0:00

know that there's a lot to

0:02

know about UAPs that they're just not telling

0:04

us, right? How do I know? I

0:06

got somebody on the podcast who

0:08

knows. Chris Cuomo here. Welcome to

0:10

the Chris Cuomo Project. Christopher

0:12

Mellon is as legit as you

0:15

get, okay? He is a

0:17

minted intelligence official from

0:19

the United States government. He

0:21

worked with Republicans and

0:23

Democrats, OK, not just as

0:25

colleagues, but within administrations, OK, Bush

0:27

and Obama. So he knows

0:29

what there is to know, and

0:32

that's why he's been pushing

0:34

so hard for transparency. So what

0:36

does he make of what

0:38

the Trump administration has done and

0:40

not done? What does he

0:42

believe about what is in the

0:44

air around us and

0:47

why it matters? What are his

0:49

questions? What are his hopes?

0:51

What are his beliefs? Christopher

0:53

Mellon is ready to fill in the

0:55

blanks for the rest of us. Are

0:57

you ready? Let's get after it. Christopher

1:07

Mellon, thank you so much for

1:09

taking the opportunity. Appreciate you. Delighted

1:12

to be here. Thank you for your

1:14

interest in this topic. All right, so

1:16

Brother Mellon, take me to the moment.

1:18

We are all waiting. The Trump administration

1:20

has promised transparency. They've come in like

1:22

a bunch of renegades that are going

1:24

to buck the deep state. And those

1:26

of us who are desperate for transparency

1:28

on this issue eagerly await and then

1:31

comes the word. And what

1:33

we hear from the White House is. Wah,

1:36

wah. Everything you

1:38

guys saw in the air

1:40

over New Jersey and everywhere else,

1:42

eh, fixed wing aircraft, helicopters,

1:46

commercial drones, nothing

1:48

to see here. Same thing

1:50

as the Biden administration. What

1:52

was your reaction to that? I

1:56

wasn't surprised. I mean, they

1:58

are naturally going to want

2:00

to try to

2:02

soothe public concerns

2:04

and prevent any

2:06

kind of uproar

2:08

or panic. The

2:11

fact is they don't really know. They

2:13

don't know what's going on. And

2:15

it's very clear they don't

2:17

know what's going on.

2:19

So while it's true that

2:21

many people were misreporting

2:23

aircraft and things, There

2:25

were clearly other cases. It's

2:28

equally true that they could not

2:30

identify the sources of the drones, for

2:32

example, over Langley Air Force Base

2:34

after weeks. They're moving

2:36

an entire squadron of F

2:38

-22s. They can't fly

2:40

safely from the Air Combat Command

2:42

headquarters that is supposed to

2:44

be protecting the nation's capital, among

2:46

other things. So if

2:49

they can't control their own airspace, you

2:51

know, kind of a protection.

2:53

Can we expect them to

2:55

offer the capital and so forth?

2:57

So deeply embarrassing situation for

2:59

the administration, for the Air Force.

3:02

And it's hard to reassure the public

3:05

when they really don't have any

3:07

facts. And people

3:09

are understandably skeptical because they're not

3:11

able to offer any definitive information

3:13

about what's going on. So they

3:15

default to nothing to see here

3:17

because they don't have any good

3:19

answers. Yeah, I

3:21

think they default to we're not

3:23

seeing any hostility Or aggression

3:25

no reason to panic which is

3:28

about the the best they

3:30

can do because they really don't

3:32

know They didn't even have

3:34

any video after weeks of over

3:36

flights of the Langley Air

3:38

Force Base The military claimed the

3:41

Air Force said they didn't

3:43

even have a single video of

3:45

these things how? And all

3:47

they do is reveal. How can

3:49

they not know what's flying

3:52

around over an airbase? Right, right.

