Congressman Eric Burlison on UAPs, Disclosure, and Humanity’s Cosmic Future

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
Good evening and welcome to a special live edition of
Total Disclosure. My NAME'SI, and tonight we're joined by a
sitting US Congressman who has been at the forefront of
one of the most pressing and controversial topics in modern
American politics UFOs, national security, and the long road to disclosure.

(00:35):
At a time when the public is demanding answers in
Congress is being met with resistance from within its own government,
we ask why the silence. Joining me tonight is Representative
Eric Burlson of Missouri, a member of the House Oversight
and Accountability Committee and someone who is unafraid to speak
plainly about the stakes involved, from the implications of UAP's

(00:59):
Nears nuclear facilities to a UAP disclosure acts vanishing teeth. Tonight,
we're going to get into it at all. This isn't
about little green men. This is about transparency, security, and
the uncomfortable truth that something is happening and the people
deserve to know. Congressman Burlison, thank you for being here.

(01:29):
So let's let's dive right in. My friend. It's so
good to have you back.

Speaker 2 (01:34):
Good to be back. I.

Speaker 1 (01:36):
You have been on quite the quite the tour lately,
I must say, and it's been I don't know whether
it's refreshing or if it's you know, a little bit scary.
How much you've been doing. I kind of want to
just jump right into it. I heard, and there's a

(01:59):
reason I'm charting with this. I heard through the grape
vine that you recently had a UFO experience.

Speaker 2 (02:08):
That's not true.

Speaker 1 (02:09):
That's not true.

Speaker 3 (02:11):
No, that's not true. You know, I wish that I had,
and then I could kind of find some definitive into
this search. But no, that's not that's the Internet. That's
somebody posting something in social media jumping to a conclusion
that's not true.

Speaker 1 (02:30):
Really, I am. I wonder why I brought this up first.
I wonder why so so yeah, I mean I saw
that you recently sat down with like people like Chris Bledsoe.
You've been, you've been, Uh, you went down and saw
the Nasca mummies with doctor Greer all that stuff. I mean,

(02:53):
did you guys do any skywatches or anything like that
and get into it, because I know Chris loves that stuff.

Speaker 2 (03:00):
So I'll tell you the story. So I didn't know Chris.

Speaker 3 (03:05):
Some other people reached out and said that he was
in town that evening and I that was on a Thursday,
I believe last Thursday. And and I said, yeah, if
you if you guys are free for dinner, we'll go
have dinner. I bought everybody's dinner then. And then at
the end of they just you know, Chris shared his story.

(03:26):
I just point blank said, hey, if I go, where,
where do you Because he said that he.

Speaker 2 (03:32):
Can call in u a P.

Speaker 3 (03:34):
I said where, like what locations the desert, over ponds
or lakes or you know, can you do it in
a city? He basically said anywhere and everywhere. And I said,
let's do it tonight. And he took me up on it.
So we went out literally to the Capitol mall and
he attempted to do it. And I mean, I don't

(03:57):
even I couldn't even tell you what he was doing.
He's just like, it's nothing different. He didn't act like
a different person or anything. It's not like you're going
to do a trance or anything. But and about you know,
there's at some point, after after being there for quite
some time, I said, all right, I'm ready to go
to bed. And so nothing, nothing had.

Speaker 1 (04:20):
Happened, I know, And and let's I just want to
make it clear that I had done my research and
I had known that to be the case, but I
brought it up for a reason, Uh, not to diminish Chris.
I love Chris. I introduced him at Contact in the Desert.
He did a SkyWatch there where people said they saw things,

(04:41):
some others said they didn't. So it's it's it's I
think it's kind of hit or mints. And I feel
like since we've had our last talk, you've been exposed
to so many more people in the community, and you're
starting to kind of kind of see where things go.

Speaker 2 (04:59):
Right. Yeah, you're You're right, tyy.

Speaker 3 (05:01):
When I first came into this, there's so many names
and groups and people that I just I was like
drinking from a fire hose. Now I've gotten to get
a little bit of a flavor and understanding of all
the players and the and the you know, the more
that I'm delving into this, the more that you can
kind of figure things out.

Speaker 1 (05:20):
Right. Uh, So I want to start, uh like legitimately start.
I was just kind of playing with you to open
it up banter, but listen, big news obviously, Uh, you
had said I think you would come out of us
a skiff, and you had said that, Uh, the next

(05:42):
hearings that are going to be now held in September,
I think is the date that we're eyeing firsthand witnesses.
Can you speak a little bit about that and the
process of going from witnesses like Ryan Graves David g
h to potential firsthand witnesses and who they may be.

Speaker 3 (06:05):
I'm not going to disclose who they may be, but
and I believe that that Anna Polina Luna is the.

Speaker 2 (06:11):
One that that disclosed that.

Speaker 3 (06:14):
But my my team is responsible for trying to get
those witnesses. We made it clear from meetings with you know,
with her and with the Oversight task Force, that we
that was our goal was to try to get firsthand witnesses.
We're and so the next hearing that's is to attempt

(06:34):
to do that.

Speaker 1 (06:37):
And how is there any been any challenges? Because it
sounds like the reason the hearings were delayed in the
first place is because people walking out coming in back.

Speaker 2 (06:52):
That's right. We keep having people that.

Speaker 3 (06:56):
Claim to have you know, and I'm sure I don't
I'm not doubting their stories, but but then when we
get them to we can't get a lot of people
to agree to come in even do a public hearing. Ironically,
some of the people that we've talked to said that
they're done talking in a skiff, that they won't.

Speaker 2 (07:17):
Go back and do a skiff, that they only want
to do a public hearing.

Speaker 3 (07:21):
And yet when we ask them to come to the
public hearing, they won't come to the public hearing.

Speaker 2 (07:25):
And so it's it is extremely frustrating.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
That's going to be bizarre, right because you know it
and again it raises that same question like, hey, that
that seems really sketchy, like and you know, it seems
like a lot of these people are seemingly all talk,
no game. They won't they won't, they won't get in

(07:49):
front of you guys in an open hearing.

Speaker 3 (07:52):
Yeah, I'm going to give them, give them a chance.
And but we'll see.

Speaker 2 (07:57):
I think that.

Speaker 3 (08:00):
David reached out to him full of people, So there's
gonna be some we will have witnesses. There's there's a
couple of witnesses that I was really wanting. We're having
a hard time getting those two.

Speaker 1 (08:15):
Yeah, and and and if I can just throw some
names at you real quick, like I would think about
and this is just me spitballing. Of course you don't.
You don't have to, you know, hear it, if you don't.

Speaker 2 (08:25):
Want to, if I can keep my poker face, yeah.

Speaker 1 (08:28):
Keep your poker face on if you if you must.
But guys like doctor Lakatski, I'd be eyeing someone like him,
I'd be eyeing uh Eric Davis, I'd be uh Tom
Admiral Wilson, Uh, Gary Nolan Uh. And you know, a

(08:49):
real big thing I've been focusing on lately is I'll
probably start looking at some of the nuclear witnesses because
they're getting up there in age, and you know, they
I think they have a lot to say, and I
wanted to start, well, not to start, but continue the
conversation with that that connection, the nuclear connection. Have you

(09:11):
been looking into that connection and some of these cases
that have been around for quite a while.

Speaker 3 (09:18):
Yeah, it does appear that there's more activity, or at
least more reportings near nuclear facilities.

Speaker 2 (09:26):
Now.

Speaker 3 (09:26):
That may be because there's a lot of eyes on
this guy in there, right, So there's a.

Speaker 1 (09:30):
Lot of.

Speaker 3 (09:32):
Security, there's a lot of cameras that are looking for
things and people. Obviously it's not like I mean, more
and more people spend time indoors at night. They don't
spend out time outside time outside looking up into the stars.

Speaker 2 (09:50):
But I think it.

Speaker 3 (09:52):
Appears that I mean, and it may be a correlation
that there is more activity at nuclear site, or it
just may be just a coincidence and the fact that
more more eyeballs are looking up.

Speaker 2 (10:09):
There's also a.

Speaker 3 (10:10):
Lot more activity, it seems, over water, m from anything
from like a cow pond or like a like a
small pond to the ocean obviously, so it does appear
that there's a lot of reported activity above water.

Speaker 1 (10:26):
I would agree. I would agree both of those of
our two of the connection. That's the biggest thing for
me is us like the USOS and the nuclear connection,
because I think there are those are among the two
most solid connections and like dots that we can cross, right,
and it just seems that there's something going on there.

