ask about the accusation that David Grusch made live on TV. I could imagine a great Fox News person doing that because it was on their network. So I'm really hoping that's gonna be done. And then Rubio, about Rubio, Ryan, can you imagine what that's like? You know, before he accepted that job for the nomination, he had to disclose, is he in any media that's gonna be coming

• 52:02Jeremy Corbell?

  out? He had to disclose, I'm in a movie, it's gonna be coming out talking about UFOs. So can you imagine that conversation? I don't think he'd ever say, you know, put, try to put President Trump in a corner on this. But I do think he could be the greatest advocate that we have right now, because I'll tell you this, Senator, former Senator Rubio, he knows, he knows, he was read and he's met with more people than most people in government at that level. So he has an opportunity to talk with President Trump about it privately. And then I think if President Trump has asked the right questions in a, in a live meeting, I think we could get a more interesting answer this time, I hope.

• 52:39Speaker 06

  And he's the National Security Advisor. And, and from what I've heard from you and George and other sources, they, they, they're overseeing the legacy program. Because that way, you know, FOIA can't penetrate anything that they're doing. Is that right? Am I getting that right?

• 52:56Jeremy Corbell?

  Not quite. Because if we are to believe what Matthew Brown said, that he read the transcripts of one of these meetings with Dr. Kirkpatrick and with Rubio, the quote was something like, you mean, they have been running this legacy UFO program, you know, unaccounted for for all, for 80 years? So it depends, like, if that is a correct assessment that Matthew Brown had of what he was exposed to, then I would say, no, he has no oversight over this legacy. It was hid from him, just like everybody else. And they make a good point in the film of how these things are held. And Lou Elizano broke it down CIA, Air Force, private defense. If you really listen to that section of the film, the way he broke it down, he exquisitely explained

• 53:38Jeremy Corbell?

  exactly how on the DOE, how that whole mechanism has worked to keep this the best held secret ever in American history.

• 53:49George Knapp?

  Danny, you were trying to jump in there earlier. Did you have a suggestion on how to take advantage at this moment?

• 53:55Speaker 07

  I like the, uh, the Jay Stratton quote that I was talking about earlier, and I think the legacy program probably does have to be outed. For us to really, really progress. I think that's the way forward. Of course, there is other opinions on that. The Trump stuff is really interesting to me. Um, even in the Grusch interview, it kind of made Trump look bad. I mean, Grusch was saying he was well versed on the issue and then they, right before that, they had the clip where he said he's not convinced. And that it's just contradicting that. So I think Trump is almost in the same position as the government as a whole, where people are gonna, if he does mention something about it, people are gonna say, well, why didn't you already say this? You already had one term. You've already made all these other comments.

• 54:38Speaker 07

  So I think like George was saying, he really is gonna have to be super motivated in some other way. Um, in order to kind of throw himself under the bus like that.

• 54:46Speaker 06

  And let's not forget that Grusch, in that interview, he said that, um, the administration, the Trump administration were talking about the issue behind the scenes. So what did he mean by that? Is it, it's like he's suggesting that they are planning something. Uh, Dan Farah has said the same thing. Uh, so if that's true, then maybe, maybe Trump is, the Trump administration is planning something. Do you guys know anything about that?

• 55:13Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, I mean, it's seeded information. Like, we're all hoping that's the case. There, you know, there, there are discussions. Look, you can just look at what happened. Who was that guy that was on the show that just kind of bragged about getting a text from Grusch in the green room? And he's part of the, um, Walter Hearn, I think? Right, right. And it was really kind of cool. He was talking about how, um, you know, within that, um, administration, how there's, you know, he thinks. Maybe Trump could be the president to come forward and do this. Well, I think he's pretty close with everybody in that administration. So I, I, I think it's interesting that he was even echoing that. But, but to, to be really clear, um, I think this is what we're aiming for. And also, we don't know how deeply President Trump was briefed on this issue.

• 55:58Jeremy Corbell?

  To say he was briefed is one thing, but how deeply, wouldn't it be great if he got the itch? Wait a second, he watches the movie and he's like, you mean, there's this whole thing going on and I haven't been fully briefed?

• 56:07George Knapp?

  Yeah.

• 56:08Jeremy Corbell?

  I can imagine him wanting to get fully briefed.

• 56:10George Knapp?

  I can tell you that after the election, but before the, uh, he was sworn in, Trump was sworn in. There were people, big named business people who were helping Trump, the administration, fill slots and jobs. They reached out, I talked to them a couple of times and they were hinting that there was going to be a push to get Trump to take that step in his first year. And that there was a lot of support among his close advisors to do that. They were looking for names of people who might help them make the case. Uh, so there were a lot of people who's, who don't have Trump's ear, who wanted to make that move before he was even sworn in. And, um, I, I haven't heard from any of them since, so I don't know.

• 56:53Jeremy Corbell?

  Could you imagine with him being up at the podium? He goes, ladies and gentlemen, I wanna, I'm gonna tell you about this book. It's called Skinwalkers at the Pentagon. Axelrod is actually Jay Stratt, look it up. Wonderful story, little scary. Um, Ron Becker had an orb go through his arm, not a good story. Check out this book. I think the sales would go through the roof, George.

