2023 TIC TAC - Military Expert Breaks Down Most Compelling UFO Evidence Yet! - Lehto Files - Investigating UAPs

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Right, guys. Today we are diving into what I believe
is one of the clearest and most tactically compelling UAP
videos I've ever seen, captured aboard the USS Jackson in
February twenty twenty three and released by Jeremy Corbel and
George Knapp on Weaponized. This isn't a blurry dot or
a misunderstood airliner. This object is flear confirmed radar, tracked

(00:26):
and verified visually by a senior Navy operator, and after
almost two decades working with targeting systems, thermal sensors, radar
overlays on the F sixteen, I can say with confidence
this is not a distant, misidentified airliner. So we'll do

(00:49):
a full, real tactical analysis, not something you see from
some journalist or some random YouTuber with no background experience
in any of this stuff. And I think you'll be
surprised what the data actually shows. I was Chris Lado,

(01:10):
welcome to later files.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
That we'll see things and it's unexplained, and we see
them so often that it's we just kind of joke
about it. You know. Well we'll you know, say we
can't explain it. You know, I'm a radar operator on
board the USS Jackson at the time of the video
in twenty twenty three. So the position is called TAC.

(01:34):
So we were monitoring the radar and that's what we do.
So if there's things that we can't explain when it
comes to the kinematics of a contact on our screen,
then you know, we'll use visual, We'll use other sensors
like sapphire. Well, you know, we'll look out of the
bridge wings and see what we can see to identify

(01:54):
what's around us. So take us back to this night
in February of twenty twenty three. What's going on? Where
are you? How does this first come to your attention?
So that night, it was an evening into the night watch.
We were standing and typical day underway, conducting normal operations

(02:18):
off the coast of San Diego. And there was a
time that I witnessed on my radar a few contacts
popping up. It was northeast on the contact on the radar,
the radars and relative and true. You know, I've been
in the Navy for twenty three years so as an
operation specialist, so I know the difference between you know, helicopters,

(02:41):
which I'm an air a helo controller myself that you
learn over you know, the years, to differentiate what's what
on your radar. So that night I noticed that I
couldn't differentiate what was what at all amongst the things
that I just mentioned. So I decided to go out
into the bridge wing just to take a look to see.

(03:01):
I didn't think it was that far away. I think,
you know, it's night time, so light travels, so I figured,
you know, let me just poke outside see what I
can see. And to my surprise, which is something I've
never witnessed, was a light I noticed on the horizon,
but it was it was It looked as if it
were surfacing out of the water and going up. Now,

(03:23):
seeing lights on the horizon very typical when you're out
out in the water, but seeing a light on the
horizon going into the air is a different story. So
witnessing that, I'm not sure of what I'm seeing. So
went back inside, looked at my radar to just kind
of kind of match what I'm seeing with my own eyes,

(03:47):
and I didn't really see what I thought I was
gonna see. I only saw one light visually, but then
I saw four different contacts on radar. So seeing those
four contacts on radar, asked the CSM to take a
look on Sapphire. They are in charge of managing Sapphire

(04:08):
and moving it around to just look at surface and
air contacts around our ship. So they slew over to
the location that I gave them, the direction in which
I gave them, and that's where you see the video.

Speaker 1 (04:26):
That Senior Chief Operations Specialist Alice Wiggins, he spent twenty
three years in Navy radar systems, so he's an E
eight out of a total of nine enlisted ranks, right,
So he's very senior in the Navy, very experienced technical operator.
So it sounds like he's been on chips doing this
job for most of that twenty three years. And his

(04:47):
job is literally to identify threats. He says, he is
a helo controller, so he's very experienced with the radar systems,
with looking outside and integrating with the fleer the Sapphire
he talks about. His job is basically to know everything
that's in the air around that ship. And I'm sure
he also works on defensive systems, right, And what's really

(05:10):
compelling in this case is you have three modes of
tracking this object. So first he sees it on the radar,
and that cues him to go outside and see if
he can see it with his eye. So that's the
first indicator that this thing is closer than what the
cynics argue that it's hundreds of miles away or very
far away and a distant airliner, right. So he goes
outside and he sees it come out of the water.

