Unraveling the Mystery of Drones: Government Transparency and Conspiracy Theories with Michael Parker

Is the 9-5 workday truly a relic of the past? In this episode of US Phenomenon, we welcome back the inimitable Michael Parker as we unravel the enigma of mysterious drone sightings, including the captivating case at Langley Air Force Base. Could these drones be the military's cost-effective answer to surveillance, or do they signal something more sinister? Michael shares his firsthand experiences and insights, challenging us to question the transparency of government responses and their impact on the ever-evolving conspiracy landscape.

From the bustling skies of New Jersey to the distant horizons of South America, we tackle the global phenomenon of unidentified drone activity. As public anxiety simmers over the lack of transparency, we explore whether these aerial mysteries are foreign provocations, clandestine government operations, or simply commercial tech tests gone awry. The episode dives into the public's skepticism and the necessity for responsible reporting, urging listeners to look beyond the skies to the broader, interconnected global issues at play.

We also challenge the term "conspiracy theory" itself, questioning its potential to stifle curiosity and critical thinking. As fringe topics like UFOs and Bigfoot dance into mainstream conversations, we ponder the role of government transparency in satisfying our collective craving for hidden truths. With Michael Parker's engaging presence, we embark on a thought-provoking exploration of notable events, from tragic helicopter crashes to the cryptic JFK assassination theories, reminding us that the quest for truth is a journey we all share.

Fan Mail Be apart of the show, or send your suggestions or feedback.

Support the show

Elevate the Extraordinary: Support U.S. Phenomenon!

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to US Phenomenon, where possibilities
are endless.
Put down those same oldheadlines.
It's time to expand your mindand question what if?
From paranormal activity toUFOs, bigfoot sightings and
unsolved mysteries, this is USPhenomenon?

Speaker 2 (00:21):
From the Pacific Northwest in the shadow of the
1962 World's Fair.
This space, you know, goodevening, good morning, good
afternoon, wherever you are onGod's green earth.
This is US Phenomenon.
I am your host, mario Magana,and tonight we explore the
extraordinary and theunexplained.
I mean with everything that'sbeen going on in the conspiracy

(00:41):
world, the top, some of the topconspiracies that are kind of on
the loose right now, everythingfrom the DC plane crash to the
drones.
Tonight, our special guest and ahuge contributor to US
Phenomenon, michael Parker, willjoin us to give us some
insightfulness in his analysisand engaging stories that he's
been kind of working on and he'salways been provoking his own

(01:04):
personal content that he's beenkind of working on and he's
always been provoking his ownpersonal content that he's been
working on with Michael ParkerMedia as well, with his own
podcast and whatnot.
He's been a contributor to theUS phenomenon for such a long
time, always giving hisinsightfulness and providing
high-quality analysis, stayingengaged and informed, whether

(01:26):
it's from way wild stuff tomaybe delving into the
historical mysteries and theunexplained and even touching on
current events and giving hishighlights to human interest as
well.
It is always my pleasure towelcome to US Phenomenon Michael
Parker.

Speaker 3 (01:47):
Welcome back to the show.
Hi, marioio, how's it going?
Thanks for having me back well,happy new year's.

Speaker 2 (01:50):
It's been a while since we've had you on the show.
Oh, it's fantastic, thank you.
Um, tons of stuff going on inthe world.
I mean planes are falling outof the sky, uh, I mean the uh,
you know you got these.
It just seems like a lot.
You got the drone situation.
You have to me, so much going onin in the world of conspiracy,

(02:11):
the jfk files that are going tofinally be released and in our
line of business, someone likemyself are like maybe we don't
want those files out just yetbecause once they're out, then
we're like well, what's left tospeculate and kind of converse
and chat about?
Uh, all tongue-in-cheek, youknow I'm like, is this a great

(02:31):
thing?
Of course it is, because at thebottom line, we want to figure
out what's, what actuallyhappened in these files, uh, and
then we can always go back andlook at it.
The conspiracies will always bethere till the end of dawn and
until the end of time.
But when, when you look at thisfrom you know, the drones that
have been, you know, happenedprior to administration and not
getting you know what was goingon in that in regards, it's

(02:55):
quite interesting why, you know.
You know people wouldn't sharethat and I know that in past
conversations that I've had,people always come to me like,
well, what's your thoughts onthat?
You know, with the drones, andI was like, come on, let's be
real about this, you don't thinkthe United States government
doesn't know.
I was like here's my thoughtson it and I'll get yours, those

(03:15):
drones, to me.
Maybe there was something goingon out there in the United
States that the United Statesdidn't want us to know.
That could have been, um, thatcould have been alarming.
So, instead of having fighterjets up there, wouldn't be more
cost effective to have dronespatrol the skies to see what was
going on, to keep an eye on theskies, to see if there was
stuff going on out there, versushaving military jets pacing

(03:38):
around at a an extremely highvolume of money being wasted and
alarming people saying, oh, oh,my God, something's going on,
we're about to be attacked.
I mean, that was my kind of myinsight in regards to that and I
, you know, kind of shared thatoff.
This was something offsite, whenpeople would ask, and just in
you know passing conversations,in regards to what you don't you

(04:01):
know what is it, and I was like, well, the government's got to
know.
The government definitely hasyou know what is it?
And I was like, well, thegovernment's got to know, the
government definitely has toknow what's going on.
And I know it's been some timeand I know that, uh, president
trump has come out and said that, yes, the faa has no has was
known about this and had someinsight to what was going on,
but not much, much else has beenshared about that.
Michael, what's your thoughtsabout what was going on during

(04:22):
that time with those dronespatrolling the skies?

Speaker 3 (04:26):
Well, it's super curious and I started covering
the drones in like Octoberbefore the big flurry of
activity in New Jersey happened.
And I'm trying to find my oldvideo and I'm slightly
embarrassed.
I'm trying to remember thisgentleman's name that was my
guest.
He was a retired colonel, Ibelieve it was.
Yeah, it was colonel john mills.

(04:46):
Anyway, he had worked both incyber security and in the
military and at the time,towards the end of october, we
were talking about this becausethe drone strike kind of
incursion didn't start this year.
Actually, a year ago, decemberof 2023, 17 nights in a row,

(05:09):
drones flew over langley airforce base and that whole
cluster of militaryinstallations on the east coast.
Now let me say that again, 17nights in a row, and okay, so
you're telling me we this is oneof the most heavily guarded,
highly secure areas within theunited states and for 17 nights

(05:32):
in a row, unidentified unmannedaircraft flew in and around
these facilities 70 nights in arow and we could not get any
information on where they werecoming from, who owned them,
exactly what they were.
So that's 2023.
Yeah, this move forward to thispast year.