(10:49):
And if we took it a little bit more serious
and you know, didn't stigmatize the people that because one
of the problems is people don't want to come forward
because they really don't want to get scrutinized, and like
what would happened with Grush, they're pulling out his uh,
his records is is calling him, you know, a looney uhh,

(11:10):
a crazy person just because you know, PTSD from from
being in a war and seeing his best friend die,
Like that's crazy.

Speaker 2 (11:19):
Mm hmmm. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (11:20):
Again, it's it's sad that they have to start coming
forward means that people are going to come through your
or try to get access to your medical records just
to disprove you. That's that's that's really a unsettling thing
and kind of puts a chill, chilling effect on anybody
that might consider coming forward.

Speaker 1 (11:40):
Yeah, and you actually hinted, you hinted in our last
conversation that hiring Grush might have been a way kind
of around this little obstacle course that you were you
were running. You've since done that, So how did that work?
And and is he able to now enter skiffs with you?

(12:02):
And like what's the level of clearance there.

Speaker 3 (12:05):
Yeah, we're still trying to get his clearance to increase
to the TSSCI level. He's not he's not able to
come into a lot of the briefings. He's able to
come in at a certain level, but not very much,
very high, not the levels that we need. So that's
a lot of paperwork and we need. We need, you know,

(12:27):
the proper agencies to approve that. We're still waiting on that,
but I would say that in general, he's been extremely
extremely valuable to myself to be to giving me the proper,
you know, places to go. He's been very helpful and
kind of reaching out to people, kind of tracking down,

(12:50):
you know, whatever things that we need to do.

Speaker 2 (12:53):
It's been it's been.

Speaker 3 (12:55):
Very worthwhile, absolutely worthwhile, and and so I'm it was
one of the best decisions that I've made.

Speaker 1 (13:02):
I think, so I really do. And I was super
happy to hear that you that you had done that
and and taken that step because again, you know, a
lot of com and I don't want to I'm not
disparaging any members of Congress, but I think there's a
lot of talk, but there's not a lot of like
backing it up when and you seem to just be

(13:24):
like your word is what we can take you on.
And you're always very honest and open. And that's what
I really like about you and why I why I
like conversing with you because you're always honest and I
really do appreciate that.

Speaker 3 (13:38):
So I mean, yeah, well, this this topic is fascinating.
Look and I'm still at a place where I'm I'm
a skeptic and and trying to approach this from a
from a skeptics perspective a lot. So so far, what
I can tell you is I've only had secondhand accounts

(13:59):
told me I've never seen anything.

Speaker 2 (14:01):
Personally. I've seen a lot of.

Speaker 3 (14:03):
Fuzzy, blurry photos and videos of objects. Nothing that just
absolutely is groundbreakingly clear and and and and overwhelming to me.
So a lot of blurry photos, a lot of a
lot of blurry videos. Yeah, second hand information I have

(14:26):
as you as you referred, I went down to try
to see firsthand because I was offered an opportunity to
see firsthand the Booga sphere and the and the mummies.

Speaker 1 (14:37):
How was that?

Speaker 2 (14:38):
That was a that was a trip?

Speaker 1 (14:40):
It was Yeah, since you brought it up, I wasn't
really gonna go here too too soon. But what prompted
that trip? How do you end up there doing that
with like guys like doctor Greer And I got to
ask if you've I mean follow up question as well.

Speaker 3 (15:03):
Yeah, So there was an individual who was connected to
me through a mutual friend. He was going down to
film this. Uh, these you know scientists that are connected
to NASA. They do work for NASA. They were contracted
to go and take samples and this documentary crew is

(15:25):
going to film that. They they said, invited me to come.

Speaker 2 (15:29):
I had to. Obviously it was my own expenses. I couldn't.

Speaker 3 (15:32):
I can't accept any of that. So went down there
and yeah, Matt Jimi Masson, who is a wonderful individual,
very very kind, very sweet person, very funny, and doctor
Greer was there as well, and so we I took

(15:54):
with me one of my good friends, Tim Albarino, who
wrote the book called Birthright, Yes, who studies this phenomenon
and and is really kind of more like he comes
from an archaeological perspective, like an He really kind of
studies like.

Speaker 2 (16:11):
The ancient alien.

Speaker 3 (16:12):
Yeah, but he is conversive with the Spanish culture.

Speaker 2 (16:18):
He lived in Peru for for a.

Speaker 3 (16:21):
Long time and you know, and and did a lot
of work in Peru, so he knows those the culture
there and those the origin of those of what those
mummies are. So having him be there was was actually
extremely valuable and helpful.

Speaker 1 (16:39):
So what is your take on So what did you think, like,
not maybe maybe we could start with the bugisphere, but
the mummies are the what actually kind of piqued my interest,
and in a good way. I really do think there's
there might be it's either the most elaborate, expensive hoax

(17:00):
ever or it's legitimate. But with the Buga spear, that's
I don't know what I'm waiting.

Speaker 3 (17:08):
To hear back from what those scientists come up with
or what what their results are.

Speaker 2 (17:15):
But I would say, just if you asked.

Speaker 3 (17:17):
Me, without having any kind of in any results to
verify it, I would say it did not impress upon
me that that was that the spear was created by
some like ultra advanced civilization. Yeah, it looks it's very interesting.
It's it's got yeah, I mean it's it's got a

(17:40):
lot of interesting markings on it. The markings themselves do
not appear to be symmetrical, and so it seems it
just it seems handmade. And so if you so, that's
that's my view of the spear.

Speaker 2 (17:57):
I do.

Speaker 3 (17:58):
I mean that the individuals that found it, I got
to meet them. They're from Columbia, and they told their story.
There's another gentleman who had filmed a after this the Buga.

Speaker 2 (18:12):
Sphere had been found.

Speaker 3 (18:13):
There was another gentleman that filmed another sphere right, very similar,
about thirty miles away in a different region.

Speaker 2 (18:22):
And so it's.

Speaker 3 (18:25):
They have interesting compelling stories. I just I'm saying, if
you just if you look, just look at this for
what it is at this point in time, I wouldn't.
I don't believe that it's convincing me that it is
made by an alien. It's so it's so rudimentary that
I said, look, if it, I'm willing to and and

(18:47):
doctor Greer and others kind of had this conclusion as well,
is that it we're gonna we want to carbon date
the thing because if it is, if it's very ancient,
then and it's then there's a different story there, right,
So it could be that it was you know, that
it's been laying dormant for for thousands of years, or

(19:12):
what they're also testing on it is to see if
it's the the metal originates from planet Earth, so they
they're able to determine whether that metal was originating here
or on you know, on a different planet. And so
that will be fascinating if if those those come back
with those.

Speaker 1 (19:32):
Yeah, I agree, but I, like you, I was very
very skeptical of it because I feel like when I
looked at it, I was looking at the black like
circles on it, and they looked like they were like
a sharpie. But that was just my observation. I don't
you got to see it a little bit more close up.

Speaker 3 (19:49):
No, I can say that there there's actually something there there.
They are their holes in in this little ridge that
goes around the all the way around. They are holes
and they're kind of plugged with what, when you look
under a microscope, appears to be.

Speaker 2 (20:08):
What they call fiber optics.

Speaker 3 (20:11):
Okay, and so they are that it is solid and
it's dark, but when you look at it under a
microscope you can see that there are even within one
hole that there are dozens, if not, you know, more
of these little bitty dots that are in a circular form.

Speaker 1 (20:31):
Okay, So I mean kind of interesting. And even if
we found out that it was like some Lockeed, you know,
because obviously I want to get to that in a
few about arrow and all everything that's been coming out.
But even if we found out that it was some
like craft drone design out of North of gram and

(20:53):
or Lockeed, like, that's still pretty I mean, look at that,
it's a sphere. Spheres don't don't usually lift off and
take take flight, So I mean it would be interesting
pretty regard regardless if it was human or not of
this earth, if you will. But pushing over to what
I think is more interesting, the Nasca mummies. What did

(21:15):
you think of those?

Speaker 3 (21:17):
Yeah, the mummies that we saw firsthand were fairly small,
and and I've heard from a lot of people that
the ones that are small are not there.

Speaker 2 (21:27):
They're replicas.

Speaker 3 (21:28):
They're not real, And just looking at them at first glance,
they look so rigid, so almost they look like like
I'm trying to like the I Joe that doesn't even
have like elbows, right, have movable movable parts, it looks

(21:52):
and so it just is hard to imagine these things
living and operating at all. There's now what I've been told.
And they did show us some of the scanned and
CT scans of the larger mummies that are in Peru.

Speaker 1 (22:11):
Mmmm.

Speaker 3 (22:11):
And I'm and I'm gonna make it clear, I'm not
saying that I believe this, but there are many that
that doubted the little mummies that but that, but do
believe that the larger ones are real because because of
the intricacy of those. I was frustrated that I wasn't
able to see those. I guess I'm gonna have to
go to Peru.