(05:31):
He says, very surprised to see it come out of
the water. He's used to seeing lights below the horizon
if it's a ship or even a low flying aircraft,
but in this case, it keeps climbing up into the sky,
into the air, so above the horizon, and that really
surprises him. So he runs back inside to check the
radar again, and that's where he sees not just one contact,

(05:51):
but four, so four contacts in the same area, even
though he only saw one visually, and that cues him
to talk to his CSM, which is basically your combat
systems manager and queue the sapphire to look out at
this thing and get an identification of it. And this
is a flear it's not just a blurry image. So

(06:14):
that is a thermal image, and now let's go and
check out and analyze actually the video. See how far
away and how large this thing is. Oy. Here's the video.
Thanks again to Jeremy Corbel and George Knapp. This is
just an amazing release. Let's check it out. Okay, So
this is a military grade medium IR flear, so that

(06:38):
means it sees in infrared, which is very good because
it works at night. It can also see in a
different spectrum, as we'll see with the Chilean UAP that
I'll show later in the video. Normally we cycle between
the TV optical modes and the infrared modes, but since
this is a night we just move the TV optical mode.

(07:02):
You can get some information with optical, so you could
have the light maybe, which would give some information in
this case, but normally you just have that out of
the rotary because you're going to only use normally infrared
at night. So again, this isn't your grandpa's flear. Okay,
this is liquid cooled, very effective system, and it's integrated

(07:25):
with the radar as we'll see here in a little bit.
So it's tough to read what's actually going on on
the screen, but this says night, so I believe they're
in a night mode. Whatever that means for the system.
I think this says black, so it means it's going
to be black hot. So whatever we see as black
will be hot. And that's a relative scale. Is there
other indicators you'll see if here there's some fault, I

(07:47):
don't know, if it's trying to get maybe that would
be where your laser range finding would be. We don't
get any range at the bottom we see sixteen February.
All these systems are going to be in UTC, so
it'll be in Zulu Time'll be basically late at night
on the fifteenth, is what I believe. And this is
probably the most important thing we're going to see on
here is the tracking. So this shows the elevation, which

(08:09):
is how high above the sensor it is. In this
case right now, it's showing one point nine degrees, and
I'll use that in this video to actually do the analysis.
I think that's very critical. It says their elevation the
asthmth is twenty two point three degrees. I believe this
is often knows that'll be related to this heading marker
and this heading that we see the top is should

(08:31):
be where the actual sensor is pointing, so the ship
will be going I believe maybe twenty three degrees, and
we're looking off the right side I guess is twenty
two point three degrees. I would guess it would say
minus twenty two point three if it was off the
left side asthmth or we'd see a higher number like
three four zero degrees instead of twenty two point three degrees.

(08:52):
So I think the ship is traveling right And that
makes this difficult to actually analyze, is that the ship
is moving. But luckily the planes were always moving in
the air when we were tracking, so quite used to that,
and ships are the same thing. You also see the
elevation goes up and down as the ship is actually rocking,
so that's the asthmuth. And then the coordinates here, this

(09:13):
is the west coordinate, And I had wondered how Jeremy
released the north coordinate, because he did release the actual
north and west coordinates of where this took place, and
he explains in the video links in the description to
Jeremy's channel, I recommend going watching the full interview with
al Alex Wiggins. But he explains in the other day
they actually had to stabilize and crop this, so he

(09:35):
does show they do remove the crop here in that
end of that video, and it shows the north coordinate
is over here. Okay, And so what are we seeing here.
It's in a wide field of view. If they do
zoom in, you'll see here there is a zoom scale
that pops up right behind Jeremy's watermark here, and it
will show how far they're zoomed in. So right now

(09:56):
I see no zoom. So this is a wide field
of view. And this is what this stuff looks like.
So at range, you know, you're looking infrared, and these
are not blurry images as people keep saying that they're
just tired of these grainy, blurry images. This is what
it looks like. This is what targeting systems look like.
If you're looking through a scope to shoot something and

(10:18):
identify it. This is what it looks like. And I
believe you could actually identify and shoot off of this
data that we get. Okay, hit play here. You see
a target here and target there. Okay, So there's two
targets that they're tracking. What are these other marks? You know,
it could be water on the sensor if that's a thing,
or that looks like the targeting radical actually, and so

(10:39):
these are two targets, and this is what it looks
like if you're targeting at range. You know, you get
cued by a radar and now there shouldn't be anything
else that size in the air. We're not concerned about
birds in this case, you know, as much as Mick
West has argued that we're tracking geese and ducks. In
this case. You're going to check your and then you're