(05:52):
All of a sudden, we begin tohave drone seed all over the
east coast, especially newjersey, beginning and not in
november, moving November,moving through December, and at
the time they were beginning toclose certain military air bases
and things, because thesethings were being seen so much

(06:13):
by so many people and not justin New Jersey, but this was
happening in multiple states andin other countries.
And, to your point, yeah, Ithink a lot of us thought, well,
surely the government knowswhat this is and you know what
they're probably our technologybut we couldn't get any definite

(06:34):
information on what these wereand, if you remember, some of
these drones were said to be thesize of SUVs Like those are
really big drones, for sure, forsure.
Said to be the size of suvs,like those are really big drones
, for sure, okay, for sure.
It's like I've never seen adrone that big.
And some people were trying tosay, oh well, we do have those
drones that are that big andthey were pointing to this super

(06:55):
secret.
I think it's the x3 spacecraftthat that we've launched years
ago and nobody really knows whatit does.
I think it came from darpa andit does these military projects.
It circumnavigates the globe athigh altitudes and every now
and then we bring it back andthen we send it back.
Anyway.
It looks kind of like, um, aflying submarine or something.
It's just kind of like a tube,right, right, okay, all right,

(07:17):
fair enough, you can classifythat as a drone, I guess.
Yeah, that's what it is.
But to have them close to theground and they're flying over
people's houses and cars andthey're flying over military
installations and air bases, notjust in New Jersey but, as I
said, in multiple differentstates and in other countries,
all of this is going on at thetime.
So the DOD, homeland Security,both in December, say look,

(07:41):
these aren't ours.
We don't know what they are orwhose they are, but they're not
ours and we don't think thatthey are a foreign adversary.
Now, the interview that Ireferenced a few minutes ago,
that I did in October, withColonel John Mills he at that
time believed that the dronesthat were seen over Langley were

(08:04):
most likely a foreign adversaryChina, iran, maybe Russia, and
then, if you also remember, atthe beginning of when this whole
thing flared up in 2024, we hadthis one Republican senator or
representative I don't fansomething.
Anyway, he says hey, guess what?
We, a iranian mothership offthe coast of the eastern

(08:26):
seaboard, and that's where thesethings are coming from, bro.
I don't think that was the caseat all and we never found that
iranian mothership.
Now I'm not saying that aforeign adversary couldn't have
a boat offshore, but we neverreally found any concrete
evidence that that was the case,that these there was the ir,
the Iranian mothership, and thedrones were being launched off

(08:48):
there and they were coming inand doing whatever they were
doing.
So now the thing goes fromNovember through December, tens
of thousands of people areseeing this.
Mayors of all these counties inNew Jersey are complaining to
the US government.
Hey, you know, help us out here.
What the hell is going on aboveour houses?

(09:09):
Our citizens are concerned.
We're seeing them.
Well, we don't get any answers.
Like I said, the DOD saysthey're not theirs, homeland
Security says they're not theirsand we don't think they're
enemy aircraft.
But we really don't know whatthey are.
Okay, we go through Christmas,we go through New Year's.
The fires happened here in LA,which has been a horrible event,

(09:33):
but right after Trump isinaugurated, because he had been
asked hey, will you please getto the bottom of the drone issue
.
And he said, before he wasinaugurated we will get to the
bottom of it, right.
So next thing you know I don'tremember which date it was, but
this is about a week into thisadministration the new press
secretary comes out, starts I'vegot my notes here starts the

(09:57):
meeting and says, hey, we foundout that all of that drone
activity, um, we found out thatall of that drone activity,
primarily in new jersey, youknow what?
That was all okayed by the faa.
These are not the enemy.
These drones were being usedfor research and various other
various reasons.

(10:17):
I kid you not, that's what shesaid for research and other
various reasons.
Well, that didn't fly.
I was about to say no, it didn't, but I could know myself that
didn't go over well with a lotof people, me included.
I mean, I think that's justnonsense.
However, what I think happened,at least the Trump
administration.

(10:38):
They said that they were goingto get to the bottom of this and
probably, if I had to guesswhat happened, someone said to
the administration hey, you knowwhat?
Don't sweat it, these are ours.
Um, faa knows all about it.
They're doing research, it's,it's all hunky-dory, it's on the

(10:58):
up and up yeah it's all in theup and up no enemies, no biggie.
So the trump administrationthinks you know what, we've got
a lot to do and clearly the lasttwo or three weeks has been
speed at which administrationhas maybe never acted before.
And I think my guess is thatthe trump administration is like
look, you know what, we'regoing to take them at their word

(11:20):
on this, because we've got somany other things that we need
to deal with right now thatwe're going to roll with that.
So I don't think that the trumpadministration is intentionally
lying to the people.
I think that that's what theywere told by the transition team
, right, intergovernment, right.
I don't think it came from thebiden administration.
I don't think the bidenadministration had any clue what

(11:41):
was going on not about, notabout this, but about many
things.
I think this was probablycoming from other groups within
government who were advising theadministration, saying look,
it's all cool, don't sweat it.
And I believe the Trumpadministration probably said you
know what, if we have to, we'lladdress this again in the
future, but for right now, we'regoing to take them at their

(12:06):
word and roll with that.
And I think that's why the newpress secretary led with that on
her first meeting, right outthe gate.
It's not satisfactory to me.
It's not satisfactory to a lotof people.
I know that there are stillmayors and a lot of people in
New Jersey who are upset aboutthis.
I've been listening tointerviews with them just in the
last couple of days.
They still don't know what itis.
I've been listening tointerviews with them just in the
last couple of days.
They still don't know what itis.

(12:27):
People are still seeing them.
I get comments on my old videoson YouTube of people in that
area who are still seeing thesethings.
So, although the activity seemsto have receded, it is still
happening, and I will also saythis yes, it's true that
probably some of this stuff wasmisidentified aircraft, some of
it's hobbyists, and a lot oftimes, you know, if you buy a
red car, all of a sudden youbegin to see red cars everywhere

(12:48):
, right?
Anything that we begin to thinkabout, we begin to notice more.
However, that does not, in myopinion, delegitimize the fact
that God knows how many of thesedrones, or whatever they were,
were flying over Jersey, theEast Coast, texas.
They were in UK, they were inSouth America, they were in many

(13:10):
different places, and so, no,I'm not satisfied with that
answer and I hope that it willbe readdressed.

Speaker 2 (13:16):
It's interesting when we talk about this.
When you, when I started seeinga lot of the um, key pieces of
social media, uh, from allplatforms, starting to show
individuals like hey, what isgoing on?
No one, you know being able tokind of give an insight to
people like this is over my home, I feel threatened.

(13:38):
You know, yeah, you know agentleman you know sadly
arrested for shooting a drone ata drone.
Obviously, that is you know,sadly arrested for shooting at a
drone.
Obviously that is, you know,against the law.
I know that he was trying toprotect himself and his family
and his land.
You know, I would say, if yousee something like this, make
sure you call the FAA and say,hey, look, I see this drone.
Call the local authorities andjust say, hey, there's a.

(13:59):
You know, if you have a spot,you see a sighting of that
nature.
I know a lot of that has reallychanged, but I know that people
were quite concerned and it isalarming that a lot of this was
kind of going to the wayside inregards to like, yeah, kid, yeah
, we get it, we get it.
You know what I mean Likenothing this year, move along,
type of feel, and that doesn'tsit well with a lot of people,

(14:22):
and a lot of Americans ingeneral, like having questions
in regards to this Is this aforeign adversary?
Is this you know?
Are we being threatened?
Are we?
Is the?
Is this the United Statesactually saying, hey, look,
we're working on some type topsecret stuff?
And if that's the case, great.
Are they working on, you know?
Could it have been, you know?
For example, maybe it's youknow cell companies trying to

(14:46):
test out their new you knowmobile devices in regards to
putting up cellular things.
I mean, I've seen that kind ofthing before.
But in regards to making peoplefeel comfortable and at ease in
their own home or within theirown confines of their own space,
look there, we got to go withwhat the administration says.
I'm glad that we were to getsomething from the
administration, but I felt likeit was just a nibble of a carrot

(15:07):
, not enough information to sayyou know what.
As a conspiracy theorist, I'mlike okay, so what are we hiding
?
What's really going on?
What is the United Statesgovernment trying to do?
Is it again, like I said?
I said the government knowswhat's going on.
Obviously, it was a coordinatedeffort between whichever agency
and the faa, knowing what wasexactly going on out there.