Speaker 2 (22:32):
If I want to see those.

Speaker 1 (22:33):
Yeah, And and then there's like prouvying. Government's pretty weird
about that whole thing. So that could be challenging as
a sitting member of Congress to do, you know, And
that's and that sucks, but it's okay. You've speculated that
uh UAPs could be very ancient h or even a

(22:55):
future race of us using advanced technology to traverse space time.
A lot of these possibilities challenge our understanding of humanity's
placed in the universe and what existential questions do they
raise for you personally?

Speaker 3 (23:13):
Yeah, I think what has been consistent and kind of
this what is you know, commonly talked about is that
these what we're experiencing is not is not is not
a being that's traveling here great distances across space time
to get here.

Speaker 2 (23:34):
If anything, it's it would appear that.

Speaker 3 (23:36):
They have access to be able to bypass that through
either warping space or they just exist in a different dimension.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
And so that's that's consistently what I'm hearing more and
more from from people that are describing the phenomenon, and so.

Speaker 3 (23:55):
It's you know, look, and I would say if you,
if you had to put it on a scale of
what is plausible. That's why from the very first hearing
I said, I really highly doubt that that little greed
men are traveling light years, which would take an enormous

(24:15):
amount of time and probably multiple generations of any form
of life to get here, and then repeatedly come here
and crash.

Speaker 2 (24:24):
It doesn't that's just implausible.

Speaker 3 (24:27):
But if you're telling me they don't have to travel here,
they can just phase in from from their existence, and
to them there is no such thing as distance. It
just they can just they can pop in and out.
That's a different story. And I do believe that that
there are more dimensions than this, and I think that

(24:49):
I think quantum physics, particularly when it comes to quantum entanglement,
I think that that demonstrates that there absolutely is more
to the existence than what we're you and I are
living on today. And I say that because the fact
that you can have two entangled particles, you can send
one particle to the other end of the universe, and

(25:12):
then when you when you measure one the other one
changes instantaneously. There's nothing that traveled between them. There's nothing
that that that you know, made a journey through space
time to be able to make that communication. And so
that that to me tells me that we are living

(25:32):
on one dimension of our a dimension that is where
there's more than what, more than what meets the eye.

Speaker 1 (25:41):
Yeah, I was just so in the studio yesterday, I
had a gentleman. His name's Rizwan Verk and uh, you know,
he's an m I. T Graduate and him and I
were speaking about the same thing, the idea that the
distance it would take from you know, because the main
hypothesis for you know, the past fifty sixty years is

(26:04):
the extraterrestrial hypothesis. But you know, if we are potentially
living in some sort of simulation, it would explain not
only things like deja vu or the Mandela effect, but
it would also explain a lot of a lot of
this UFO activity or the phenomena, because it could be

(26:28):
the simulators or even part of the simulation, you know,
kind of dropping like and maybe explain some of the crashes,
you know.

Speaker 3 (26:38):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (26:38):
Diana Posoka her her contact at NASA, Tim Taylor. He
spoke about UFO crashes as gifts, and she always questioned
that gifts, what do you mean by gifts? And what
if they are care packages from the simulator or God

(26:59):
or whatever, the sky beings, whatever you want to call them,
and it's meant to nudge us in a certain way.
I mean, do you ever think about things like this?

Speaker 3 (27:12):
Not I don't often go in that direction, but I
do love This is not the first time someone has
brought this up to me, as is proposed.

Speaker 1 (27:20):
To I don't. I really, I'm with you on the
whole crash thing, Like either we've built weaponry that's bringing
them down, which I think is highly unlikely but possible,
versus this might be some sort of simulation and they're
potentially you know, guiding and running like advanced scenarios for

(27:47):
future outcomes. I mean, we do it right now.

Speaker 2 (27:52):
Yeah, it very well could be.

Speaker 3 (27:54):
It could be that there's a the way that, for example,
that we treat them any other animal on this planet.
We kind of there's moments where we kind of intervene
to make sure that like an endangered species is saved,
or like a beached whale is saved. And I'm sure
that to the whale, the experience of having humans interact

(28:17):
with it is has got on land, has got to
be extremely foreign.

Speaker 1 (28:21):
Yeah, and then he gets dropped back into the oce. Sorry,
cut you off, Ah, got it. I'm so sorry. It's
I'm getting more used to the in person episodes and
the latency here is as people always gonna yell at me.
But yeah, imagine the whale goes back to his whale
buddies and he's like, dude, you're never gonna fucking You're

(28:42):
never gonna guess what I happened to me today. I
got pulled out of the water by these things with
arms and they gueld you know, they're walking, They you know, puts,
you know, injected me with something, then dropped me back
into the ocean. And now I'm here telling you that
would sound crazy to the other whales, but it's reality.

(29:03):
It's it's reality, right, so.

Speaker 2 (29:06):
Right, you know, it just seems like that's that's one
of the narratives, is that that these.

Speaker 3 (29:15):
These higher dimensional beings, if you will, that they're more
like a caretaker looking after us and and making sure.
But I mean, that's just that's one of the narratives.

Speaker 1 (29:26):
That's it's very much speculation as all of this usually
is so going back to Arrow and and I mean
some reporting that that came out recently that this, this
whole phenomena is essentially boils down to UH an air

(29:52):
Force hazing ritual or like a program. I'm sure you
at the Wall Street Journal articles the whole thing being
tied back to some Air Force hazing ritual for UH
special access programs and UH it's it's all like some
sort of sigh up, Uh what what?

Speaker 2 (30:13):
What?

Speaker 1 (30:14):
What was your take on that? And and what should
the public think about this journalism?

Speaker 3 (30:21):
You know, it was I've had a lot of people
that are very angry that are from the u AP
community that are very angry at that. They there's a
lot of doubt about Sean Kirkpatrick and and and the
team of Arrow that was that he was leading.

Speaker 2 (30:41):
Tim Phillips, I think is a personally. I think that
he is an honest as he can.

Speaker 3 (30:49):
And I would say my experience with Sean Kirkpatrick and
with Tim Phillips is that they I think that they
they looked and they looked at thousands of cases, and
every time it came up something that they could debunk,
and eventually they just kind of get black, they got
black pilled.

Speaker 2 (31:09):
That's to me the but the question.

Speaker 3 (31:11):
But the other question you have to ask yourself is
how many thousands of times are you gonna are we
all gonna like look at this and if we come
to dead ends at well some point you got to
cut bait and say it's not gonna happen. It's not
and and and come to the conclusion is probably not
a real phenomenon. And so I can I can somewhat

(31:32):
relate because I'll tell you it's been two years that
I've been looking into this and coming into dead end
after dead end after dead end.

Speaker 2 (31:40):
Well cut, go ahead.

Speaker 1 (31:43):
Yeah, Well that brings me to one of the viewers
questions or the listener questions that I got. And I
guess I'll just ask it and I'll plug it in
now because I mean, it makes it makes a lot
of sense. And to what you just said, let me
just pull it up real quick. It's people are gonna
be interested with why I chose this one. It's from
Stephen Cambion, who him and I've we see him and

(32:06):
I very very much are are on the opposite ends
of the spectrum. Okay, And and and when you ask,
he's highly highly skeptical. He thinks everyone is grifting. He's
he's one of those guys. Now, now, no.

Speaker 2 (32:23):
Shade, there's definitely some grifting.

Speaker 1 (32:25):
There's, of course there is. I mean, I I would
I I agree with him. I just don't think everything
it seems like for him. I don't want to make
this never mind. I won't even go there. We're just
we're different people. Let's put it that.

Speaker 3 (32:47):
I would say, definitely, there's some people that are grifting,
but there's many others that are genuine. Their worldview has
been rocked and they just and they're motivated by that.

Speaker 1 (32:59):
And so, yeah, I don't think it's I don't think
it's healthy to start from a believer's perspective and work
your narrative to fit that. And the same way, it's
not to start off as it's not possible and work
your narrative to that, because you're starting from a biased
perspective either way. And you know, again, we need to

(33:21):
remain neutral. And he so he asks, does Eric have
any comments on how these efforts to disclose could be
seen as a waste of taxpayers money if there ends
up no payoff from Stephen Canyon?

Speaker 2 (33:37):
Yeah, so then so to.

Speaker 3 (33:39):
My response to that is they're already spending taxpayer dollars.
There are programs including ARROW, and there have been these
legacy programs for quite some time, and they are you know,
one of the narratives is that that was from the
Wall Street Journal article, is that this was a disinformation

(33:59):
campaign to try to try to, you know, smoke people
or to point people away from the true projects that
are happening. And if that's the case, that I want
to know that I think that it's it's disheartening. It
would be disheartening to find out that the federal government
is not only just holding information and lying to the

(34:20):
American people, but they're actually creating a false narrative that
causes the American people to go down this rabbit trail
and spend time, money, resources. And so at the end
of the day, it's happening, and I'm just trying to
get down to the bottom of.

