June 15, 2025 • 15 mins
Guest host Rich Berra and UFO activist Stephen Bassett discuss geopolitical affairs obstructing official disclosure of extraterrestrial existence.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Now here's a highlight from coast to coast AM on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
It seems like what I'm hearing the latest news and
correct me if I'm off off the path here, but
it seems like what you're hearing is the Pentagon has
totally in the military too, have totally duped us into
releasing videos that aren't really that spectacular, but to get
us talking about UAPs, but to distract us from what's
(00:25):
really going on. Is that close to what I'm understanding?
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Sort of something extraordinary just happened, and I do want
to address it.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Let's go and.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
And what the best way I can describe it is
that there's been another effort to push back against the
disclosure process, which has been making great progress of late.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
Yes, over the last few years, it's talked about a lot,
but it seems like there is a little bit more now.
You guys know too much.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Let's just say that simplify. There is a policy that
has prevented the American people and the world's people from
knowing that there is a presence here that is not human,
technologically advanced, almost certainly from other stars. This policy is
still in effect. It's been seriously maintained, and that policy,
(01:20):
which i'd call the truth embargo, is collapsing. It has
been for some time, certainly in the last seven years,
and this is leading to a very profound moment in
which the government will ultimately have to confirm it. When
I say the government, I mean the confirmation from the
President of the United States. There are people in government
that have been saying there's ets here for some time, astronauts,
(01:43):
scientists and so forth. That doesn't count. What counts as
when it's confirmed by the office of the President. Now
it helps if that confirmation, when it happens, is supported
by a lot of other appropriate endeavors that have taken place,
such as a series of legislation, witnesses testifying before Congress,
(02:07):
many many private breathings of members of Congress, the key
members in the background, a great deal of media coverage right,
all of which has happened substantially that would be helpful,
and that has happened, and thus, technically speaking, as I
perceive it, the platform upon which a president, whoever it is,
(02:31):
needs to have to step on to to be able
to tell the American people that, yeah, we have that
non human technologically advanced presence. We even have crash vehicles
and bodies and so forth has been built. Without it,
it would have been very, very difficult. There were individuals
like lawnce Rockefeller that wanted Bill Clinton to go after
(02:52):
these files and get them out, get them, pull them
from the Pentagon, and put them out.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Well, yeah, we've been talking about that for a while.
In fact, before the show, I don't know how many
stations that are on now play the Somewhere Back in
Time with Art Bell, but that was like circa nineteen
ninety three, and I heard him talking about disclosure tonight,
but it was from nineteen ninety three. And it seems
like the same questions we have now are the same
(03:19):
questions we had then, except for we have an army
of Internet people out there trying to get the word
out more and more and more. So it seems like
it's see the truth comes kind of seeping out a
little bit at the time, but it is still safely guarded.
And I thought, like that show, if it was live tonight,
you could ask the same questions and we'd still have
(03:39):
some of the same answers about pushback and things that
we know and things that the military cameras have seen
or radar has picked up, but it's still not like
you say, the office of the President, which is which
is a great thing. What would you describe what is disclosure?
For people that are new to the uap UFO thing,
how would you describe what disclosure means totally? Is it
(04:01):
just the president saying there there's alien contact here.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
Yeah, that's That's kind of convenient for me because I
defined it. Yes, back in two thousand and two, disclosure
with a small D had been in play, and it's
I'm well understood it was applied to this subject matter.
Certainly Steve McGeer applied it in that sense when he
created the Disclosure Project. The idea was to disclose the information,
get it out, get it out. I get that and
(04:26):
that still goes to this day. So I like to
call that small D disclosure. But what was missing at
that time, in the early days of the Act, really
the beginning of the Act of as Era, which started
just a couple of years before I came on board
in ninety six, was the what's the goal of this? Right?