(15:29):
And you know, as I told peoplelike, are you worried?
I'm like I'm not worried.
I try not to be, becausethere's so much other stuff
going on in the world thatthat's not a huge concern.
I mean, you know, you go backand we look at the, the
incidents and I'm sure we eventalked about this in past shows
about the balloon.
You know you go back and you'relike why the hell is this thing
floating in our airspace whenthat should have been, like that

(15:51):
should have been gone, likeASAP, really fast, that should
have been taken out immediately,and because we knew right away
that that was a chinese balloon.

Speaker 3 (16:00):
I don't remember how we knew that immediately, but we
did right.
And so what did we do?
We just let it literallytraverse the entire half the
continental us, right from thewest um to the east.
I mean, that was insane and thenthey finally shot it out of the
sky, or yeah, then we finallyshot it out of the sky, but
that's that's after it'straversed the entire us right

(16:20):
and gotten intel on variousmilitary installations.
And the thing about the efaa onthis current situation that
doesn't work for me is that whenI did my first show on this in
october, I found a website whereyou can get monthly kind of you
can download these excel sheetsin pdfs and basically they have

(16:43):
a list of all of the droneactivity over all major US
cities.
And at the time, because I waspreparing for this interview
with Colonel Mills and it wasinteresting because I was
looking at various cities andChicago in particular had a
gigantic amount of droneactivity, and some of these

(17:05):
drones are identified, some ofthem are unidentified, some of
them have certain colorcharacteristics.
Anyway, long story short, theFAA has this catalog of reported
drone activity over all thesemajor cities, cities, and if all

(17:25):
of these drones that wereoccurring on the east coast were
in fact licensed and authorizedby the faa, then why in the
hell did you allow them, uh, toshut down certain airstrips and
military bases when these thingswere being, when these were
flying over them?
So I mean, so at what point arewe supposed to believe that
this part is not talking to thispart.
And if the FAA is knowledgeableabout a program, for whatever

(17:50):
purpose, and we're now allowingmilitary installations of our
country that we maintain for ourown self-defense to be shut
down because they're notoffering up the information
about the things that they arenow saying that they knew about,
I mean, that just seemssomething is not right here, and
it's well.

(18:11):
Another thing is is just thesafety aspect of this right?
So let's say we've got allthese thousands, hundreds of
drones flying around, at whatpoint does that begin to be a
air safety issue?
And clearly this month ofjanuary has been a terrible
month for awareness of anaircraft accidents which have

(18:37):
been a real tragedy.
So I'm just I'm just sayingthat the more stuff you have
flying around and we're nottelling local military and local
airports about these things,then to me that increases the
likelihood of accidents withinthe sky.
And I'm not saying that droneshad anything to do with these
three recent tragedies.

(18:59):
I'm just saying, I'm justputting it out there that if
there's things flying around inthe sky that everybody needs to
know about, if I'm flying intoLAX or LaGuardia or wherever it
is, and there's a bunch ofunknown nonsense flying around.
That doesn't make me feel goodas an air consumer.

Speaker 2 (19:16):
Send us texts at 775-990-5151.
We are getting a couple textscoming in.
Michael, a guy from Tacoma, islistening in and says over the
past few weeks, my neighbor andI have been witnessing some
quite unusual things going on inthe night sky.
We've seen multiple drones inas large as small cars flying

(19:40):
and performing.
What looks like?
What do they say here?
lights that are red, green andwhite these drones have been
spotted near the Tacoma NarrowsBridge, commencement Bay area
and even near our home,interesting.
I know federal officials aresure that the drones are no
threat, but they reported themand that's according.

(20:05):
You know, that's great.
I'm glad the neighbors, peopleare listening, are able to
report that stuff, but still itdoesn't make you feel easy.
I will say this I know I was uh, resting here at my home and,
um, I live close to the airportand I I would say that I'm sure,
just like everyone else withwatching the headline news, that
I would say that your sense ofa heightened, heightened

(20:29):
awareness of traveling is quitedifferent right now, and we'll
continue to talk about that aswe continue with the show.
But I was like the pattern onhow they fly over west seattle.
This area is typically quiet andso I'm watching the pattern, I,
I hear this and I was like, uh,that's not normal.
A that's either a fighter jetor there, you know that's a

(20:50):
plane going the wrong direction.
So I open my sliding glass doorand I look out and I see the,
the plane flying over um, but asI'm watching, I'm, he looks
like he's coming from boeingfield, but to me it looks like
he may have taken off the wrongdirection because all the planes
were coming from the north, theland at sea, tack.

(21:11):
So he took off, jammed to headwest, but he flew over our place
and I was like, hmm, couldn'tfind any information in regards
to it.
But but again, michael, fromthe last couple months just
hasn't, even as a consumer offlying and having to go places,
I haven't felt.

(21:31):
I was like damn, there's a lotof things going on in the
aviation world Planes fallingout of the sky, you got.
Planes running off, running in,you know there's so much going
on.
Planes running off, runwaysrunning in, you know there's so
much going on.
Planes running off, you know,runways, things of that nature.
It just seems like there's somuch going on in the regard in
the world of the aviation stuffthat just doesn't make you as a

(21:54):
consumer feel at ease whenyou're like this has not been an
issue and it's still typicallythe safest way to travel and to
get places at it.
And you know, and well, Iwouldn't say almost, but travel
and to get places at a, you know, at a well, I wouldn't say
almost, but you know, to getplaces that you need to get to,
you know, within a six-hourperiod or a three-hour or
four-hour benchmark.
So quite interesting, you know,with what's been going on.

(22:15):
I know we can definitely talkabout the DC crash and the
conspiracy theories on what'sbeen going on with that, but it
has been quite an interesting, Iwould say, like three months
right now, just a three-monthwindow of aviation being so
highlighted in the news lately.

Speaker 3 (22:38):
It is.
And this morning because I wasthinking about the show today.
You know, this morning becauseI was thinking about the show
today and I was thinking Iwonder how many air traffic
accidents happen annually to USaircraft, and so I started
looking it up and the numberswere surprising to me because I
haven't looked it up in the past.

(22:59):
They may surprise you up in thepast and it may surprise you.
On average, we have about 1,200aircraft accidents per year to
US-related aircraft and of thoseroughly 1,200 per year, 200 to
250 of them will be fatal.
Now most of those accidentswill be related to kind of

(23:22):
general aviation, which is smallplanes, private planes and, as
you mentioned, professional orwhat's the word.
I'm looking for More majorairlines.
It is really really safe.
But I guess what I wassurprised about is because and I

(23:43):
think that we're not unlikemany people when you hear of
three very tragic accidents in amatter of weeks to start a year
off, it catches your attention.
You're like, well, I wonderwhat's going on, and not to
minimize those because they'reterrible tragedies, but we do
still have.
You know, nothing's perfect andthere's car crashes, there's

(24:03):
air crashes, and we still have,you know, it's nothing's perfect
and there's car crashes,there's air crashes and we still
have accidents, but by andlarge it's an extremely safe
manner of transportation.
And when I was thinking aboutthe drones, so when we had the
fires here, right, some some guyand and he just was in court,
like this past week so when wehad these terrible fires here in

(24:25):
LA, we had super scoopers right.
So they're coming in andthey're trying to grab the water
and they're trying to put outthese flames and palisades.
Some guy, numerous people, wereflying drones, which was
completely unhelpful, but anyway, one guy who turned out to be a
pretty well-to-do filmmakerhere in LA.
He flew a drone that impactedwith one of these super scoopers

(24:47):
and put it out of commissionalmost within the first night or
two of the fires and I've seenthe picture of the super scooper
.
So it only had a medium-sizedhole within the wing structure
of the super scooper, but thateliminated it from being able to
do its job and try to help ushere in LA with putting out

(25:09):
these fires.
So drone activity with aircraftis an issue.
It's something we have to takeseriously.
And to the FAA and to droneoperators I would say listen, I
hope that we're all on the samepage here and the FAA is
authorizing these drones.
And to the people who arehobbyists or whatever, I'm not
trying to villainize or makethis accuse anybody, but this is

(25:33):
a serious issue and you know wehave to pay attention because
accidents happen.