Speaker 2 (34:35):
Why it's happening.

Speaker 1 (34:47):
Oh I was just muted. I don't know why. So yeah,
making so, if it's going to be spent, might as
well make sure it's spent the right way to some degree,
or at.

Speaker 2 (34:57):
Least get the truth out right.

Speaker 3 (34:59):
Right, Congress should have some kind of role in this
elected somebody who's elected and accountable to the people should
have some some form of role and complete insight on this.

Speaker 1 (35:13):
I agree, I absolutely agree. And and uh so Daniel
Miller asks, after after you met with the i C,
I g uh, you said some aspects of Russia's claims
were true. Can you elaborate on what claims specifically?

Speaker 2 (35:31):
Yeah? Yeah, yeah, so they that that was an interesting meeting.
They base.

Speaker 3 (35:36):
They basically said that they can't they don't have enough information.
They weren't able to get into the details of what
these programs were or were not doing. But what they
were able to investigate because they're mostly financially they're investigating
the finances, is that the programs are not following the law,
that they're not reporting to Congress, that the programs are

(36:00):
overly compartmentalized.

Speaker 2 (36:01):
They're not, they're not even you know.

Speaker 3 (36:04):
They said that they the Office of Inspector General had
a hard time getting these programs to even respond to them.
That's not acceptable and so and so they they confirmed
because you know, of the Grussia's allegations, those were some
So those were consistent.

Speaker 2 (36:25):
With what he was saying.

Speaker 1 (36:28):
Yeah, yeah, so what what role does the I C.
I G. Still have in all this if if any.

Speaker 2 (36:36):
You know, they're mostly looking at any kind.

Speaker 1 (36:38):
Of is that the financial aspect?

Speaker 2 (36:40):
Right, the financial aspects.

Speaker 1 (36:43):
Because that that's that that brings up a really good
uh maybe not good segue. I don't know, but a
lot of people, I mean, you've heard the auto before
is follow the money, follow the money, follow the money.
And you know, the Pentagon is never passed an audit,

(37:03):
and it seems pretty odd where like you know, the
speech I think Rumsfield Rumsfield gave a couple of days
before nine to eleven, you know, two point three trillion
dollars is missing tea with like trillions of the tea.
And then after nine to eleven they come out and
they say, oh no, just kidding, books are balanced. We
figured it all out. And it's like, well, uh, you know,

(37:27):
something doesn't add up here. So what I'm asking is,
I mean, you you you've pretty much confirmed in other
interviews that you do believe the deep state is a
real thing. Is that is that accurate?

Speaker 2 (37:44):
Oh? Absolutely? I mean.

Speaker 3 (37:49):
And there's some alligators. You know, it's a swamp and
there's some alligators and other things that are in there,
and so it gets it gets very prickly. When you
try to try to delve deep into some of this stuff,
you definitely get some pushback.

Speaker 2 (38:05):
But the at the end of the day, that's what
our job is.

Speaker 1 (38:11):
M Well, do I mean, do you think it is
possible that the Bunny's being i mean siphoned off essentially
and funneled into black programs? Maybe? I mean recently, I
know Jeremy Corbel and George I don't know what they're
standing is in Congress anymore after the last hearing, but

(38:34):
the Immaculate Constellation whistleblower, he could I don't know if
he would be good to bring in. But did you
did you look at that? Have you? Have you heard
and looked into this?

Speaker 2 (38:46):
Yeah, I've had conversations with Matt Brown.

Speaker 3 (38:48):
He's he seems to be you know, he's his experience,
seems to be honest, he's coming. I believe that he's
being completely honest and transparent. He's he's takes he's taking
this very seriously. And you're right, he would make a
great witness.

Speaker 1 (39:08):
I agree. I agree. So I guess look, question, well, I'm.

Speaker 3 (39:16):
Willing to regarding the question, what is Congress's role working
with people. How are we working with corgo with NAP.
You know, there's you know, what's interesting about this community
is that there are turf battles between these different groups
and they don't like many of them don't like each other,

(39:37):
many of them don't get along, and and they all
kind of want to be the center of it. And
the truth is, I don't really care. I'm just trying
to get to the truth. So I'm I will work
with whomever I think is going to be effective it
and and and you know, can bring forward some helpful
information or help or connect me to other people. And

(40:01):
so I'm not I'm not here to judge the people
that I'm working that that.

Speaker 2 (40:05):
Are willing to do that. I'm just.

Speaker 3 (40:09):
So I'm willing to What I'm saying is I don't
I'm not going to pick a camp. I'm not like
Team Edmund what is that? What is that movie the Twilet?
You know, I'm not I'm.

Speaker 1 (40:20):
Not Team was Pattinson and Taylor Water's characters.

Speaker 2 (40:26):
Yeah, or like Hogwarts versus. Yeah, I'm not.

Speaker 3 (40:30):
I'm not here to try to do that. I'm just
trying to navigate. And frankly, I think that having these
groups separate does is actually beneficial to the topic as
as a whole, because they're different perspectives on the same topic.
You're you're able to get, you know, three dimensional view

(40:51):
of what's going on.

Speaker 1 (40:52):
Yeah, And honestly, it's actually kind of refreshing to hear
you say that that, because that's I mean, that's essentially
what I like I as a podcaster, as a journalist,
you know, you hear everybody out and you take the
information that you think, uh, you know, is is genuine,

(41:16):
you know, because I think humans are are they're naturally
if they're telling you a story, it's going to be
the best version of that story, even if it's just
going to the convenience store. You know, I almost got
hit taken a you know, taken the right turn. And
we always want to tell the best story. And and
I think that's that's kind of what happens in the

(41:36):
UFO community is everyone everyone thinks they have the secret
to the sauce, right, that's right, and and and in reality,
if we had stepped back and worked as a team,
like there's nothing that a united humanity couldn't accomplish. And
I think this plays out on the geopolitical scale as well.

Speaker 3 (41:59):
Yeah, and we we're looking at working with other countries.
So the first country that I've been connected with is Japan.
And so we're right, you're getting a puzzled look. But yeah,
Japan is looking at creating a version in their in
their country. That's kind of like aero to study the phenomenon.

(42:22):
And I've had at least on two occasions been on
zoom calls with with with with Japanese political leaders.

Speaker 1 (42:31):
Just amazing. Yeah, that's really that's that's really cool.

Speaker 2 (42:36):
I didn't know.

Speaker 1 (42:36):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (42:37):
If I and I get to try out my Japanese speaking.

Speaker 3 (42:40):
Ability, you can speak Japanese, Yeah, chumas just just a
little bit, just.

Speaker 1 (42:47):
A little bit. Well that's not I mean, that's awesome.
And and I think that. I mean I didn't Oh shoot,
I forget, didn't the UK come out and say they're
going to finally have hearings as well? Am I'm making
that up?

Speaker 2 (43:02):
If it happened.

Speaker 3 (43:03):
Look, there's a lot that's that is hit hits the
you know that you guys are saying, but there's also
sometimes not everything comes to my to my visibility.

Speaker 1 (43:15):
Right right, and and yeah, no, that makes it does
it really does make sense but I think I think
I'm I think I'm not making that up. I'm pretty
sure that one of our allies, i think it's the UK,
finally said that they were going to hold some hearings and.

Speaker 3 (43:31):
Yeah, that would be good. I'd be happy to reach out.
I'll take note of that and I'll have my team
reach out.

Speaker 1 (43:36):
Yeah, let me let me maybe the chat can fact
check me here. But I I know, I just heard
it somewhere. And speaking of that, I'm you know, I'm
pretty good friends and and pretty uh, I don't know,
I'm okay with Danny she and speaking of a guy
who kind of goes with both camps, you know.

Speaker 2 (43:59):
Is great. The great individual really.

Speaker 1 (44:02):
Really really just such a He's such a good person
to have in this community because he's so so well
versed in so many areas of of of things that
he's just he's become this really wealth of knowledge and
and you know, he's really pushing the UAP Disclosure Act
and he wants to know who the enemies of this

(44:23):
act are. And if you've been able to sniff any
of them out, well we'll see.

Speaker 3 (44:29):
We had, you know, where we tried to get it
past the what was it last year we had to
get it, you know, Chuck Schumer was actually helpful getting
it in in the Senate, but that language got stripped
out in the House.

Speaker 2 (44:43):
We've we've got new leaders on the.