Is the goal of this just to prove that there's
(04:47):
ets here. If that's the case, you got a problem
because the government's already known about the ets for like
sixty some years prior. They've known since all the way
forty seven is the is the is the the idea
to prove it so well that the government has to yield, meaning, oh,
you've proved it. What can I say? Yeah, we've been
telling not telling you the truth. That's not a very
(05:09):
good goal. What is the goal of this movement? And
I said, it has to be the confirmation. It has
to be the confirmation of the heads of state, which
then open all the doors. And so what's the name
for that? We could call it confirmation, but I said,
let's call it disclosure capital D. Let's take small D disclosure,
make it a proper noun, and basically say, it is
(05:30):
the moment those words come out of the mouth of
a head of state, preferably first from our president. Capital
D disclosure. That's what it is. Anything else is not
my definition. And I'm really not that interested. How close
are we to that? Very very close? But we have
been at it now in a very vociferous way since
(05:52):
the Clinton administration and the Rockefeller initiative. When the tide certain,
when the things started to turn, and while I hope
that they would move faster. We are now what nineteen
ninety two, We are now like thirty three years on,
and we're not quite there, but we are almost there.
In the last seven years, Morris happened in the previous
seventy seventy years. And it's not that we have the
(06:15):
same questions. We have plenty of answers right, and the
work has been done to build the platform on which
the president could stand. There was no platform for Bill Clinton.
There was no platform for George Bush or Rock I'm sorry,
or Barack Obama. There is a platform for this or
Biden for that matter. That it was being built. It
(06:38):
was being built, and a lot happened in the four
years of the Biden administration, including the extraordinary hearing with
David Grush, the first real hearing since nineteen sixty eight
in the House Subcommittee. That was under Biden. But then
he leaves the stage, and now President Trump is our leader,
(06:59):
and it happens, if we can get through this current situation,
he will be the disclosure president. Everything is set for
him to do it. All he has to do is
walk out in the East Wing and say it. There's
a number of ways to go about that, but the
outcome is the same, but it's not like the current
president has done a great deal to make this happen.
(07:21):
That's all right, because the presidents have a lot to do.
It will be because he will be the president when
the music stops. And here's where things get interesting, because
there are still significant entities within the military intelligence complex
and possibly in the political arena. They are not ready
for that music to stop. They just cannot imagine or
(07:44):
will he accept this event to take place, for various reasons,
some national security, some concern about embarrassment because they're going
to have to answer some brutal questions, and so forth.
They're just not ready, and so over the years you
see these attempts to push back. There have been a
few since the Endgame began in twenty seventeen. By and
(08:08):
large they sort of work. But in the modern era
of internet and social media and so forth, and podcast
and everything that we are now used to you can
push back, but everybody's going to know exactly what you're doing.
It's going to be transparent, and so that makes it
even more difficult, which brings us to now. We were
(08:29):
making tremendous progress and then there was a dramatic change
that happened relatively over pair to two years, but kind
of culminated with the Wall Street Journal article of June sixth,
though it took a while to sort of assess that.
And the best explanation I can have for this is
(08:52):
that a lot of good people in our government that
would very much like to see disclosure are also profoundly
concerned about the fact that in the last number of years,
dramatic events are taking place within the United States, which
is literally tearing the country apart, and extraordinarily new dangerous
(09:17):
developments have occurred overseas, which, while there have been precedents
to this, there's a quality about these events which are
far more frightening, far more unpredictable, and they just keep
coming one after another after another. And so while the
article came out in the Wall Street Journal on January sixth,
(09:40):
June sixth, we'll talk about what else has happened. There
is now a war between Israel and Iran.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Yeah, the world changed just a few days ago. Again
completely when that happened, it's like now we're in a
totally different existence.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
It seems like we're in a totally different existence. But
every three days, well that's true too. Some people think, well,
they're doing some bombing and aronspiring some missiles, but it's
not a war. The hell it isn't. This is a
full out war, the implications of which could be profound
and catastrophic. Right, and then there is still a war
going on in the Ukraine which is not resolved. Millions
(10:20):
of people have been killed or innocent, and the potential
I'm killed or are injured, forgive me, and the potential
for the use of nukes is high, very high. This
is It's hard to find something quite like this. Why
because the various entities involved have such a complex interaction
(10:41):
with the rest of civilization and other nations. What am
I referring to? All Right? First of all, the war
that is now going on between Israel and Iran is
in some sense a war between the western non Islamic
countries and the entire Islamic world. And because of past
(11:02):
events and so forth, that world is filled with various
terrorist groups who are very angry and very determined that
what has happened to them is going to be accounted for.