(11:01):
going to look into your targeting scope. This is basically
a targeting scope, is what this is, and you can
identify what this thing is and shoot off of it.
Based on what we see today, you could identify and
shoot this target. I believe that's how good these images are.
That's what flear looks like. This is what it looks
like to target and actually shoot something. Okay, you'll see
they zoom in. Okay, and now he changes the field

(11:22):
of view, and I believe he may just have zoomed in.
You see here. Now this is how the zoom works
is you're going to have a line here and then
this will be This looks like full zoom in. So
he's almost zoomed fully in. And normally these other little
radicals tell you the narrow field of view. So if
he does go to a narrow field of view, now

(11:43):
it's going to show that level. So if I go
back a little bit, I think you have your narrow
field of view image here right, your little box here,
and then I think he just zooms in with the
radical you see it flip there, or he could go
into another field of view. Maybe they have like a

(12:04):
medium field of view in there. Okay, but it's basically
zoomed as you see there. So now he zooms in, okay,
and now he manually slews to the target and then
zooms in again. Okay. So this is very important, and
this is how I was able to determine how far
away it is. The Next thing I want to highlight

(12:26):
is these exes okay, and what will happened is they'll
just appear over the object and then stay in that position.
And what I counted is they appeared about once every second,
maybe a little bit less. So you'll see sometimes not
exactly on the object, but a lot of times often
right on the object. So some skeptics argue this could

(12:48):
be glitches or bad flear but that's not how this worked.
So I looked into the radar used on the US's Jackson.
It's the TRS three D or called the SPS seventy five,
and it's at thirty revolutions per minute. That means one
full rotation every two seconds. But we're seeing in X
every second, So how does that work? And the real

(13:10):
world explanation is that's just how military radars actually work. Right,
they're going to give you the best fastest upgrade rate
and some radars and I believe the SPS seventy five
here can give you a new track every half suite,
so every one hundred and eighty degrees. Right, it's a
flat plate. I think it'll give you an update when

(13:31):
it first sees the target and when it last sees
the target, so you'll get a track update every second
from the FORD and the AFT arcs and this match
is basically perfectly what we see. It also uses track
while scan logic, so that's TWS. We had that in
the F sixteen and we didn't use it. I'm assuming
now they have aces they will use it. But it

(13:53):
uses that to maintain a predicted track, so even between sweeps,
it interpolates motion and gives refined updates. So each X
could be a predictive queue, not just a raw sensor input.
But I think either way, it shows that the radar
is tracking this object and it's correlated, so it's a
correlated target. If you idd this as an enemy aircraft

(14:13):
or helicopter, you could shoot it. The other thing is
that is not blurry, okay, So if you look, it's
a very clear outline. If this was in the shape
of an F sixteen, we could target it. I mean
you can even kind of see shading on it or
the shape of it that even looks like a TikTok.
I think if that was a helicopter or an aircraft
actually flying, you would see it clearly. The other thing

(14:42):
you'll notice is there's no heat behind it. You know,
normally you would see exhaust from an aircraft, even a helicopter,
you could see some exhaust coming from its engines if
it has a turbojet engine on it. But in this case,
there's just nothing right, nothing there. Okay. Now I'll get
the Chilean Navy UFO from twenty seventeen, and this is

(15:03):
going to be the biggest debunk argument. I know, Mick
West has already brought it up. Looks like an airliner.
First thing is you can see the ground. Right, We're
getting a lot of other indications all around, right, other indications.
You can also see kind of weird artifacts around it,
and then it's just not that clear. Okay. Again, they're
doing a manal track on it. I can tell they're
manually tracking to this thing from distance. You see them

(15:27):
zoom out, zoom back in. So for me, this just
feels like a distant target for this Chilean one. It's
during the day, right, so this is what your day
video would look like. It can tell to me. You

(15:48):
can just tell it's far away. And there's no correlated
range data, okay, so they have no idea how far
away this thing is, and that is a huge issue.
We need is accurate asthma to a target and then
the range and we can shoot it right with long
range missiles and with guns. And here you can see

(16:11):
the aircraft entering what looks like contrails. Even you can
see the contrails in the TV mode. So to me,
this is obviously a distant airliner. Okay. I wish they
would have asked a fighter pilot at the time to
look into this, but they obviously did not. This is
just from the DHS type aircraft. But I think any

(16:33):
US fighter pilot would have been able to easily tell
you that this is a distant airliner. It even looks
like contrails. Okay, so this is descending. I can tell
it's descending. This is your control range. It's going to
be like a range of five thousand feet where you're
going to have contrails. And now the light is reflecting this,
so it's going to show up different temperature than the background.
That's why I've seeing it. The other thing you'll notice

(16:55):
is it's blurry. The object is actually blurry. Okay, So yeah,
it doesn't look like this. I get it. I know
you guys think it's blurry, but I'm just telling you
it's not. Okay, that's a you can easy idea that.