Speaker 3 (44:46):
Intelligence Committee, and so I'm hoping that I and I've
I've had conversations with Rick Crawford, and I think that
he's he's absolutely willing to be helpful on this, which
is different than his predecessor. So we'll see. And but
Dannie's right, like, at the end of the day, we

(45:10):
all we have, all we can do is just try
and then force the you know, the whoever the opposition is,
to actually show themselves until there is no more opposition.

Speaker 1 (45:23):
Right, right, And I mean I I just find it
weird that guys like you know, Mike Turner that represent
the same district that Right Patterson is in, which holds
a tremendous place in UFO lore as being you know,
almost almost more important than Area fifty one. If I

(45:45):
was really going to go look for for a reverse
engineered UFO, I'd probably go to Wright Patterson before I
ever went to ask for if it even exists, as
as we think it does. I just interesting stuff. He
gets a lot of money from private aerospace as well,
and the tic TAC ross Coltart just came out said

(46:07):
the tic TAC he thinks is uh manufactured by by
Lockheed Martin. What do you think about that? That's that
that sentiment.

Speaker 3 (46:19):
Yeah, So whenever I first the very first hearing where
David Grush came forward and we had David Fraverer and
Ryan Grace testify as well, and they and they talked
about the tic TAC, you know, his his experience with
seeing the tic TAC the I was getting. I got
an email from someone that was very detailed in explaining

(46:44):
that that was a Lockheed Martin project.

Speaker 2 (46:48):
That was what was almost three years ago.

Speaker 3 (46:52):
So then since then, I've had another individual come FULK
come to me.

Speaker 2 (46:59):
I won't I won't say his name.

Speaker 3 (47:02):
He claims to have photos and videos of different different
versions of this of this phenomenon of the tic TAC
and as it throughout its progression, and so I'm I'm
trying to set up an opportunity.

Speaker 2 (47:18):
Where I can see that for myself first.

Speaker 3 (47:22):
But yeah, that's that's what I've I've been repeatedly told
is that it's Lackie Martin.

Speaker 1 (47:29):
So but I don't know what surprise you.

Speaker 3 (47:32):
I don't know, and it wouldn't surprise me. It would
kind of fit with what is the most most plausible.
But I would say, you know Tim Phillips when he
was when he went on his interview circuit with Yeah,
he you know, And honestly, I feel like when just
working with Tim that he was he was genuinely trying

(47:53):
to get us the same information that they were seeing,
which is very noble, right, but said that he had
tried to give a briefing and had gotten permission from
a special access program to be able to brief us,
and and he and that briefing was not blocked by
the d O D or people in the special access program.

Speaker 2 (48:16):
It was actually blocked by.

Speaker 3 (48:17):
Leadership, is what he leadership, to which I reached out
to the speaker immediately, Me and Anna and Tim Burchett
confronted the speaker on the floor and about it.

Speaker 2 (48:35):
He had no.

Speaker 3 (48:35):
Idea what we were talking about. I really no no
idea whatsover had never was. And I believe, honestly, there
are times, I honestly I think Mike Johnson is an
honest individual. I think he there's times where he makes
promises that he is not able to live up to.

Speaker 2 (48:56):
But he's not gonna lie about about something like that
just and so I do believe him.

Speaker 3 (49:04):
But I also I think that whenever he looked into it,
had his team look into it, they indicated that it
was blocked by one of the one of the chairmen
or ranking members of either Intelligence or HASK and so
and so, one of which would it could have been
very well could have been my turner at that time.
So so, and that that briefing that that mister Phillips

(49:29):
was talking about was a briefing that would have probably
indicated to I'm just speculating, because he was trying to
show us some of the historical craft and he had
even done a site visit where he saw almost what
he describes as a museum of the of this technology

(49:49):
as it as it's involved, and that that would be
that would be helpful in kind of ascertaining and knowing
what's out there right, knowing what we have and being
able to eliminate a lot of a lot of photos
and videos that that are speculatively extraterrestrial.

Speaker 2 (50:15):
HM right, and the fact that we are blocked from that.

Speaker 3 (50:19):
It was very frustrating and I think that we're making it.
We're because we've raised the alarm, because I've spoken with
the new Intel chairman. I'm hoping that we have we
have a different scenario. And the other thing that's different
is that we have we have a very transparent lighthouse.

(50:39):
You know, Donald Trump is a disclosure president. We've we've
kind of had a little bit of difficulty with the
f STET files, but I think it's at the end
of the day, I think he wants the information to
come out on that. He wants all of the information
that you know, some of the scandals with our intelligence
community to come forward. We've had a tremendous we've had

(51:02):
a lot of success when it came to the JFK files.
If there's anything that this task Force has I think
been successful on, it's getting more and more JFK files released.
And these files are not something that the deep state
wants released. When you have files that the CIA that
basically implicate the CIA in a cover up where they're

(51:25):
or they're lying the Congress multiple times about the assassination
of JFK, that's that's remarkable, really remarkable that that that
those documents have been released. So this president, I think
is a disclosure president and his office has been has
been very.

Speaker 2 (51:44):
Helpful on this.

Speaker 1 (51:46):
Okay. Well, with that being said, you know, if if
that legislation was our best shot at I don't know
if you if you want to call, if it was
our best shot at formal transparency, what comes next? Are

(52:06):
there backup plans or an alternative route being considered in Congress?

Speaker 3 (52:12):
Really the only the only chance that we have is
the National Defense Authorization Acts. So every you know, every
year when that comes forward, which that there's in Congress,
there are bills that are called must pass bills, and.

Speaker 2 (52:25):
Those are generally the only bills that fully make it
to the President's desk.

Speaker 1 (52:29):
Okay.

Speaker 3 (52:29):
And so what you you, once you realize that and
you understand that's the train, you better figure out how
to get your you know, get get.

Speaker 1 (52:38):
On the train, get your ass on it, and get get.

Speaker 3 (52:40):
Your language on that train. And so that's why we've
got Senator Rounds, who is he's he's now going to
be putting that language in the bill on the Senate.

Speaker 2 (52:52):
He's he's the he's really the one driving the charge
on the language.

Speaker 3 (52:57):
And our office has reached out to Center Around's office
and said you know, how can we help. We want
to we want to do our part from the House side,
so we will be trying to get it into.

Speaker 2 (53:08):
The House's version and he and I believe he will
be doing that on the Setate side.

Speaker 1 (53:13):
Okay, because I you know, I just I have a
fear that come mid the mid uh the midterm, that
the Republicans will lose the House. They'll keep the Senate,
but they'll lose the House, and that any legislation from
that point on it just won't It'll just be it'll

(53:34):
be dead. It'll be dead, dead on the floor. So
do you feel that you're up against the clock? Kind
of yes?

Speaker 3 (53:44):
Okay, fair and really kind of with this with this
White House as well. I mean that that is, assuming
we we win the midterms and we're able to keep
the House, we still we've only got so much time
with this president, and so we while we've got someone
that's favorable of disclosure, we've got to pounce on it.
And so I would just encourage everyone in the UAP

(54:07):
community to do whatever you can, through social media or
otherwise to remind the White House that this is an
important topic. And look, Donald Trump has got a lot
of irons in the fire. Okay, he's trying to solve
global conflicts all over the world. He's trying to renegotiate

(54:28):
trade trade deals with every nation on the planet. He's
completely reformed our tax code with the One Big Beautiful Bill,
completely reformed our energy exploration system and a process, completely
reformed manufacturing in the United States. So, as you can imagine,

(54:52):
he's got a lot of irons in the fire. This
topic is not necessarily top of mind, and so we
have to make it top of mind.

Speaker 1 (55:01):
Yeah, And I think and you because I think that
not a lot of people want in the UFO community.
I don't think a lot of people want to talk
about this. But I think the people that control the Epstein's,
the Ditties and and are honey potting and you know,

(55:23):
uh and trapping world leaders, politicians, uh, people of influence.
What are the chances the same people that are doing
that are also obvious skating the truth and have that
technology of non human origin and they're the ones that
are suppressing it. What are the chances that's the same person,

(55:45):
you know, figuratively, the same person who would run the
Epstein's and Ditties, same person who runs the obviouscation of
the truth on UFOs. I think it's highly likely we're
dealing with the same thing all.

Speaker 2 (55:59):
To maybe maybe I don't know, Oh.

Speaker 1 (56:04):
All right, but a plan of the seed, that's all right,
well we'll see. I I just it's it's it's almost
like I don't I don't know, because we talk about
the deep state.

Speaker 3 (56:16):
And it would be nice and comedia and kind of
a clean way of addressing if there was one one villain,
but I would I doubt it.

Speaker 2 (56:24):
I doubt it.