I'm not assigning good, bad, right wrong here, I'm simply
saying that is the case. And while we've gone through
(11:24):
the episodes before when there have been how would you say,
conflicts that have led to terrorist reactions. We haven't gone
through something like this in a very long time, going
back many decades, and that terrort situation then was a
fraction of what it is now. And so I expect
an explosion of terrorism across multiple fronts with the risk
(11:45):
of a popular possible use of a nuke, because the
idea of loose nukes is not a fantasy. And the
idea that we've encounted for every single nuke of the
eighty six thousand plus others that have been built.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Season is there that many out there?
Speaker 3 (11:58):
There were six eighties. We managed to pair that down
from eighty six thousand to about twenty five thousand, and
supposedly the seventy one thousand we got rid of whatever
have all been taken care of. And that's fine. But
the technology to be smaller and smaller nukes and tactical
shells has grown since then. And so there is an
illusion that is maintained by countries for obvious reasons you
(12:22):
don't want everybody scared to death, is that all nukes
are accounted for, don't wear none are in the wrong hands.
And that is absolutely nonsense. And so the use of
a terrorist nuke, a non state operator nuke is very
high now because the incentive these groups has just been exploded.
And I'm talking about the war in Iran. I'm also
(12:44):
talking the situation with respect Israel and Gaza. Looked at,
even from a neutral standpoint, without getting into partisan politics
or anything else, this is massive bloodshed. It's going to
make very numbers of people angry. And at the same
time you have the issue in Ukraine. Nuke's come into
play in any time. Two of the people involved in
these two wars, two of the entities are nuclear. Meanwhile,
(13:07):
in the Pacific, while all of this chaos is going on,
all of this disruption just absorbing the intention of Europe
and the United States, Russia, China is sitting there looking
at Taiwan, going when do we want to take it?
Why not? Now? What's going to happen? The risk of
nuclear events in that case. So we are in a
(13:28):
really dangerous situation. And I believe that people in the
government has said, look, we got to push backy. It's
going to look stupid, it's going to be obvious. The
internet will savage us. But we've got to push back
because we can't deal with that and try to avoid
the calamities and all of this awful behavior which has
been going on for well thousands of years. That's certainly
(13:50):
the modern era from nineteen oh one forward, I mean, yeah,
nineteen oh one forward has been rather profound, or rather,
you know, substantial in the amount of war, the amount
of destruction, the amount of slaughter that we have conducted,
casting tens, if not one hundreds of trallions of dollars,
and we keep doing it. And so they're going, my god,
let's push back.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
And is there part of you, Steven as you as
you look at this instead of thinking of pushback, is
there part of you that, if you're in that entity
of government that you're like, well, why don't we why
don't we do some disclosure, because that'll be become like
Lindberg baby headlines and now we can take the heat off.
The other thing. You use it as a distraction. Almost there,
almost Okay. So that's where you're going with this, is
(14:33):
that when it comes out, it's it's a it's a
don't look over here, look over there.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
The old the no, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
The prestige is that what's happening.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
No, no, no, no, no, no, it's it's much more
complicated than that. I'm having a lot of trouble. I
mean the last I think eighteen months. I mean literally
I'm keeping I'm trying to keep it together. But it
has been absolutely brutal. Because I I'm a political activist.
I just happened to be regular lobbyists. I'm a political
(15:01):
activist activists, and the disclosure issue isn't one of the
focus of my activism. But it's not like I'm not
aware of everything else that's going on. And in the
thirty years I've been involved in this, I finally understood
that the et presence and the modern era and what's
been happening in the last couple of decades, certainly, but
(15:23):
maybe even going about more than that, maybe going back
fifty years, is connected. In other words, there's a connection
with the extraterstrial presence, their activities, what they're doing, what
they're saying, and other things, and the slow decline of
the modern world into chaos and possibly another catastrophic period.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Listen to more Coast to Coast AM every weeknight at
oneam Eastern, and go to Coast to coastam dot com
for more
Now here's a highlight from coast to coast AM on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
It seems like what I'm hearing the latest news and
correct me if I'm off off the path here, but
it seems like what you're hearing is the Pentagon has
totally in the military too, have totally duped us into
releasing videos that aren't really that spectacular, but to get
us talking about UAPs, but to distract us from what's
(00:25):
really going on. Is that close to what I'm understanding?