Speaker 2 (25:38):
You know, as you say, that someone who owns a small
little drone, you know justbeing I've only used it a
handful of times, but evenflying within my own area,
because I am so close to SeaTacAirport and you know adjacent
airports that I only have athreshold within my own drone to
go a certain height.
After that the drone will notfly anymore and it will actually

(26:01):
return.
That the drone will not flyanymore and it will actually
return.
Thankful for those who are, youknow, you know, beginner drone
users.
Um, it's interesting how, maybeyou know, different
manufacturers didn't go aheadand put a bubble around the la
area where the fires were to sayyou know what, no drone should
be flying because you have thecapability to say you know what
you know, and maybe they did andI, you know prior to that

(26:23):
accident, you know what you knowand maybe they did prior to
that accident and me not havingthe information and looking that
up, but them saying you knowwhat?
There's a threshold you can'tfly within this certain amount
of.
You know, there's a benchmark.
Now, okay, this is where thefire's at, you can't fly right
now.
You know, and I know that thesedifferent drone manufacturers
have the ability, within theirown software, to restrict drones

(26:45):
such as myself, who's verynovice, to the pros who are
running very large drones, whohave their pilot's license.
I do not, because I don't fly.
I'm flying a smaller, minimumlittle drone and I'll be honest
with you.
I mean I bought it and I'veused it maybe like a handful of
times and it sits because Ihaven't been using it for what I

(27:07):
want to use it for, like thatwhole unsolved mysteries where
I'm walking with my big old, youknow, like trench coat and you
hear the, and you know me tryingto, you know, pretend like I'm
walking in the mysterious nightwith my coat, and at least
that's how I pictured it and ithasn't worked out great for me,
but it is, you know, with.

(27:28):
You know things going on, suchas the fires in LA, the
manufacturers being able to dothis, and maybe they did, and I
just don't know or have anyinformation at this point how
they could lock that down.
And you know, prevent, you knowa tragedy where a drone strike
hits a plane and disables theplane.
So, moving forward, hopefully,you know these companies will

(27:49):
say oh, you know, I almost wore.
Oh, shoot, you know, maybe weshould.
You know, let's go ahead andput, you know, a protective
bubble around this certain areabecause they are flying low,
they're, you know, down to 400feet, which is, you know, and
these guys are doing some diceymaneuvers.
Those airspace should becleared for that type of work,

(28:10):
medical emergency, you know,bucket dumping, things of that
nature.
Our guest tonight, michaelParker, joining us.
You can follow him on Twitterat MichaelParkerLA.
You know it's been a whilesince we've had you on the show.
I mean so much has come andgone and new administrations
here.
I just feel like witheverything that's been going on
the different conspiracies, wehaven't really talked.

(28:33):
You know we should talk about,maybe, the DC plane strike.
Since we've been talking aboutthis, what's interesting to me
about this?
That there has been a trend inregards to the DC crash me about
this.
That there has been a trend inregards to the dc crash sparking
conspiracies.
Uh, you know, with the recentcrash in dc has generated
conspiracy theories.
You know that has beencirculating, leading to the
collision of the militaryhelicopter.

(28:54):
You know it's interestingbecause you see it from all
walks of life.
They're like oh, they were paida million dollars.
You know the guy?
Oh yeah, there was one that wasout there saying that the guy
who was flying the Doom chopperwas paid a million dollars
because there was somebody onthe jet that had information
that they wanted erased.

(29:16):
And it's so tragic becausepeople's lives were lost.
It's unfortunate.
You know things will continueto come out, but to me and I
think this is something thatwe've covered from way back in
the day to now that theconspiracies are always
interesting, but some of theseare just so outlandish in

(29:36):
regards to that was someone'shusband or wife or you know that
people, you know people's liveswere lost, super unfortunate on
what happened and how.
You know that people, you knowpeople's lives were lost, super
unfortunate on what happened andhow.
You know, and I hope that theycome to the bottom of you know,
get to the bottom of somethinglike this and you know
restricting the airspace andknowing that DC, that area is so

(29:56):
congested and in a busyairspace, you've got restriction
areas and you've got peopletrying to land at, you know, at
the airport there close inDulles.
What were your thoughts on thatday on that tragedy?

Speaker 3 (30:10):
So when that happened , I was actually traveling and I
was in Texas at that point.
I was seeing my father andwe're working on some things
together, so I was not able tostay on top of it.
But here's what my observationswere that I thought were odd.
And, first of all, my heartgoes out to the families.
And there was these, these kidsand their mothers.

(30:31):
There was part of the skatingteam.
I mean, it's absolutely tragic.
It's absolutely tragic for thefamilies of the of the people
who were on the helicopter.
Um, so we cannot understatethat.
But here's what I thought wasstrange about it.
Sure, was that immediately theypretty soon within the hours

(30:52):
after this tragedy, they saidwho the two male pilots of the
helicopter were.
And then they said the thirdmember of the helicopter team is
unidentified.
And then, in a day or so, theysaid we are withholding the name
of the third pilot of thehelicopter team.

(31:16):
The family has asked for us notto release the names.
The family has asked for us notto release the names.
Sure, in the meantime, there'sthese rumors online that this
third member of the team was awoman.
And then, one night, there wasthe rumor that we now know who

(31:41):
this female pilot was and it wasa trans woman, I believe named
Jo Ellis.
Well, that was incorrect.
A lot of people rolled withthis and they were talking about
it.
The next day, she posts a verysomber and brief video saying
hey look, I've been notifiedthat people think that I was on
board that helicopter.

(32:02):
I was not.
And then, within a couple ofdays after that, they released
the name of the third pilot, whodoes, in fact, turn out to be a
woman.
Anyway, what to me was unusualwas, like I don't know and I'm
no, I'm no expert on this, but Idon't really remember a time
when an accident of thismagnitude happens that we hold

(32:26):
back information at the requestof a family member.
I think that typically what theydo is they reach out to the
family first and explain youknow, we regret to inform you
that there has been a death ofyour family member, and we
release the information kind ofsemi-simultaneously.

(32:46):
But the fact that theyannounced the names of these two
male members and then later,you know and I'm not saying
anything, I don't know what thatmeans I just, in the days that
it was happening, I was like Idon't know that I've ever heard
of this before, know that I'veever heard of this before and,
that being said, I don't haveany inside information on this

(33:08):
other than I thought that thatwas really strange.
And I will also say that whenthings like this happen and you
hold back that information, itmakes people begin wonder, like
what's going on here?
And then they begin to fill intheir own details.
Now, the only thing that I canunderstand about this that I
keep hearing is that thehelicopter was flying, you know,

(33:30):
100 plus feet or so above whereit should have been, but it's
absolutely tragic.
It was terrible.