Speaker 1 (56:25):
Well, okay, that's a little bit of oversimplification. I mean,
the deep state, whoever's controlling whoever, because I think, you know,
Daniel in a way said it best. You know, there
there is a an apparatus out there that has its
own fundraising mechanisms, its own army, its own agenda, and

(56:45):
it operates outside the law. So I don't know. One
plus one, you know, is starting to look like two
to me. Whether Terrence Howard agrees or not.

Speaker 3 (56:55):
Yeah, and there could be I mean, look, there's just
some commonalities amongst just just the political nature of things.

Speaker 2 (57:02):
One is one is that.

Speaker 3 (57:05):
Information is power, and so if you have if you
feel like you're the only individual or group that has
information that's job security, that that's making sure that you're
the king of your little mountain, and you don't want
to you don't want to lose that. Sometimes that I
think that that was the motivation or can be the
motivation if even for members of Congress, particularly if you're

(57:27):
a committee chairman, you don't want anybody taking on anything
even close to your topic or purview of your committee
because that's a loss of control and power.

Speaker 2 (57:38):
You might as well not be the chair of that topic.

Speaker 3 (57:41):
So the same thing has to be you know, it
has to be the same thing within the deep state.
But I would also say a commonality to just never
discredit is the ineptitude and the lack of will or
or effort of government employees. Yeah, because you know, like I,

(58:03):
I really think that one of the reasons why we
don't have everything we are you and I would think
that there would be out there about Epstein is because
it's just that they they haven't done.

Speaker 2 (58:14):
The work to get the information right they.

Speaker 3 (58:18):
I truly think, for example, on the UAP topic, there's
there's it to some extent, there's just not the time
or energy or motivation. And so because of that, the posture.
I'm saying this very well could be the scenario is
that the government just that because they haven't done the homework,
they haven't done the work to even really know what

(58:39):
these things are. They their posture is to just be mum,
because they it's better to act like you don't know, right,
and or that then to admit that you haven't done
you haven't done the.

Speaker 1 (58:53):
Work, the actual homework. Right. No, it's a very very
good good way to say it. So, uh, that kind
of a good, kind of a good little segue here.
So eli at quint essence eli on X asks Congressman
Burlison on the Event Horizon show hosted by John Michael

(59:14):
Goat Guttier, Former acting Arrow director Tim Phillips revealed that
Arrow had discovered a classified version of an MJ twelve
crash retrieval document. Former Arrow director Sean Kirkpatrick downplayed it,
saying it might be a public version, but also admitted
it could be something entirely unfamiliar to him to add context.

(59:36):
Not long after Phillips began speaking publicly, including that interview,
his detail to Arrow, he was terminated. So, with Rep.
Luna now leading a congressional task force focused on declassifying
federal secrets, including UAP materials. Are you aware of this
document and would you support efforts to have it reviewed?

Speaker 3 (59:56):
And yeah, absolutely would support efforts get access to this document.

Speaker 1 (01:00:01):
Yeah that was long winded, but yeah, I had heard
he'd mentioned that to me, and I started doing some digging,
and what are your thoughts on m J twelve and
that that side of the Loretic.

Speaker 3 (01:00:18):
The Majestic twelve is It's an interesting it's an interesting
it is time and history. So yeah, anything that we
can get that has not been released, I'm happy that
I want to get access to. Yeah, make it disclosed
to your show, total disclosure.

Speaker 2 (01:00:41):
I'm going to clear that, got it.

Speaker 3 (01:00:42):
And then you know MJ the m J twelve, the
Majestic twelve. How long ago was that that was?

Speaker 2 (01:00:48):
We're talking what the fifties and fifties?

Speaker 1 (01:00:51):
Yeah, fifties and sixties.

Speaker 2 (01:00:52):
So I mean at some point, this is the same
thing with the JFK files. At some point.

Speaker 3 (01:00:57):
Okay, it's seventy and seventy years. Let's I mean, how
long is it going to take? I hope it's not
gonna take seventy years to find out what happened with
Epstein or seventy years to find out what's happening today
with UAP, I mean, and so the least we can
ask for is what happened in the forties and fifties
and sixties.

Speaker 1 (01:01:18):
Yeah, And honestly, I think that some of the stuff
that is a little bit older is with the growing
advancement in AI, and you know, just like deep fakes,
and I think the older cases are going to become
especially the ones with a lot of evidence, like whether
it be physical, testimonial or all of the above, those

(01:01:40):
ones are only going to increase in value.

Speaker 3 (01:01:44):
Yes, yeah, because they're legit. You know that they weren't fake,
they weren't created.

Speaker 1 (01:01:48):
By AI before time.

Speaker 2 (01:01:51):
I think we're getting.

Speaker 3 (01:01:52):
Ready to enter into just an absolute goofy time in
world history where you're no one's gonna no one's gonna
have any kind of level of certainty on anything, because
so it's going to be so easy to fake things. Look,
I'm getting phone calls from individuals that.

Speaker 2 (01:02:11):
Are being impersonated.

Speaker 3 (01:02:13):
Rick Crawford, the Intelligence Chairman, I had multiple phone calls
where a person was impersonating him. I had phone calls
where they're impersonating the chiefest staffs of the White House.
Her voice was on, I have a voicemail from her,
and it's not her.

Speaker 2 (01:02:30):
And so this we're going to get weirder and goofier.
And right now probably it's.

Speaker 3 (01:02:36):
Only being you know, because we're more high profile, we're
getting targeted. But it's just get ready. I mean, the
world is going to get really goofy. And with that
in mind, all of these historical photos and videos are
going to be are going to have a lot more
value and legitimacy, which is why in the hearing that
I had with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, knowing that he's

(01:02:58):
the NASA that he's now at the administrator over NASA
as well, one of my questions was based on Michael
Gold's question or what he said whenever we had a
hearing with Michael Gold, that NASA has a vast amount
of information or photos, videos, just an.

Speaker 2 (01:03:18):
Archive, a vast archive of.

Speaker 3 (01:03:21):
Videos that we should they should turn over to some
kind of effort, whether it's nonprofit or create an effort
within NASA to use AI to go over to just
view and comb through all of that, all of those
thousands upon thousands, probably tens of thousands of note hundreds

(01:03:43):
of thousands of hours of video footage and in looking
for what might be a UAP.

Speaker 1 (01:03:51):
I by the way, I just wanted to commend you
on your resilience and bringing that up at that moment,
because you know, I just like I said, you're you're
you're really becoming a one. Uh, whether you like it
or not. I think Burchette held that title for a while,
but I think you're slowly becoming the the member of

(01:04:12):
Congress that leads is leading the charge on this. So
thank you for representing every.

Speaker 2 (01:04:18):
In the way they this topic.

Speaker 3 (01:04:23):
And I love that guy. I don't want to take
that crown from him. I'm doing my dutiful role and
just kind of beating beating the bushes and trying to
trying to help.

Speaker 1 (01:04:35):
Yeah, do you do you? I mean, so, do you
Luna and Burchett? Do you guys or you know, do
you guys have a plan in place for say, okay,
let me rephrase this because that was a little jumbled.
Do you guys as a as a trio, do you

(01:04:59):
guys like talk privately about your thoughts? Because I think
a lot of people think that Congress is it's really
just like in office, right it's it's it's these inter
hallway conversations. But it seems like you guys are are
friendly in the regular world too, So I mean, do
you guys ever talk about this, like just personally?

Speaker 3 (01:05:22):
Yeah, I mean Tim and Anna and I are very
good friends and so we In fact, Anna often sits
next to Tim Burchett.

Speaker 2 (01:05:31):
You know, he's got a particular.

Speaker 3 (01:05:33):
Spot on the house floor that he always sits in,
and I'm in that general vicinity too, and the three
of us are you know during voting sessions that we
have a lot of conversations during voting while we're waiting,
while we're sitting there waiting between votes, we have a
lot of conversations on this topic.

Speaker 1 (01:05:50):
I would and I think that's what I thought I
would think, because like, I feel like people don't really
understand like, uh, you know, government work, and even in
the military, it's a lot of hurry up and wait.
So you have a lot of time on your hands usually,
and it's like, you know, how do you feel the time?
Is that why you guys have gotten so vigorous on
this topic, is you know you want the answers because

(01:06:14):
you guys do the homework, and it seems like that's
the case. So on. On total disclosure, we often explore
how the UFO phenomena intersect with consciousness and spirituality. What
do you believe there's a connection between UAPs and human
consciousness and how might disclosure reshape you know, our spiritual

(01:06:38):
or philosophical framework.

Speaker 2 (01:06:42):
Yeah, I mean I'm a I'm a born again Christian.
I think that.