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Sort of something extraordinary just happened, and I do want
to address it.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Let's go and.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
And what the best way I can describe it is
that there's been another effort to push back against the
disclosure process, which has been making great progress of late.
Speaker 2 (00:48):
Yes, over the last few years, it's talked about a lot,
but it seems like there is a little bit more now.
You guys know too much.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Let's just say that simplify. There is a policy that
has prevented the American people and the world's people from
knowing that there is a presence here that is not human,
technologically advanced, almost certainly from other stars. This policy is
still in effect. It's been seriously maintained, and that policy,
(01:20):
which i'd call the truth embargo, is collapsing. It has
been for some time, certainly in the last seven years,
and this is leading to a very profound moment in
which the government will ultimately have to confirm it. When
I say the government, I mean the confirmation from the
President of the United States. There are people in government
that have been saying there's ets here for some time, astronauts,
(01:43):
scientists and so forth. That doesn't count. What counts as
when it's confirmed by the office of the President. Now
it helps if that confirmation, when it happens, is supported
by a lot of other appropriate endeavors that have taken place,
such as a series of legislation, witnesses testifying before Congress,
(02:07):
many many private breathings of members of Congress, the key
members in the background, a great deal of media coverage right,
all of which has happened substantially that would be helpful,
and that has happened, and thus, technically speaking, as I
perceive it, the platform upon which a president, whoever it is,
(02:31):
needs to have to step on to to be able
to tell the American people that, yeah, we have that
non human technologically advanced presence. We even have crash vehicles
and bodies and so forth has been built. Without it,
it would have been very, very difficult. There were individuals
like lawnce Rockefeller that wanted Bill Clinton to go after
(02:52):
these files and get them out, get them, pull them
from the Pentagon, and put them out.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Well, yeah, we've been talking about that for a while.
In fact, before the show, I don't know how many
stations that are on now play the Somewhere Back in
Time with Art Bell, but that was like circa nineteen
ninety three, and I heard him talking about disclosure tonight,
but it was from nineteen ninety three. And it seems
like the same questions we have now are the same
(03:19):
questions we had then, except for we have an army
of Internet people out there trying to get the word
out more and more and more. So it seems like
it's see the truth comes kind of seeping out a
little bit at the time, but it is still safely guarded.
And I thought, like that show, if it was live tonight,
you could ask the same questions and we'd still have
(03:39):
some of the same answers about pushback and things that
we know and things that the military cameras have seen
or radar has picked up, but it's still not like
you say, the office of the President, which is which
is a great thing. What would you describe what is disclosure?
For people that are new to the uap UFO thing,
how would you describe what disclosure means totally? Is it
(04:01):
just the president saying there there's alien contact here.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
Yeah, that's That's kind of convenient for me because I
defined it. Yes, back in two thousand and two, disclosure
with a small D had been in play, and it's
I'm well understood it was applied to this subject matter.
Certainly Steve McGeer applied it in that sense when he
created the Disclosure Project. The idea was to disclose the information,
get it out, get it out. I get that and
(04:26):
that still goes to this day. So I like to
call that small D disclosure. But what was missing at
that time, in the early days of the Act, really
the beginning of the Act of as Era, which started
just a couple of years before I came on board
in ninety six, was the what's the goal of this? Right?