Speaker 2 (33:37):
You know it's interesting because you were
talking about that and, yes, Iwould say the same thing To add
to your point there, michael.
Um, there was a tragic accidenthere during the christmas
holiday here, uh, down by uh,mount st helens, mount rainier
and mount adams, where therewere two uh individuals that
were researchers or I I don'tknow what you want to call them.

(33:59):
They were sasquatch enthusiaststhat were out, that were out
hiking and they died of theelement.
But here's the interesting partof the whole situation I kind
of beginning to remember this goahead they died of exposure was
what they said.
Right, but guess what?
The names were not released.
And I thought that was quitestrange that the names were not

(34:19):
released.
So I started asking around andwas like what gives the same is
what you're asking.
Why wouldn't the names were notreleased?
So I started asking around andwas like what gives the same as
what you're asking.
Why wouldn't the names bereleased?
You know why wouldn't they like, okay, so two individuals died.
Okay, that really sucks.
And we had a guy come on who,tobe Johnson, came on the show
to talk about it and we kind oflooked at the area and we know

(34:42):
that there was a lot of uh, itwas rich in sasquatch sightings,
um, but it's unfortunate thatthey were.
They died of the element.
I'm like man, that'sinteresting.
Um, that no information otherthan that the two individuals
had passed away.
I know that they were fromoregon, so I don't know if
there's an oregon law thatstates that they don't need to,

(35:03):
you know, identify the bodies oridentify the names or share the
names.
There may be a different.
You know a lot in Oregon thatmay, and so we I didn't really
look into that any further I waslike, okay, well, if they're
not releasing it?
I just thought it was, just asyou're saying, very strange that
why wouldn't you okay if theyjust died of exposure?
Why aren't giving the names?
But kind of looking at the mapand looking at the topography,

(35:26):
something didn't sniff, thatpassed the sniff test, you know.
But it makes you think, itmakes you ask questions like
what's really going on?
Why are we not?

Speaker 3 (35:36):
And they did release those people's information later
, right, because it happened, Ithink, on Christmas Day or
Christmas Eve or something.

Speaker 2 (35:43):
So going back through that just really just made me
think I'm like what, why?
Why were they holding that?
And by the time we had done theshow, that information still
hadn't been released.
But they eventually, I believethey said how old the victims
were, but they didn't give namesat that point in time.
You know just what a sadsituation.

(36:05):
And so that made me think ofwhat you were just saying in
regards to what was going on forthe DC stuff, michael.
You know, as you know, wecontinue to cover a lot of
conspiracies, and I'm kind ofgoing back real quick.
I mean, it just seems likeeveryone's been getting sick
lately and I think one before wego to that.
I just my heart goes out toeveryone.

(36:27):
That's a part of the LA Fires,and what's interesting to me
about the LA Fire is that theconspiracies that have started
to flourish and arise now thatthings have kind of you know,
you know kind of calmed down.
But what's interesting and what?
Like?
My heart was just like bro,like how does this happen?

(36:48):
You know exactly, you knowyou're like where's the water at
?
How come?
You know we're in a time of youknow like why isn't right.
Obviously, you know, weatherhasn't been a factor in regards
to playing in favor of helpinggive relief to areas of this
tragic accident or this tragicthing that has gone through.

(37:12):
I mean wild because you startto look at the biggest
conspiracies that are startingto arise of they did this
because they wanted a land grabin regards to, you know,
changing how this is going tolook for the topography.
This was, you know, politicallydriven and it's like again,
like I always tell everyone,it's like damn, some of these

(37:33):
conspiracies are.
So, you know, I've been tryingto come to grips with a lot of
them, but, man, some of them areso out there.
It's just, it's interesting tome and someone like yourself
who's been a part of the lacommunity base, who is there and
has been a part of thiscommunity for such a long time,

(37:55):
michael, share your insights onthat time and, and what has
arose post, what was going onduring those wildfires.

Speaker 3 (38:04):
I have lived here since 1990.
You know, I've lived throughthe LA riots, I lived through
the Northridge quake.
I've lived through.
Well, when I say lived through,I mean I was here, yeah, and

(38:32):
numerous fires, including somereally, really bad fires just
from 2017 on that, were in theMalibu and the Palisades or more
the Malibu kind of area, out ofall the things you know.
And then when George Floydhappened, we had massive rioting
here.
You know that came on thebackside of the COVID issue,
like all of a sudden.
No, you don't have to stand,you know, six feet apart anymore
and wear masks.
You can just run in the streetsand steal, you know, things out

(38:54):
of ransacked buildings.
Out of all the things that Ihave seen in Los Angeles, I
would say that this was the mostprofoundly sad thing that I
have ever witnessed for the city, because the damage is of such
an astronomical level.
This will be the most expensive.
Now, was it arson?

(39:16):
Was it the Santa Ana winds?
That's another issue and I dohave ideas and thoughts on that,
but but regardless, this willbe.
Let's just say for the sake ofargument, it was just straight
up, natural wildfires.
I'm sorry, there's something inhere that's making me almost
sneeze right now, so I hope Idon't sneeze.
Um, I'm losing my point.

(39:36):
This is going to be the mostexpensive tragedy from a
financial.
This is going to be worse thanKatrina.
You think of hurricanes, youthink of earthquakes, you think
of Northridge earthquake.
All of that will pale incomparison to what the cost of
the LA fires are going to be.

(39:58):
It's going to be hundreds ofbillions of dollars.
Everybody in LA knows someonewho lost their home in this
situation.
And the other thing that'sweird about it was when this
thing happened, because I havetwo friends in particular who
live in the Palisades area.
One lost their home, onemiraculously their home survived

(40:26):
, and it's just the damage fromthe Palisades fire, the Eaton
fire and the subsequent firesthat happened.
There was numerous fires thathappened over that week or so.
Now, mind you also, it was onlya few days ago that these fires
were completely contained.
Imagine that this thing happenson January 7th and even after

(40:48):
we finally had some rain, like aweek or so, these fires were
not completely contained until afew days after the rain.
That's how big this was, and Imean it's just an absolute
tragedy.
And what you were talking aboutas far as the reservoirs.
I mean listen, that's real 170million gallon reservoir was

(41:11):
completely dry.
And you know what?
Governor Newsom and Mayor KarenBass should have both resigned.
And if they are not going toresign, then we should at least
try to recall them.
And if we cannot recall them,then we need to vote them out,
because and there was multiplelevels of incompetence on this
but this is an unimaginable.

(41:31):
There were so many things thatwent wrong in the response to
the fires.
It it's just unimaginable.
And I would say, if you want toknow what some people think
about the fire, how it happened,I would guide you toward my
friend who runs a website calledthe Duke Report, and Peter Duke

(41:54):
has done some great work onthis.
Unfortunately, he lost his homethere, but if you want to, it's
his story to tell.
It is not mine, but he's donesome very deep research on the
palisades fires and my fatherhas um property in maui, in the
wailia area.
So what was it a year, two yearsago, when the lahaina fire

(42:17):
happened?
And again, it was one of thosesituations where so many things
went wrong that you almost can'thelp but think okay, how many
accidents, how many mistakes,one after another, can happen
before we're leaning away fromthis all just being coincidence
and error to it being somethingelse.