(17:16):
And it looks like a flying cylinder, looks like a
ticktak to me, it's just amazing. So now let's use
some actual fighter pilot analysis, not journalists or armchair quarterbacking,
and figure out how far away this thing most likely
is and how large it is. If we play it

(17:36):
forward until the object gets right into the radical, you'll see, okay.
And what happened is this changed, okay, And so this
move is the most important maneuver, okay, And it's basically
it's not tracked. If anything's auto tracked by the system,
it'll be right in the center like that, and the

(17:56):
system will just stick right on it and even they'll
put a little container around it to show that it's tracking. Okay,
So I know he's manually tracking whoever's operating the sapphire,
and this is going to be the most important thing.
There it is center. The elevation always cues to the
center of the crosshairs, and I know they're in a
manual track, like we already mentioned. So as we go
backwards here, this is the maneuver, right, So Alex Wiggins

(18:21):
tells the CSM to go track this object. They queue
it up based on the radar. They zoom in and
now this is the first frame the radar. The fleer
operator actually has to manually move the sensor down to
put it in the center. So as we go backwards here,

(18:44):
so this is where the fleer operator manually moves the track. Okay,
So that's going to be the most important part here,
the most important maneuver to figure out how far, oh wait,
this is and how large it is. So there it
is in the center, and we see it's at two
point one degrees elevation above the camera. The camera is
up on a mast around fifty to sixty feet above

(19:06):
the water. So as I go backwards here we find
the first frame where it came in. The object came
into the screen. Okay. There it is the first frame,
and it's hard to read here, but it says three
point seven. Okay, So as it goes up as it's
not moving, the object's not moving, he's actually slewing down.

(19:26):
And I can tell because the asthma changes. Right, So
the asthmus changes quickly, more quickly than the ship listing
and goes to two point one very quickly. Okay, so
that is one point six degrees. So the object goes
one point six degrees from the bottom of the field
of view all the way to the center, and he
is slightly zoomed in. Okay, So we don't need the

(19:47):
system information even so we can just use fighter pilot
math did it for almost a century now, so what
we can do is just zoom in. So I zoomed
in on the object right and then put a little

(20:07):
box around it. I messed up the box, but there
we go. I found it was thirty eight pixels, thirty
eight pixels wide, and then how far down is it
to the bottom, So if you look there, it's thirty
eight long. And then from the very top of the
object to the bottom of the frame is seven hundred

(20:29):
and eighty two pixels. Okay, so what does that give us?
So we have the object is thirty eight pixels long
in the video, and the vertical scale is seven hundred
and eighty two pixels equals one point six degrees. There
is some fudge factor there with the ship listing, but
again it happens pretty quickly. So your degrees per pixel

(20:52):
is one point six degrees divided by seven hundred and
eighty two pixels. That equals point zero zero two zero
four or five degrees per pixel. So therefore the object's
angular length is thirty eight pixels times point zero zero
two zero four five degrees per pixel equals point zero
seven seven seven degrees. Convert that too radiance. That gives

(21:15):
you point zero zero one three five six radiance. That's
how long the object is. So that's the angular length
will be used to compute real world size at various distances.
So now we'll use that length based on the angles.
That's the actual angular length to mill size, essentially the
distance based on how far away it is. Okay, So

(21:35):
case one, let's say the object is one nautical mile
away six thousand and seventy six feet, so the length
will equal ten of that number the length in radiance
point zero zero, one, three, five six times the distance,
and that will give a size of the object of
eight point twenty four feet. And I actually think this
is not correct because if it was that close it

(21:59):
was a mile away, I think you see much better
detail on the object. But that would be if it's
one mile away. So case two, let's say the object
is that twenty two thousand feet altitude and it's observed
at two point five degrees elevation, and they say this
in the tape, right, they say it's twenty two thousand feet.