• 57:17George Knapp?

  I'd be for that. I'd, I'd be for that. Yeah.

• 57:19Speaker 07

  There's also the factor of him just being so controversial and the, um, environment that we all live in now with conspiracies and distrust of the government, um, distrust of the presidents. Uh, if he says something like that, I, I am starting to wonder, will it even do the trick? And cause, you know, quote unquote disclosure like we would want, they'd have to have something along with that.

• 57:42Speaker 07

  Proof or something, I think, but him just saying it would be amazing progress and great. I just don't know if it's going to convince as many people.

• 57:51Speaker 03

  Yeah, over 10 years ago, Tom DeLonge was writing, somebody brought it up as a negative. He was, DeLonge was writing with Podesta, saying a big problem with the young kids today, the youth, is they're so cynical. And it's still a problem. It's not just young people. Like you said, they're not, whether or not they like Trump or not, they're not going to believe him. But again, like you said, if they present evidence, that's, you know, that may get us to where we need to be.

• 58:14George Knapp?

  With that, gentlemen, any parting thoughts? Anything else you want to say about the movie, about Grusch, about the moment, about what you hope to see in the future? Ryan?

• 58:23Speaker 06

  Uh, I just want to bring up, I don't know if you guys, any of you have an opinion on this, but one of the most fascinating parts of the film was where Dr. Eric Davis was talking about a crash in Russia, I think in 1989. A Tic Tac, he described it as twice the size of what Commander David Fravor encountered in 2004 with the USS Nimitz UFO event series. They got four bodies recovered and there was an energy weapon inside, energy directed weapon inside. And I just, I'd like-

• 58:52Speaker 03

  Is that how they came up with, if Russia is behind Havana syndrome? Is that, was that their basis for coming up with that? Weapon? Um, I don't know what year. It was 80s, in the 80s, he said. But remember, Jeremy talked about a certain scientist who was, and you never mentioned who it was, who was briefed on a foreign program. And then later on, Eric in his solo interview basically said, I was able to see some of the Russian, I don't know if he said crash retrieval, but he mentioned one of their pro, sorry. He, he mentioned one of their programs and he had access. Is that what he was looking at? Was it something related to that? That Tic Tac, you know? I don't know.

• 59:36Jeremy Corbell?

  All I know is Ryan got it right. Eric said in official capacity that in 1989, there was a crash in Russia of something double the size about of the Tic Tac UFO and that it was a Tic Tac shaped and that there were four, exactly his words, humanoid aliens and that they did in the reverse engineering process, you know, find a very advanced directed energy weapon. So that's what Eric Davis said, a guy who admittedly was in multiple programs within S, if you go through the transcripts and look at what he said in the film, UAP programs. So I would say Dr. Eric Davis is worth listening to. I feel like, what else do you want to hear?

• 1:00:18Jeremy Corbell?

  He just straight told you that and that tracks with everything George and I know over the years, right, George?

• 1:00:23George Knapp?

  Yeah, and I'd say that there were attempts by the Russians, if I'm thinking of this crash, it was Kazakhstan and there were attempts by the Russians to exploit that, that weapon. And it was a disaster for them. It was a disaster, but.

• 1:00:36Jeremy Corbell?

  Can you elaborate, George?

• 1:00:37George Knapp?

  I think some of these details are verifiable. Anyway, Ryan, was that your last comment on the movie? You want to move on?

• 1:00:46Speaker 06

  Yeah, that was my, that was my last comment and yep.

• 1:00:49George Knapp?

  All right, Danny?

• 1:00:50Speaker 07

  I think, I'm just happy that it came out, you know, the Three Eye Atlas story has been so sensational and it seems like it's been the biggest story of the year, unfortunately, at least the most UFO civilians have spoken to me about it and asked me about that. And meanwhile, we've had a hearing with a guy named George featured on it. That was amazing. And now we've had this movie, so I'd like to see the movie and the hearing kind of overtake the Three Eye Atlas story, which is a little bit sillier, even maybe it's true, I don't know, but it just seems a little bit sensational or silly. So I like this energy that there is right now.

• 1:01:33Speaker 07

  It's, it's getting released towards the end of the year and I hate to say it, you know, we had the end of the year, New York Times article, so it's just the same season. It's just giving me kind of memories. Now, I don't think it's as big as that story, obviously, but it just, it's making things a little bit more fun now again and I'm really thankful of that and hopefully. You know, all these other documentaries and movies we've always talked about, they're, they're great to bring, bring to the public. And this one is really great as well. It's um, maybe one of the best, if not the best long form. Um, so it's a good thing to, good thing to show to politicians. Um, a lot of them have tweeted that they're watching it and promoted it online, which is really interesting. So it's just, it's great movement and I'm happy to uh, be excited about something.