(42:39):
So, and in both cases, you'relooking at Lahaina, you're
looking at the Pacific Palisades.
This is some of the mostdesirable real estate within the
United States of America, ifnot, the world breaks for the

(43:04):
people of altadena, of palisades, of all the areas where
thousands, tens of thousands ofhomes burnt to the ground and
there is nothing.
And even now, my mayor, karenbass, and our governor, gavin
newsom, have just done anabsolutely terrible job in
dealing with this and, um, it'sbeen one of the worst things
I've ever seen we we do have a aquick coverage of the map.

Speaker 2 (43:24):
that's uh that I found on the website of as a cal
uh fire, the cal fire websiteof the palisades fire.
It's just incredible to see howmuch devastation happened
during, uh, this tremendous lossfor so many people, and it's
interesting because a lot ofpeople who don't live in this

(43:45):
area and, look, we know that alot of this area is homes to
very rich people, but there areworking class individuals that
are part of this community aswell, and it's, it's, it's I
would say mostly working class,because the palisades, yes, it's
very desirable and there aresome rich people there.

Speaker 3 (44:04):
There's some, probably some rich people in
altadena as well, but most ofthese people are working class,
middle, you know, middle classpeople.
So it's it's not, it's not justsome stereotypical, you know,
playground of the rich andfamous, it's regular people that
lost everything our guest thisevening, michael parker, at.

Speaker 2 (44:24):
You can follow him on twitter at michael parker la.
He is on youtube.
You can watch his show michaelparker media.
Michael, do you feel like rightnow, with everything that's been
going on, do you feel like theconspiracy world has been kind
of tame?
Do you feel like it's been onan upper tick where you feel
like the conspiracy world hasbeen kind of tame?
Do you feel like it's been onan upper tick where you feel
like from from I would say thelast five years?

(44:46):
Can you, can you believe it'sbeen five years since we started
doing these?
You know the interviewstogether and these shows
together.
Do you feel like back in theday, during like the 2020, those
conspiracies were more raw ordo you feel like now the
conspiracies have been?
Do you feel like they're moreenhanced in regards to being
more far-fetched?

(45:07):
I guess, in the world ofconspiracies from 2020 to 2025,
where do you feel like we're atright now?
Do you feel like it's way overthe top or do you feel like 2020
was like god, jesus, you knowwhat I mean I know what you mean
, but I have a different take onit.

Speaker 3 (45:23):
So to me, like I don't like the term conspiracy
theory, I don't either, andhere's the deal.
It's like that was created as aterm to kind of get people, to
discourage people from askingquestions and having critical
thought.
What I would like to remindpeople is that there's all kinds

(45:45):
of people in the world.
We're approaching 8 billionpeople or something.
On this planet.
There's good people, there'sbad people.
Every day, if you watch thenews, you're going to see bad
people that have done bad things.
Well, that is not restricted tothe lower aspect of the
financial world, right?
I mean this.
There's good and bad people ofall stripes and of all um,

(46:06):
financial demographics.
What I'm trying to say is thatthis idea of conspiracies what
you might think is somethingthat you could never do well,
somebody else could very easilydo it.
And just because you can'timagine that someone would do
such a thing doesn't mean thatthat's out of the possibility
for others to do, and it dependson what is normal for you.

(46:29):
We all have our own normal,normal normalcy.
Bias, I think, is the termwhere, okay, I can accept this
much, but I can't accept that,and so what I'm seeing now is
just a continuation of.
I don't really think ofconspiracy theories as that far
out.
It depends on what it is.
I'm not a flat earther, but thegeneral term of conspiracy

(46:53):
theory, I just look at it morelike this, is what happened here
.
Why would it happen?
I look more at the strategy.
If someone was going to dosomething, or if this purported
event happened, why would thathave happened?
You know the old phrase q bono,you know who benefits right.
So to me, I think there's moregood people in the world than

(47:16):
bad people.
But you know what?
There's some bad people, andthose bad people can get up to a
lot of bad things.
And I think that we're in aplace now where, because of the
internet and because of 500channels of cable television, we
have more hyper focus on thingsthat are happening right now

(47:38):
and happening across the globe.
It's like we were talking aboutwith these terrible air
tragedies.
Well, three tragedies in amonth is really terrible, and
but if you go and look at thosestatistics where we typically
have 1200 air uh accidents ofsome sort, right with us related

(47:59):
aircraft in a year, you're likeokay.
Well, actually, while it'sterrible, I didn't have the
entire story right.
I didn't know how much of thishappens and still that's not
that much out of the entirescope of air travel.
So when it gets back to theconspiracy theories or is it
ramping, uping up, is itdecreasing?

(48:19):
I think that people are justbeginning to want to know more.
I think that this is all.
What used to be fringe is nowmainstream.
My wife laughs at me because Ihave a deep interest in in all
of this and I have an extremelydeep interest in the UFO, et,

(48:42):
uap question, right, right.
And so sometimes I'll readsomebody who's talking about
something.
For example, there's a folkrock singer called Father John
Misty and my daughter loves thisguy.
He's a really smart dude.
Anyway, a couple of days ago heposted something.
What was it?
I can't, um, I can't.

(49:03):
It was had to do with dianapasulkas and, uh, it was pretty
inside baseball for ufo typestuff and I was like whoa who
knew, like father john mistyknows about this deep ufo stuff.
And my wife looks at me, shejust laughs.
She's like come on, that that'smainstream now.
My point is that things thatwere absolutely, completely

(49:27):
verboten in the past you couldnot talk about, that you can't
come to thanksgiving and it'sgotten worse, but now it's more
like tribalized oh well, youvoted for trump.
You can't come to thanksgiving,or vice versa, or whatever.
You're not vaxxed or whateverit is.
But my point is now all of thisis very much part of our

(49:48):
cultural conversation that we'rehaving.
We're in the past.
No, we're imagining the guy inthe basement eating cheetos, you
know and, and looking up youknow UFO sightings or whatever.
So I'm rambling, I'm saying no,I don't think it's increasing.
I think our awareness of thesethings is increasing.

Speaker 2 (50:09):
I would challenge you , michael, to say I think maybe
that what it is, with morecritical thinking, asking
questions, I think maybe that'swhat we would be.
You know, like what the hellwas that?
You know what I mean, right?
I think that's what we would be.
You know, like what the hellwas that?
You know what I mean, right?
I think that's what I'm trying.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, forsure, yeah, for sure, uh, you
know.
Going back to you know your,your artists there, tom delong,

(50:29):
you know all these differentartists, uh, you know, sharing
their insight and differentindividuals coming out to share.
If it's, you know, I can't, mymind goes blank as, as I, you
know, people come up to you like, oh, have you heard the
information from x, y and z, andI can't even think of the guy's
name.
Um, you know all thesedifferent guys that have been

(50:49):
sharing their insight to youknow, what is you know of of
that fascination of the ufo, thecons?
You know the ufo, uh, you know.
Or the uaps and things of thatnature, and it feels like we're
so close on the fringe tofiguring out what's going on.
You know the same thing withthe, you know the elusive
Bigfoot.
Go ahead.

Speaker 3 (51:11):
Well, by the way, I'm pro Bigfoot.
I don't know if Bigfoot exists,but I hope Bigfoot exists.
How awesome would that be.
But what I just remembered isokay.
So here's something thathappened this week.
That's cool and not depressing.