Speaker 3 (01:06:47):
I think it actually for people that are Christians. The
first thought about this is that if the if we
were to discover that there were these beings that are
coming here from an extra dimension, it would it would
rock their world for view. But the truth is that's
what the Bible describes, the Bible and the Old Testament describes,

(01:07:11):
you know, extraterrestrial beings.

Speaker 2 (01:07:14):
It's called angels that come for it.

Speaker 3 (01:07:17):
So I don't think that it should rock anybody's worldview
if if there was to be some kind of revelation
and the world discovers that these things do exist. It
is interesting how often spirituality in some form is brought up.

Speaker 2 (01:07:38):
I would say consistent. It's consistently brought up.

Speaker 3 (01:07:42):
And most people who come to me and tell me
stories about their encounters often that they're either.

Speaker 2 (01:07:52):
They are communicating in.

Speaker 3 (01:07:54):
A way where they're not using you know, they're not
speaking directly, there's no there's no real audio. They're just
they're just being given a message through there through their mind,
or they're using their mind in some cases like mister
bloedsin to like to communicate.

Speaker 2 (01:08:10):
Our or or direct the UFO.

Speaker 1 (01:08:14):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:08:15):
Right, So there's there's quite a bit of that. And
then I'm that that keeps coming up and again. But
I have not had any kind of personal encounter.

Speaker 1 (01:08:26):
With So do you think that, uh, that maybe science
should look more into consciousness and you working towards towards
you know, some sort of advancement in uh, you know, ourselves,
advancement in our evolution. You know, there was anywhere to
be looked at.

Speaker 2 (01:08:49):
I mean, I think that it's I think that.

Speaker 3 (01:08:53):
To me, it's pseudoscience until until unless we get close
to it and it becomes real, I think that it's.

Speaker 2 (01:09:02):
It's science that's not If that.

Speaker 3 (01:09:04):
Is true, it's well beyond the what we're our capabilities
of measuring and right discovering.

Speaker 2 (01:09:11):
And so this is this.

Speaker 3 (01:09:13):
Would have to be something that would be revealed if
it were true from at this point in time, given
our technology, it would.

Speaker 2 (01:09:22):
Have to be revealed to us through a like some
form of non human.

Speaker 3 (01:09:25):
Intelligence, right, so I just don't see us like we're
you know, you got Elon Musk doing the neural Lenk.

Speaker 2 (01:09:34):
Right now.

Speaker 3 (01:09:35):
That's like, but that's pretty physical hardware connected to people's
you know, connecting a chip somebody's circuitry in their brain.
And that's like the cutting edge stuff that we're doing today.

Speaker 2 (01:09:48):
It's hard to believe that we would be.

Speaker 3 (01:09:50):
Able to come up with some some other form of
that where you don't even have some kind of physical
connection or some translator that would translate this aw into some.

Speaker 2 (01:10:00):
Kind of broadcast. I think we're a long ways from that.

Speaker 1 (01:10:04):
Yeah, I do. I would. I would agree with you think.
You know, I look at I look at humanity, and
if you kind of dig into it, I think we've
stopped evolving physically and and the evolutionary state I think
probably would be our brains because we're the apex predator

(01:10:28):
of the of the planet. So and you know, nothing's
challenging us physically anymore. So you know, where would the
next evolutionary state take place, whether that's emerging with technology
or a raising of your consciousness. Uh, I think that
would be the next step logically, And I mean it

(01:10:49):
could explain why the grays look like that, and and
we could be headed that way. It could always be
that outway. That's very very loosely said.

Speaker 2 (01:11:03):
Right, that's that's just to me, that's speculation.

Speaker 1 (01:11:07):
Of course, naturally, I mean it's it's all speculation at
this point. But all right, I I totally and I
do understand. I consciousness is a weird one because you
start asking people about it and whether.

Speaker 3 (01:11:20):
It is to me, it's goofy. It just kind of
but it keeps, but it keeps coming up.

Speaker 2 (01:11:28):
And I'll tell you.

Speaker 3 (01:11:31):
When when when this when people start talking about using
their brain to to control or call in a UFO,
I have to like it.

Speaker 2 (01:11:40):
Just it's it's a leap for me, and I'm highly
skeptical of that. But you know what I mean, I'm
not going to be judging people.

Speaker 3 (01:11:51):
That's why I'm willing to you if you want to
show me, I'm happy to I'm happy to go out
with you and and see if we can't call in
a Ufoh.

Speaker 1 (01:12:04):
What it's good to be like Like you said, I
think it's good for to be a healthy kind of
skeptic because you're going to be if if someone can
prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that something's happening
to you, that's going to go a further way, a
longer way than if they were to prove it to
someone like Chris Bloodsoe already kind of you know, knows

(01:12:27):
it or believes it. So and that's as I do.

Speaker 3 (01:12:32):
Yeah, now, what I'm not gonna do It takes some
kind of psychedelic that I think that or like good
in some kind of trans state. I mean, and personally
I'm not trying to do any of this myself either,
but that's I do hear that that's what some of
this activity is. And look, I mean if you're in
a if you're if you're impaired through some form of drug,

(01:12:54):
how do you even how?

Speaker 2 (01:12:56):
I mean, I don't know how.

Speaker 3 (01:12:57):
You can ascertain that what you're seeing is really there.
So that's just something I'm not going to participate in.
If if asked, if.

Speaker 1 (01:13:06):
I just wanted to understood, yeah, no, totally. I mean
because there are people like Gallum we're doing studies about
extended d mt US and trying to map that world. Uh,
you know, I've been there and I can assure you
you don't have to go there. I can try to
tell you as best I can that it is. It

(01:13:30):
feels as real as this right here, if not more real.
I'm actually color blind, and I was seeing colors. I
don't know if they exist all the time, but I
was seeing colors that that I'd never seen before in
my life, and I haven't seen since, so I don't know.

(01:13:52):
I definitely went somewhere else and there was another being.
There was a being there. It was a cloaked figure.
When walked up to it, it looked at me. I
looked at it. No words were spoken, but I knew
that this thing, It's like, what are you doing here?

(01:14:16):
You're not supposed to be here. And I remember getting
upset with the being the thing, like who are you
to tell me I can't be here? And then boom
snapped back to my earthly body. And I mean, I'm
a skeptic. I'm skeptical like you, you know, I'm very

(01:14:38):
trying to see it, see it, to believe it, and
that it was just it was the craziest experience I've
ever had. And it was fifteen minutes, and it felt
like I went somewhere else. I mean truly, So I
would just say, you know, h I think there's something
to explore there. Then that maybe not what your job is.

(01:14:59):
You know, that's not where you want to focus. And
that's okay.

Speaker 2 (01:15:05):
Yeah, I'll leave that to you.

Speaker 1 (01:15:07):
Yeah, yeah, and and and and you know, again, it's
it's kind of dicey even talking about it, because again
it's it's not the most legal thing. Uh. So many
Americans are feeling disillusioned. Uh. They hear congressional testimony whistleblowers
like David Grush, but no follow up. What do you

(01:15:28):
say to people that are losing faith in the process.

Speaker 2 (01:15:33):
Yeah, I don't know how you say that there's no
follow up. I mean I basically spent the last.

Speaker 3 (01:15:37):
Two years following up and and now not getting to
a lot of dead ends. But but but look, I mean,
we we're doing as much work as we possibly can,
and I and I.

Speaker 2 (01:15:51):
Think that we do.

Speaker 3 (01:15:52):
I think right now I feel probably more confident that
we're going to get some answers than we have before
that I have before. But I'm starting to see a
loosening of the swamp, if you will. Like I'm starting
to see things like different postures and different attitudes when
we're when we're making these requests than before. So I

(01:16:13):
do think that the the the climate right now is
much better than it was two years ago.

Speaker 1 (01:16:20):
Wells, I think that's fair. And and when I said
no follow up, I just mean, well, that's I don't Yeah,
I don't mean that to you.

Speaker 2 (01:16:28):
I know, Yeah, And that's what I look. I get it.
Like I'm frustrated too.

Speaker 3 (01:16:33):
I would love for this to just be over and
to have definitively and be able to say, my god,
it's real and but but but that's not where I'm at.
So we're just going to keep going and keep researching
it figure out what it is.

Speaker 1 (01:16:48):
Yeah, And I again, I I do commend you. I
really do. And if you could, if you could get
one straight answer from the intelligence community with zero O obstruction,
what question would you ask?

Speaker 3 (01:17:06):
What I would what I want to see is I
want to see physically either a crash vehicle or or
the bodies. I'd want to That's that if I could
get one thing, That's what I would want is to
have be able to see that firsthand. Because to me,
even just getting testimony, if I if I had if

(01:17:30):
I had a briefing and and they just you know,
disclosed information. Look, I've been in a skiff where people
have said things, but at the end of the day,
it's their narrative and it's their experience. So I think
that I want to see if we have real tangible
physical photos or videos or or objects.