(22:20):
Initially I thought that would be altitude, but as I
looked more into it thought about it more, I believe
that is actually range because these guns, right, the max
tactical effective range of that fifty seven millimeter gun, which
shoots three rounds a second, by the way, is actually
not that far. The max effective range for air targets

(22:42):
of that fifty seven millimeter cannon is only around two miles,
so that's going to be twelve thousand feet. So I
think they're actually talking slant range to this object based
on the integration of the gun and the missile systems.
So I think when they say twenty two thousand feet
in the video, initially I thought it was altitude, but
I think it is actually slant range, and so let's

(23:03):
look at it. Let's say, let's assume, as I initially thought,
that the object is at twenty two thousand feet altitude,
and it's observed in that case at two point five
degrees elevation based off the sensor's elevation. So if you
do ten of two point five degrees, that gives you
point zero four to three sixty six your slant distance,
then will give you eighty two point nine miles. That's

(23:26):
just simple trigonometry, right, So if this object is at
two point five degrees elevation, right, if you're looking that
far elevation, which is right above the horizon, then it
will be at eighty two point nine miles based off
of twenty two thousand foot altitude, which again I don't
think is the case. If you remember that Chilean Navy
UAP that airplane was up at altitude, and when it

(23:49):
was zoomed out that far that object was an airliner
distant airliner one hundred something miles, you could still actually
see the ground right, And in this case we don't
have any indication of the ground zoomed in, And that's
why I think it's quite close. Right, based on the
curvature of the earth, I think you would see you
would see the ground in a wide field of view.

(24:09):
So in that case, if it is eighty two point
nine nautical miles away, again, I don't think it is
the length based out the tan of point zero zero
one three five six will be six hundred and eighty
three feet, so it'd be six hundred and eighty three
feet long. So if the objects at twenty two thousand
feet of altitude and appears thirty eight pixels long, it's
roughly six hundred and eighty three feet long at eighty

(24:31):
three nautical mile slant distance, which I think is far
too large obviously for a tic TAC. And as we see,
it's not as blurry as that Chilean video, so I
don't think that is the case. I also think we
would probably see the ground. So what do I think
is the most accurate is case three. And this is
really interesting because this would make the object thirty feet long.

(24:52):
So if we solve for distance gate using length ten,
and we say, okay, thirty feet, assume it's thirty feet
now divided by ten of that number, it gives you
twenty two thousand foot slant range. Okay. So if we
use a slant range, which is what they say it's
at twenty two thousand feet, that gives us a distance

(25:14):
of three point sixty four nautical miles and an object
that's thirty feet long. So if the object is a
slant range of twenty two thousand feet, which they say
in the video, that's amazing, then it appears thirty eight
pixels long. It will be a thirty foot tic Tac
sized craft and it's only twenty two thousand feet away.

(25:34):
That's three point six nautical miles. That's still out of
gun range. So they still can't shoot at this thing, right,
but it is much closer than the eighty three miles
if it's at a twenty two thousand foot altitude. Okay,
So we go to the conclusion of the three scenarios, right.
If the object is one nautical miles away based on

(25:56):
that angular length point zero seven seven seven degrees as
measured pixels right, and the screen, it would be eight
point two feet long, which I think is much too short.
I think we'd see much better detail for was only
one nautical mile away. Also, that's quite close, right, he
saw it visually and on the radar. Any city was

(26:18):
never threatened, which makes me think it wasn't that close
to the ship. It's still out of weapons range right
for the gun. The gun's two nautical mile effective range
for air targets. Okay, So if the object is that
twenty two thousand feet altitude, as I'm sure mcwest is arguing,
which for one thing, doesn't make sense to me because
you would say flight level two two zero I think

(26:40):
in the navy, if you're calling out altitudes at that point,
and that would make the distance eighty two point nine
nautical miles and the actual size of the object lengthwise
would be six hundred and eighty three feet long, which
I think is definitely incorrect. If you look at the
Chilean Navy UAP, it is much blurrier. I know you
guys say it's grainy, blurry video but it looks clear

(27:03):
to me. I think you could identify it clearly as
a TICTAC, so I think it's not that far away.
I think what's much more accurate at the bottom line
is when they say twenty two thousand feet, I think
that is slant range. You're talking about people running flear
Sapphire systems on a ship that's used to coordinating helicopters.
It's used to shooting targets that are much closer right

(27:26):
within twelve thousand feet for the gun. So I think
they're calling twenty two thousand foot slant range based off
the targeting computer that's getting hits on the radar. So
that's what those xes you're seeing. So if it is
twenty two thousand feet away, then the size of the
object is actually thirty feet long, which is amazing because
that matches what Jake Barber said about the egg being