Speaker 2 (51:26):
Because right now, I think everything we need a cool
story.

Speaker 3 (51:29):
So Representative Paulina Luna, who is a
Republican House ofRepresentatives person from
Florida, made this announcementlast week.
Now we may end up beingdisappointed, but back to our
UFO UAP thing, and this beingmainstream.
To her credit, she, along withTim Burkett and some other

(51:52):
people, have really been pushingthe UAP disclosure story within
the US government.
Big respect for that.
Anyway, she said, I believe onMonday or Tuesday of this past
week on Twitter if I can findher exact quote, here's her
statement I have an announcementthat will impact the entire

(52:15):
nation.
The press conference date willbe announced soon.
And then this otherrepresentative, this guy named
Jared McCaskiewicz, replied andhe's another person who's been
part of these UAP hearings saidquote I know so immediately UAP,
ufo, twitter X, whatevereverybody's like.
Oh my God, I hope it's like aUAP disclosure.

(52:36):
And then today there was someclarification where it said
whatever is going to beannounced will happen on Tuesday
afternoon.
She said 3 pm.
She's on the East Coast, so I'massuming that's 3 pm, tuesday,
east Coast.
Now, will this be UAP related?
I would love for that to be thecase.

(52:57):
I don't know what it's going tobe related to, but I'm pretty
sure it's going to be related togovernment transparency and
these things that we've nottalked about in the past.
I hope it doesn't turn out tobe an overdramatic nothing
burger, but this will bewhatever it is that she's going
to announce, and she'sannouncing it, I believe, on
behalf of other members of thegovernment.

(53:21):
She's been kind of chosen tomake whatever statement this is,
but I do think it will be aboutgovernment transparency and so
far this month, that's reallywhat this is all about.
All these things that have beenobscured eventually are coming
to the light, and people can getthat out of shape about doge
all day if they want to, but youknow what?

(53:43):
The, the, the drapes are beingpulled and we're being able to
see what's under the hood andwhat's been done, and I look
forward to hearing whatrepresentative luna says on
tuesday, whether it's related touap or some other act, um, or
some other facet of somethingthat needs to be discussed
openly.

Speaker 2 (54:02):
Well, and your thoughts are your, you know you
sharing that piece and made methink like, okay, you know, I'm
ready to know what's been goingon at Area 50.

Speaker 3 (54:11):
Me too.

Speaker 2 (54:11):
You know what you know what you know, these, these
different.
I want to know about the.
You know the Murray islandincident as I you know point.
If you're watching the, theshow, I'm pointing in the
direction of murray island, overby vashon island.
That was the incident thathappened where uh j edgar hoover
sent uh the men in black to uhgo figure out what was going on.

(54:33):
But what's interesting to meabout that piece in that story?
Because I know that there usedto be a museum here and we've,
you know, we've covered it uh,these two individuals that have
uh have, who had a museum hereand you know just like
everything else you know,shutting down during covid um,
shared their, their stories.
And how did j edgar hoover evenknow about the maury island

(54:54):
incident?
You know, because when youthink about it back in those
days, I mean, I think he knewabout everything at that point.

Speaker 3 (55:00):
I mean, he was he, uh , he was tapped into everything
for better or worse right, um.

Speaker 2 (55:07):
So I was like, wow, this is interesting.
But it it will be interestingto hear the, the stories about
the stuff over at mount rainier,the stuff at roswell, here
locally, all the you know, allthe ufo, uap stuff that may have
happened.
Was this, you know, how youknow, to find out like, hey,
look, wouldn't it be interestingto say, hey, look, the

(55:29):
government comes out and say,look, we've been working with
aliens for decades and they'vebeen helping us, you know, build
these stealth fighters andthings of that.
I mean, my mind would just belike I'd be like, okay, I kind
of had an idea like how do yougo from horse carriage and buggy
from the 1900s to you know, astealth bomber in the late,

(55:52):
early 90s, late 80s, early 90s,with this B-2 bomber that came
out, you're like what the isthat?
You know it.
Just the technology andinvestments during that
timeframe was justastronomically huge.
So that's why I'm like, oh,this would be awesome and I know
you've talked about that inother shows that you've done in
the past in regards to ourevolution and how we, you know

(56:16):
either, reversed engineer thingsof that nature.
So it will be interesting tohear to see if maybe we get some
other cool nuggets in regardsto that.
Thoughts before we head over,because I want to talk about the
JFK files before we head out.

Speaker 3 (56:29):
I don't know what it is that she's going to say on
Tuesday.
I'm all ears very excited, Iwant to hear it.
But disclosure in general, okay, well, here's another another
thing, because another thingthat people are talking about
right now is that there is asteven spielberg film that's
going to come out, I believe, in2026, and we all know who
steven spielberg is, right, Imean close encounters et, yeah,

(56:53):
yeah, huge filmmaker, right,right.
So anyway, he's making this newfilm.
I don't know what the originaltitle was supposed to be.
We had all heard that it wasgoing to be some kind of a ET,
alien related, ufo kind of movie, and now, all of a sudden,
they're saying that the moviehas been retitled to disclosure.

(57:15):
Ooh.
So, and that's, that's all overX right now.
So who knows?
I mean, some people have longthought that Steven Spielberg
was part of the what's the wordI want to say acclimates,
acclimating us to the idea, sureof of this.
And you know what, if thismovie that's about to come out

(57:38):
is another piece of that, Idon't know.

Speaker 2 (57:40):
I'm all ears, I'm fascinated by the subject and uh
, so that's, uh, that's kind ofall I have on that for a second
yeah, you know I I'm I'm nervous, but i'm'm excited in regards
to you know what's going to beposted out there or what we're
going to hear as things continueto evolve with this new
administration sharing and kindof like, as you said, pull back

(58:01):
the curtain to reveal some stuffthat has been a long time in
waiting for.
You know just some answers inregards to what's been going on
Our guest tonight, michaelParker, joining us from Michael
Parker Media.
You can find him on Twitter onhis Twitter handle at Michael
Parker, la Michael.
I know that we've talked aboutthis on previous shows and it's

(58:24):
I don't want to say it'sexhausting, but I would say
fascinating From the umbrellatheory to the grassy knoll
theory, to the secret serviceagent turning around and
shooting JFK, to the perch, tothe guy smoking the cigarettes

(58:47):
behind the grassy knoll, to theshots that were taken, possibly
by Lee Harvey Oswald from thebook I want to say suppository.
Well yes, That'd be rough right.
Yeah, it would be depositoryno-transcript.

(59:39):
What's your thoughts on thiswhole thing?
Do you think they're going toredact anything in these final
documents?

Speaker 3 (59:47):
Well, first of all, I support the release of all this
information on JFK MLK 9-11,anything that has been obscured
from us.
I would like to see the truth.
You know the Epstein files awhole nine yards.

Speaker 2 (01:00:08):
If you're listening to us on one of our platforms,
you should go and download thePatreon version.
We're going to continue ourconversation on the Patreon.
So if you're not listening, gocheck us out.
Go subscribe on the Patreonpiece.
You can get a little extrabonus with Michael Parker and
myself.

Speaker 3 (01:00:26):
Michael, continue on with your conversation so I I
know that some people hadresponded to you on tiktok that
they were more interested inhearing about the epstein files
than the jfk thing.
Sure?
So here's where I am not superoptimistic, because a president

(01:00:48):
can sign an executive orderasking for the declassification
of something, but, man, I don'thave a great deal of faith in
the existent deep state justhanding over its information,
that it is now obscured.
For what is it?
70, some odd years?
I don't want it to be redacted,but I'm not.