Is the goal of this just to prove that there's
(04:47):
ets here. If that's the case, you got a problem
because the government's already known about the ets for like
sixty some years prior. They've known since all the way
forty seven is the is the is the the idea
to prove it so well that the government has to yield, meaning, oh,
you've proved it. What can I say? Yeah, we've been
telling not telling you the truth. That's not a very
(05:09):
good goal. What is the goal of this movement? And
I said, it has to be the confirmation. It has
to be the confirmation of the heads of state, which
then open all the doors. And so what's the name
for that? We could call it confirmation, but I said,
let's call it disclosure capital D. Let's take small D disclosure,
make it a proper noun, and basically say, it is
(05:30):
the moment those words come out of the mouth of
a head of state, preferably first from our president. Capital
D disclosure. That's what it is. Anything else is not
my definition. And I'm really not that interested. How close
are we to that? Very very close? But we have
been at it now in a very vociferous way since
(05:52):
the Clinton administration and the Rockefeller initiative. When the tide certain,
when the things started to turn, and while I hope
that they would move faster. We are now what nineteen
ninety two, We are now like thirty three years on,
and we're not quite there, but we are almost there.
In the last seven years, Morris happened in the previous
seventy seventy years. And it's not that we have the
(06:15):
same questions. We have plenty of answers right, and the
work has been done to build the platform on which
the president could stand. There was no platform for Bill Clinton.
There was no platform for George Bush or Rock I'm sorry,
or Barack Obama. There is a platform for this or
Biden for that matter. That it was being built. It
(06:38):
was being built, and a lot happened in the four
years of the Biden administration, including the extraordinary hearing with
David Grush, the first real hearing since nineteen sixty eight
in the House Subcommittee. That was under Biden. But then
he leaves the stage, and now President Trump is our leader,
(06:59):
and it happens, if we can get through this current situation,
he will be the disclosure president. Everything is set for
him to do it. All he has to do is
walk out in the East Wing and say it. There's
a number of ways to go about that, but the
outcome is the same, but it's not like the current
president has done a great deal to make this happen.
(07:21):
That's all right, because the presidents have a lot to do.
It will be because he will be the president when
the music stops. And here's where things get interesting, because
there are still significant entities within the military intelligence complex
and possibly in the political arena. They are not ready
for that music to stop. They just cannot imagine or
(07:44):
will he accept this event to take place, for various reasons,
some national security, some concern about embarrassment because they're going
to have to answer some brutal questions, and so forth.
They're just not ready, and so over the years you
see these attempts to push back. There have been a
few since the Endgame began in twenty seventeen. By and
(08:08):
large they sort of work. But in the modern era
of internet and social media and so forth, and podcast
and everything that we are now used to you can
push back, but everybody's going to know exactly what you're doing.
It's going to be transparent, and so that makes it
even more difficult, which brings us to now. We were
(08:29):
making tremendous progress and then there was a dramatic change
that happened relatively over pair to two years, but kind
of culminated with the Wall Street Journal article of June sixth,
though it took a while to sort of assess that.
And the best explanation I can have for this is
(08:52):
that a lot of good people in our government that
would very much like to see disclosure are also profoundly
concerned about the fact that in the last number of years,
dramatic events are taking place within the United States, which
is literally tearing the country apart, and extraordinarily new dangerous
(09:17):
developments have occurred overseas, which, while there have been precedents
to this, there's a quality about these events which are
far more frightening, far more unpredictable, and they just keep
coming one after another after another. And so while the
article came out in the Wall Street Journal on January sixth,
(09:40):
June sixth, we'll talk about what else has happened. There
is now a war between Israel and Iran.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Yeah, the world changed just a few days ago. Again
completely when that happened, it's like now we're in a
totally different existence.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
It seems like we're in a totally different existence. But
every three days, well that's true too. Some people think, well,
they're doing some bombing and aronspiring some missiles, but it's
not a war. The hell it isn't. This is a
full out war, the implications of which could be profound
and catastrophic. Right, and then there is still a war
going on in the Ukraine which is not resolved. Millions
(10:20):
of people have been killed or innocent, and the potential
I'm killed or are injured, forgive me, and the potential
for the use of nukes is high, very high. This
is It's hard to find something quite like this. Why
because the various entities involved have such a complex interaction
(10:41):
with the rest of civilization and other nations. What am
I referring to? All Right? First of all, the war
that is now going on between Israel and Iran is
in some sense a war between the western non Islamic
countries and the entire Islamic world. And because of past
(11:02):
events and so forth, that world is filled with various
terrorist groups who are very angry and very determined that
what has happened to them is going to be accounted for.