Speaker 2 (01:17:54):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:17:54):
Yeah, and and so do you do you or in
your opinion, is the one truth or data point? Oh okay,
I'm sorry, I read past that. What in your opinion
is the one truth or data point that, if made public,
could fundamentally shift the conversation on the UAP subject. Is

(01:18:18):
it what you just said?

Speaker 3 (01:18:19):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, because that's at the end of the day.
Until you get to that point, it's all just additional stories.

Speaker 1 (01:18:29):
Yeah, yeah, no, I will agree. And I think that's
what the public wants, is they want some of this thing.
They want they it rolled out onto the Congressional floor
in the in the Longfellow Building and and you know,
passed around the room. That's what people are really I
think it's gonna take eventually, you know. And and I

(01:18:51):
don't think that that's I don't think that that's realistic
right now. I don't. I don't know why, but I
just I don't so, I mean, it is interesting. If
we'll see, you've had many people come to you now,

(01:19:12):
I'm sure, like you've said in this interview several times, now,
you're getting people coming up to you probably all the
time telling you stories of their own encounters. Is there
anything that is there any one in particular that sticks
out with you and you don't have to give names,
but is there anything that really sticks out to you

(01:19:33):
that is like that's weird.

Speaker 3 (01:19:38):
Yeah, again, I'll just this comes from my like, it's
interesting how often again it comes up, the spiritual connection
spoken with one individual that is completely anonymous and it
wants to remain that way. Who has been providing valuable
information to the federal government, which is why I got

(01:20:01):
connected to him? And he says that he has what
he describes as these beings that are inter intra or
extra dimensional, that are sending him a message through some
form of broadcast that he's able to receive and it
has changed his worldview. He went from being a went

(01:20:25):
from being a you know, he's you know, of Jewish
faith to being he was an atheist before this, before
these encounters happened, and through these encounters learned that the
the that the that the narrative about Jesus is real,
and suddenly started, you know, without having read the Bible,

(01:20:49):
started because of what he was being communicated, started started
believing that. And so, which which I found to be
extremely interesting. That was a very it was a very
different conversation than I've ever had before.

Speaker 2 (01:21:04):
But but I.

Speaker 3 (01:21:06):
Do get some you know, we've had some very Michael
Herrera had a meeting with him. He's got a very
interesting story that he's mostly public.

Speaker 1 (01:21:14):
Yeah, I had him on the show here. Yeah, so
and and and you know, kind of the reverse side
of that, which I find, you know, to be really
really crazy, was the Jake Barber story, you know, because
it was the other side of the Herrera story. And
you know, I don't know if you heard about this,

(01:21:35):
but Jake Barber, you know, when he was retrieving some
sort of vehicle, he said that an orb passed through
his body and and again this is his narrative, but
the orb passed through his body and he had this
overwhelming like he was like crying, like couldn't hold back

(01:21:56):
the tears, like it just he felt like engulfed and
love and positivity. And that's similar to like what Chris
Bloodshell says as well. So, I mean you and and
you know, you just put these things together and it's
pretty wild.

Speaker 2 (01:22:13):
Yeah it is.

Speaker 3 (01:22:14):
That's definitely important. And it's like, look, it's their experience.
It's and it's not something that they have evidence of.
It's just it's once again. But but yeah, it's You've
got a lot of people that have had some interesting encounters.
I'll tell you at the end of the day, Like
I my some people ask me why are you doing this?

(01:22:35):
And look, if you look at my bandwidth and what
we're working on. I'm doing everything from like studying small
module and nuclear reactors how we can like deregulate some
of those so that we can you know, advance our
manufacturing industry.

Speaker 2 (01:22:48):
I'm looking at.

Speaker 3 (01:22:50):
Regulations related to the EPA, looking at regulations that affect
our transportation, infrastructure and and and have a lot of
bills related to a lot of topics that that are
extremely extremely important to our economy and our society and
businesses and individual rights in the United States. I fight

(01:23:12):
for a lot of Second Amendment topics. You do, and
so but but I'll tell you that, I mean when
people say, well, look, why focus on this, it's a
there's money being spent, b this may be a national
security issue of great importance. And then and then see

(01:23:33):
it's also it's really interesting. I'll tell you, like I've
never it's never boring. Having a conversation where someone says
the extra dimensional beings are talking to through him is
pretty it's not your every.

Speaker 2 (01:23:49):
Day right, And that was not that was not a
conversation I had before. Get you know, getting in this.

Speaker 1 (01:23:55):
Job so right, right, and as a member of Congress,
like I can't even imagine being elected as into being
a member of Congress. And then all of a sudden,
you're you're you're leading the charge for UAPs, which I
mean in our last conversation, I believe maybe I'm misquoting you,

(01:24:17):
but you didn't really have like too much of a
thought on it before all of this.

Speaker 2 (01:24:25):
Yeah, no, this was not something I mean, yeah, it wasn't.
It wasn't a priority. It was being in this Oversight committee,
having that first hearing with David Grush is what kind
of launched me on this trail.

Speaker 3 (01:24:37):
And look, I my attitude is if we're going to
do it, let's do it. And that's why I kind
of kind of jumped in and kind of tried to
at least push because I don't. What became clear to
me is that this is never going to go anywhere.
No one's ever going to get any answers given the
posture that we have today or back.

Speaker 2 (01:24:56):
In two years ago.

Speaker 3 (01:24:58):
And so if if you're gonna get any make any headway,
you've got to be aggressive, got to get heads down
and push do I've got just a little bit more time,
but I need to.

Speaker 2 (01:25:11):
Jump off here.

Speaker 1 (01:25:12):
Okay, all right, so I'll start wrapping up. I. I
do appreciate your time. I really do. I you're one
of the coolest people. Do you think that a lot
of the I mean, there's a lot going on in
the world right now, you know, conflict in other countries,

(01:25:33):
you know, uh, everything that's going on geopolitically, it seems
very volatile. Uh. Do you think that that stuff does
need to be solved prior to any disclosure or can
it be something that ends up uniting the world.

Speaker 2 (01:25:51):
Yeah. I mean, we have a large federal government.

Speaker 3 (01:25:54):
There's no reason why we can't do both, right, So
they can't focus on let the Secretary state and let
let this you know, that division that that branch and
and their efforts deal with the you know, diplomacy with
other countries. But at the end of the day, we've
we've got people that are already investigating this, We've got

(01:26:16):
intelligence within the intelligence community, they've got information. We there's
no reason why we can't we can't address both both.

Speaker 1 (01:26:24):
Okay, Yeah, and and lastly, if there's anything that that
you want people to walk away with knowing you know,
what would that be from from your involvement in this topic,
what what do you want to walk away have them
walk away with from tonight's conversation.

Speaker 3 (01:26:45):
What I want people to know is like that this
is we're not going to get anywhere unless people get
out and push. Right so the car imagine this way,
the car is stalled and you're going to have to
get out and push.

Speaker 2 (01:26:59):
Maybe we can get it kickstarted.

Speaker 3 (01:27:02):
But if but what I mean by that is you
gotta start reaching out.

Speaker 2 (01:27:06):
You got to like use social media, you gotta.

Speaker 3 (01:27:07):
Start demanding yep, from from elected officials all the way
up to the White House. Make it a priority. Make
it clear that this is a priority to you. Otherwise
people know there's no one's gonna spend any time on it.
And anybody that is like myself is questioned as to
why you're spending time on.

Speaker 1 (01:27:25):
This absolutely representative. Thank you so much for spending uh,
you know, this time with me today, and I really
look forward to seeing you, you know, when the hearings
do happen. I'll definitely be there and uh, you know,
I hope to be able to talk to you then
and pull you guys aside, uh and if you guys

(01:27:46):
need anything and pointing in the right direction. There's several
people that, uh that I know of that could be
of use to you, uh in terms of direct knowledge.
So I just want to say again, thank you and
thank you for everyone being here. For everyone who's listening
in the future, make sure you like, share, subscribe, and

(01:28:07):
if you're listening on a podcast platform, you can rate
and review the show. It really helps. It's free, it
takes twenty seconds. Eric Berlson, everyone, thank you again. Thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:28:17):
Tyler.

Speaker 1 (01:28:18):
All right, we'll talk so

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2

Dateline NBC

NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Congressman Eric Burlison on UAPs, Disclosure, and Humanity’s Cosmic Future

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2

Dateline NBC

NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal

All Episodes

Congressman Eric Burlison on UAPs, Disclosure, and Humanity’s Cosmic Future

Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2