(01:01:14):
I'm not super optimistic and Iwant to be totally wrong about
this.
I want to be completely wrong.
I want the information to comeout.
I, just I, I I'm going to waitand see.
I mean, I, I want it to comeout because secrets are harmful
and they metastasize over time.
And there is, there is.

(01:01:38):
You know, these kind of thingsare why people have an animosity
towards the government, becausethey feel like, okay, well,
you've got jfk, you killed mlk,you've got this, uh, epstein
thing, you've got this, this9-11 situation, you've got the
ditty files, you've got allthese things that we don't

(01:01:59):
really know what exactlyhappened on and you seem to not
want to talk about it very much.
So this upsets people and youknow what is the.
What do they say?
That truth is the best sunshine, or sunshine.
Anyway, yes, this informationshould come out.
I'm not super optimistic thatit will, despite the intentions
of the current administration.

Speaker 2 (01:02:21):
You know, when you say that, I feel like I know
that stuff has been released bythis administration previously.
To coming back to coming backto office, you know, stop being
redacted.
It will be interesting to hearwhat's going to happen with the,
the MLK files, the and the RFKfiles as well Now, let me just

(01:02:45):
interject.

Speaker 3 (01:02:45):
My understanding is that some of the MLK information
has come out and we but it wasmore seedy information, just
about his life and things likethat.
And I, I I'm a fan of MLK and Ibelieve that we are all flawed
humans, you know, let he who iswithout sin cast first stone
Right, um, but that's differentfrom actual information about

(01:03:09):
the assassination itself, and somy concern is that stuff will
come out about jfk that you knowwe may get some additional
information, but it's not theinformation that we really,
really want, which is how didthis thing happen, who was
behind it, etc.

Speaker 2 (01:03:23):
And I just want to reiterate I hope that I'm wrong
it's interesting, as you saythat, because when you, when you
start to, when I hear you saythat, michael it, it goes back
to a character assassination andlook, these individuals have
been passed away for such a longtime.
Look, whatever is going onbehind closed doors for any of
these three individuals, theirbusiness, not mine.
Clearly, way before my time,I'm not going to judge anybody

(01:03:48):
because I don't want someonejudging me in regards to what
I'm doing.
You know, in my in, you know,in those types of circumstances,
look we, I think that theamerican public wants to know
what happened absolutely is theamerican public here hear me out
real quick.
Sure is the american publicreally ready for the information
?
They're like, oh my god, let'sjust throw something out there

(01:04:09):
like real quick, just for uh,for for talking purposes.
We find out that jfk was uhkilled by you know, assassinated
by the mob because they weren'thappy with you know that they
that rfk was coming after youknow had you know they had you
know they, the mob had felt likethey had something to do with
you know him going into officeas a a young press sitting

(01:04:33):
president.
Uh, this is just a ahypothetical uh, uh story that
this, you know this may not haveany you know factual
information.
But what if it was the mob thatyou know said you know what he
bit, the hand that fed him.
You know what I mean.
And that's why you see that jfkand rfk had uh said you know

(01:04:53):
what we're going to make youunalive and say and and that's
what they did, it was, it wasthe mob that took them out.
You know, maybe they, maybethey were pissed that you know
they were sleeping with marylandmonroe, who knows you know if
that was, if that was a thingtoo, I don't know that's.

Speaker 3 (01:05:05):
That's just a theory out there so I think what you're
asking me is do you think thatthe American public is ready for
this?
Well, I think they are.
And I mean just last year,another interview that I did and
once again I'm embarrassed, Ican't remember this gentleman's
name.
He's an excellent journalist.
He wrote a book that wasdeveloped into a television show
that I believe was on HBO orShowtime this past year and it

(01:05:28):
was called Mafia Spies and inthat book book he basically lays
out the story.
There's no question there were,I believe, alan dulles and some
of these people in the earlydays.
They had reached out tomafiosos.
Hey look, we want to do thisthing.
Do you want to partner with us?
And so that there's no questionthat that was happening.

(01:05:49):
My question would be like whoelse was involved?
So I think the American publichas already kind of digested
that and knows that it's true,and they know that the longer
you don't tell us the truth, theworse it gets.
But I think that the Americanpublic has accepted that and in
the first Trump administrationit is my understanding that you

(01:06:12):
know, because he wanted torelease the JFK information then
it is my understanding that Ibelieve, okay, mike Pompeo, who
I was not a fan of?
I believe he was.
I believe his position wasSecretary of State.
Anyway, my understanding.
I could be wrong on that.
I can't remember his exactposition Secretary of State,
anyway, my understanding.

(01:06:32):
I could be wrong on that, Ican't remember his exact
position, but my understandingis that he was the guy that said
to Trump don't do it, do notrelease the information.
And since then, trump andPompeo are no longer and they
are no longer friendly and hissecurity classifications were
taken away, which clearlydepicts to me that Mike Pompeo

(01:06:53):
and the rest of theinfrastructure they're guarding
their own per usual.
But in regards to the JFK thing, yes, I definitely think that
America's ready and I think mostof America and the world
already knows what kind ofhappened.

Speaker 2 (01:07:06):
Now the particulars yeah, We'll figure that out.
Anything from the industrialcomplex to who knows what it
could be.
Michael Parker, it's always apleasure to have you come and
hang out with us.
It's what a fascinating time.
It's always fun to go over someof these these different things

(01:07:26):
that are in the headline news.
Unfortunate for you.
I'm glad that you and yourfamily are safe thank you.
Um, I hope that this heightenedawareness of what you know, hey,
if I I should have that one guywho who came on the show like
how a long time ago, thegeoengineering, the storms, why
didn't they geoengineer a stormto make it rain?

(01:07:48):
You know what I mean.

Speaker 3 (01:07:49):
So that what if they geo?
What if they geo-engineered afire?
Oh, I mean, I mean, and, bro,I'm not saying that's what
happened, but look, nothingwould surprise me.
And these fires were terrible.
And I would just like I say, ifI had to point to someone who
has an idea, I would say if anyof your listeners are interested
in the subject, go to the dukereport.
It's a long.

(01:08:10):
It's a.
It's a friend of mine that I'veknown for 20 plus years,
extremely intelligent.
He lost his home and he's donesome very good journalism on
what he believes is how, howthis happened.
I don't know that it's true.
What I do know is that therewere a lot of things that went
wrong, that should not have gonewrong, and how many things can
go wrong before it looks likethat's really an unlikely chain

(01:08:34):
of events our guest tonight,michael parker media.

Speaker 2 (01:08:37):
You can find him on twitter x at michael parker la.
You can find him on youtube.
Uh, streaming on differentplatforms.
Again, always a pleasure tohave you on.
Uh, thank you for taking thetime to hang out with us to
discuss all these lovely topics.
Uh, I I look forward to seeingwhat happens here in the next
few weeks.
Um, again, thank you so muchfor coming to hang out with us.

(01:08:59):
If you have insights to what'sbeen going on, maybe you want to
share something with michaelparker or myself.
We'll have all the informationavailable on our podcast.
You can go to your favoritepodcasting platform and search
us phenomenon with mario magana,or just go to on air mariocom
and click on the podcast link tosubscribe for my entire team,

(01:09:20):
mark christopher sofia maganaand myself.
Mario magana, be sure to lookup at the sky, because you never
know what you might see.
Good night.