I'm not assigning good, bad, right wrong here, I'm simply
saying that is the case. And while we've gone through
(11:24):
the episodes before when there have been how would you say,
conflicts that have led to terrorist reactions. We haven't gone
through something like this in a very long time, going
back many decades, and that terrort situation then was a
fraction of what it is now. And so I expect
an explosion of terrorism across multiple fronts with the risk
(11:45):
of a popular possible use of a nuke, because the
idea of loose nukes is not a fantasy. And the
idea that we've encounted for every single nuke of the
eighty six thousand plus others that have been built.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Season is there that many out there?
Speaker 3 (11:58):
There were six eighties. We managed to pair that down
from eighty six thousand to about twenty five thousand, and
supposedly the seventy one thousand we got rid of whatever
have all been taken care of. And that's fine. But
the technology to be smaller and smaller nukes and tactical
shells has grown since then. And so there is an
illusion that is maintained by countries for obvious reasons you
(12:22):
don't want everybody scared to death, is that all nukes
are accounted for, don't wear none are in the wrong hands.
And that is absolutely nonsense. And so the use of
a terrorist nuke, a non state operator nuke is very
high now because the incentive these groups has just been exploded.
And I'm talking about the war in Iran. I'm also
(12:44):
talking the situation with respect Israel and Gaza. Looked at,
even from a neutral standpoint, without getting into partisan politics
or anything else, this is massive bloodshed. It's going to
make very numbers of people angry. And at the same
time you have the issue in Ukraine. Nuke's come into
play in any time. Two of the people involved in
these two wars, two of the entities are nuclear. Meanwhile,
(13:07):
in the Pacific, while all of this chaos is going on,
all of this disruption just absorbing the intention of Europe
and the United States, Russia, China is sitting there looking
at Taiwan, going when do we want to take it?
Why not? Now? What's going to happen? The risk of
nuclear events in that case. So we are in a
(13:28):
really dangerous situation. And I believe that people in the
government has said, look, we got to push backy. It's
going to look stupid, it's going to be obvious. The
internet will savage us. But we've got to push back
because we can't deal with that and try to avoid
the calamities and all of this awful behavior which has
been going on for well thousands of years. That's certainly
(13:50):
the modern era from nineteen oh one forward, I mean, yeah,
nineteen oh one forward has been rather profound, or rather,
you know, substantial in the amount of war, the amount
of destruction, the amount of slaughter that we have conducted,
casting tens, if not one hundreds of trallions of dollars,
and we keep doing it. And so they're going, my god,
let's push back.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
And is there part of you, Steven as you as
you look at this instead of thinking of pushback, is
there part of you that, if you're in that entity
of government that you're like, well, why don't we why
don't we do some disclosure, because that'll be become like
Lindberg baby headlines and now we can take the heat off.
The other thing. You use it as a distraction. Almost there,
almost Okay. So that's where you're going with this, is
(14:33):
that when it comes out, it's it's a it's a
don't look over here, look over there.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
The old the no, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
The prestige is that what's happening.
Speaker 3 (14:41):
No, no, no, no, no, no, it's it's much more
complicated than that. I'm having a lot of trouble. I
mean the last I think eighteen months. I mean literally
I'm keeping I'm trying to keep it together. But it
has been absolutely brutal. Because I I'm a political activist.
I just happened to be regular lobbyists. I'm a political
(15:01):
activist activists, and the disclosure issue isn't one of the
focus of my activism. But it's not like I'm not
aware of everything else that's going on. And in the
thirty years I've been involved in this, I finally understood
that the et presence and the modern era and what's
been happening in the last couple of decades, certainly, but
(15:23):
maybe even going about more than that, maybe going back
fifty years, is connected. In other words, there's a connection
with the extraterstrial presence, their activities, what they're doing, what
they're saying, and other things, and the slow decline of
the modern world into chaos and possibly another catastrophic period.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Listen to more Coast to Coast AM every weeknight at
oneam Eastern, and go to Coast to coastam dot com
for more
The Best of Coast to Coast AM News
Host
George Noory
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.