(27:49):
approximately twenty feet long, and also matches what David Fraber
said about the first ticktac in two thousand and four
in the same area, saying it was about the size
of a hornet, maybe forty feet long. So that is amazing.
That would give a distance of three point six nautical
miles and that matches up with Alex Wiggins seeing it
visually and then it rising out of the water, and

(28:11):
then from what I can tell on the fleer, the
level of detail looks around three point six nautical mile,
So if the object was thirty feet long, it had
to be much closer than a twenty two thousand foot
altitude two point five degree elevation. So if it's thirty
feet long, the object had to be around twenty two
thousand feet away based off what we can clearly measure

(28:32):
using firepolot techniques and real analysis, so it's maybe three
to four nutical miles out. If it's really eighty three
miles away like some people claim, it would have to
be over six hundred and eighty feet long, and that's
clearly not what we're seeing here. Another interesting point is
after the UAP left, Wiggins slewed over to another ra

(28:55):
radar contact, an airliner. He says five to six not
aic miles further than the TICKTAC and at that point
everything showed up the wings, the tail structure, the thermal
exhaust plume, and a transponder based ID is what he says,
so clearly an airliner. He also says five to six
miles further. If you're talking eighty three miles away, you know,

(29:18):
five to six miles not that far. It sounds like
it's a further distance. So that makes me think this
is only three to four nine a miles away, and
then five to six notical miles, will be almost double
the distance. So this ticktac is not an airliner lost
in the noise in the distance. It's a completely different signature.
And every operator watching that screen, I think, knew it

(29:39):
and even proved to the officer on watch said hey, look,
this doesn't look anything like that airliner. The final point
I thought was quite interesting is that Wiggins says all
four contacts which matched the visual sighting, departed at the
exact same moment, perfectly in sync. He said it reminded
him of a Navy tax formation executing, where vessels execute

(30:04):
coordinated turns. We do the same thing in aircraft, right,
We're all going to maneuver at the same time to
be tactically efficient, and so that was just on a
completely different level. He also says he could see them
depart right. That didn't just disappear or fade away. It
was like saw them depart and there was no noticeable
signs of anything any You're not going to see sonic

(30:26):
booms necessarily, but you would think there'd be some sort
of propulsion or something, but no, he said, they just
zoomed away, which is amazing. So this is not the
Chilean UFO video that was a thermal missidea of a
distant airliner easily debunked. Okay, this is radar tracked seen
by senior US Navy operators correlated to the fleer. So

(30:50):
it's FLEAR confirmed, radar tracked, witness verified, and I think
it is tactically remarkable. You see four of them together
departing at the same time. The TIC TAC in this
video behaves exactly like Commander Fraver described in two thousand
and four, and now we have clear thermal footage of
it with matching radar, So this is correlated information. I've

(31:13):
spent years working with these systems. I know what an
aircraft looks like on FLEAR and radar. This isn't it. Okay,
this is one of the clearest and most controlled up
captures we've ever seen. And if this doesn't make you
pause and ask serious questions, I honestly don't know what
will you saw the size matches, David Fraver's account matches

(31:34):
Jake Barber's account. Ero should absolutely investigate this case and
it should be raised in the next congressional hearing why
they didn't hear about it and why they aren't investigating it.
Now we should be asking our congressmen and women why
this isn't being investigated and to focus on this case.
I think this is all we need to prove that

(31:55):
these tic TACs are real objects out there flying around
doing amazing things. Thanks again to Jeremy Corbel and George Knapp.
It's just an amazing, amazing video. Thank you guys so
much for what you do. If you want the tactical
truth analyzed from real experience, subscribe. I'm editing an incredible

(32:16):
interview with lou Elizondo now, so that'll be coming out
on Friday. I hope to see you guys there. Thank
you so much for watching. Please support my work and
get behind the scenes info additional merch at Patreon dot com,
Forward slash Chris Laedo like these other amazing people, check
out our sister channel UAP Society for their weekly news show,

(32:40):
and then come to the Later Files discord to continue
the discussion while those links are in the description. Have
a great rest of your day, peace.

Speaker 2 (32:54):
Jazz. We scribe here.

Speaker 1 (32:56):
Anxiety six teams in place.

Speaker 2 (33:03):
Dude got like twenty two dollars eat actually one that Yeah,
that ship took off earlier

All Episodes

2023 TIC TAC - Military Expert Breaks Down Most Compelling UFO Evidence Yet!

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce

.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;}2023 TIC TAC - Military Expert Breaks Down Most Compelling UFO Evidence Yet!