• 1:02:17Speaker 03

  Yeah, it's, it's not as big as the New York Times 2017 article. But it could be, it could definitely turn into that and more. Um, one thing Eric Davis I wanted to bring up said, uh, he would spill his guts, basically. If the president waived his NDAs, that was a big deal. Probably it would only be behind the scenes with Congress. And then one more part about the movie, which I've talked to you guys about, Jay Stratton towards the end goes, I was really enjoying the movie. And then Jay Stratton said, and I'm going to quote him specifically, he said, "The people behind the legacy program truly believe that the secret is so intense that they can't share it with the Amer- the American people."

• 1:02:58Speaker 03

  And then Jay goes, "There may be aspects of this that are so intense, they can't share it." I, I would say they won't share it. Um, he goes, "However, I think the basic fact that we are not alone in the universe, we can share that with the American people. We can handle it at this point. Hopefully, one day, the American people will learn the bigger story and how it impacts us all." I was so upset when I saw that. I'm like, "No, no, no, no." If it's not about propulsion, if it's not about sources and methods, if it's about intent and what they've been doing, do not support that being kept secret. No, that, that needs to be shared now, not 20 years from now. So, I love the movie, people should see it, but that really bothered me. I don't know if you guys agree.

• 1:03:45Jeremy Corbell?

  But I think that's what he was meaning, Joe, because I'm hearing you say it now and I agree with you. But just like we have a nuclear program and clean nuclear energy, that power, but we don't give everybody the codes to a nuclear bomb. I think that's what Jay was saying in his defense is that we can handle the core of everything. We're just not going to give like nuclear codes to the technology.

• 1:04:05Speaker 03

  Yeah, of course, but I don't think that's what he was talking about. I think he's talking about some of the scarier aspects of this.

• 1:04:11Jeremy Corbell?

  Okay.

• 1:04:12Speaker 03

  I mean, Skinwalkers at the Pentagon tell some of it. I don't know what else there is more to it, but even let's just say that happens and the basics just come out. You're gonna get people who are gonna want to say, really, you lied to us about this? And then they're gonna come and find out more and then they're gonna learn on their own. So it would still be a great thing. And then that pressure from people saying, what else aren't you telling us? That will happen, so it's a positive. It's just that when I first saw it, it really bothered me, but you know.

• 1:04:39Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, no more bullshit. We want transparency and we got to fight for it. We got to get it in the news. We have to call Congress, people have to do whatever we got to do to make sure this story isn't dropped. The momentum keeps going and the current administration makes a damn disclosure. That's what we want, right? Okay.

• 1:04:56Speaker 03

  Yeah, try our best and hopefully this time we get the media waking up and asking the questions of our politicians and getting this more in the media and the media follows up and it continues. And like you said, something doesn't knock it off the map, some major event. This needs to be going. This should become the biggest story in the history of our planet. And the media eventually, hopefully will cover it, you know, every day 24/7 because it deserves that coverage.

• 1:05:28Jeremy Corbell?

  Ryan, are we ready for the truth, bro?

• 1:05:31Speaker 06

  Oh, absolutely. Transparency, I mean, if, if, if the phenomenon is already here, then tell me what's, what, what, what really changes by learning the details? It's already here. Nothing really changes. It's not going to change the equation because it's already here. So if you learn that it's here, even if you didn't know it was here, it's still here. So for me, just tell the American people, tell the world at large and that's, that's the trajectory we should go in.

• 1:05:58Speaker 07

  I'm not so sure that the world can handle that if the president comes out and says, "Hey, you could be abducted and there's nothing you can do to stop it." But I don't think it's their job to hinder that from us. So whatever reality is, we deserve to know the truth. But I do think that there will be a lot of scared people.

• 1:06:19George Knapp?

  I encourage people to watch it. I encourage UFO people to share it with non-UFO people so that they can, you know, learn how deep the subject goes, how real it is. Those, the packaging of those 34 national security folks and people in the know into this film is excellent. And I hope it moves the needle. We've been down, we've made progress before and somehow it always gets stopped. I'd like to believe that the public can handle the truth, but since we don't actually know what the ultimate truth is, I can't say definitively whether we could or not. And there's some pretty scary scenarios that would be, could mess people up, depending on what the ultimate truth is, assuming there's anybody who really knows it.

• 1:07:02George Knapp?

  But I hope it moves the needle and progress continues. And I really do encourage people to check out this film. Jeremy?

• 1:07:11Jeremy Corbell?

  Yeah, man, I'm just glad that it exists and I really want to support it. I think it's a huge endeavor, a heavy lift to create a good film, to get all those people together. And I think it's so good that it exists and I just hope people, you know, pay attention because it's a stepping stone. If we can all come to some basic consensus reality that there is a there, there is Robbie Williams says, "Something's up." He said that to me at the ranch, George. And it's like, if we can just all come to that point where we're like, "Okay, now what?" And that's what I hope, you know, this movie, and by the way, the second Bob Lazar movies, or the second, sorry, a new documentary on Bob Lazar will be coming out soon and I am eager to see it. I haven't seen any of it either.

• 1:07:51Jeremy Corbell?

  It'll be neat to see how, how this whole concept moves forward if we don't drop the ball over the next, you know, six, 12 months.