3:54

It's and when you combine

3:56

that with what we see going

3:58

on in Ukraine, for example,

4:00

it's horrifying. I mean,

4:03

we're completely the emperor's

4:05

buck naked when it comes

4:07

to protecting America from

4:09

these drones, which are now

4:11

highly weaponized and precise. And

4:14

of course, it bleeds into

4:16

a larger question about what else

4:18

is overflowing America because our

4:20

pilots, military pilots are seeing a

4:22

lot of crazy stuff. There's

4:24

clearly not drones. I mean, 35

4:27

,000 feet go in 500 miles

4:29

an hour. That's

4:31

not a hobbyist drone

4:33

or anything of the sort.

4:36

weeks of drone formations operating

4:38

in the American West

4:41

and no ability to track

4:43

them down or identify

4:45

them. Drones overflying the

4:47

most sensitive parts of our

4:49

air base in Guam

4:51

and hovering over the ballistic

4:53

missile defense battery and

4:55

shining lights down on it,

4:58

like they're recording it and taking

5:00

photographs of it on consecutive

5:02

evenings. It goes on and

5:04

on. Our bases overseas, this is

5:06

happening in England. Nuclear

5:09

power plants, it's

5:12

a very

5:14

concerning pattern. And

5:16

I think within the

5:18

government, there's kind of shock

5:20

and embarrassment or realization

5:23

that we're in a very

5:25

vulnerable situation. What

5:27

is your best sense of what we're

5:29

dealing with? I

5:31

think we're dealing with a range of things. And

5:34

in some cases, my guess would be

5:36

in Guam, for example, that was probably

5:38

Chinese drones. I

5:40

think there was some other cases

5:43

involving Navy ships where it was

5:45

most likely Chinese drones. Recently,

5:47

a young man was

5:49

arrested. He was

5:51

flying a drone over a

5:53

naval shipyard in Virginia. Chinese

5:56

visitor to this country

5:58

of students. So there's that

6:00

kind of traditional espionage

6:02

that is being sort of

6:04

accelerated with the implementation

6:07

of drone technologies. But in

6:09

addition, for years now,

6:11

we've been seeing things that

6:13

defy not only sort of

6:15

our understanding of what they

6:17

are, where they're coming from,

6:19

but how they even work.

6:21

And we're seeing propulsion less

6:23

craft. that are, in

6:25

some cases, they sphere six

6:27

feet across with a cube

6:30

inside that fly in formation

6:32

that sometimes goes supersonic speeds

6:34

without breaking the sound barrier,

6:36

seemingly, that are utterly

6:38

baffling. The Nimitz case, as you

6:40

know, is a great example of that,

6:42

but that's only one example. And

6:45

there are great many more.

6:47

It's actually becoming almost

6:49

overwhelming when you look at the number

6:51

of incidents that occur in places

6:53

like Arizona, where our F

6:56

-35 and F -22 pilots are

6:58

training and they're running in

7:00

with single week, they might

7:02

have three or four different

7:04

encounters just in that one

7:06

area with objects that are

7:08

just baffling. You

7:13

have so much experience in this

7:15

area and understanding how the government

7:17

processes things and what it knows.

7:19

And, you know, one

7:21

of the reasons I think

7:23

you're so helpful in this transparency

7:25

push is, one, it's hard

7:27

to dismiss you as a little

7:29

green man fanatic. And

7:31

you've worked for Republicans and

7:33

Democrats in their administrations. What

7:36

do you make of the pushback that

7:38

someone like I, I've never been involved

7:40

in the UFO UAP world in my

7:42

life. It is not a point of

7:45

personal fascination. I'm a transparency guy. And

7:47

what is your read on

7:49

how people want to dismiss that,

7:51

wow, what's happened to Cuomo,

7:53

man? He's gone full tin foil

7:55

hat. Why is this so

7:58

easy to dismiss for legitimate media

8:00

when it's clearly just a

8:02

transparency issue? How do you spend

8:04

so much money, do so

8:06

many operations, use special operators from

8:08

the military if there's nothing

8:10

for you to tell anybody? Yeah,

8:13

I think you're on

8:15

a really great point here.

8:17

There are a lot

8:19

of problems here. So

8:21

you're raising sort of several different

8:23

issues. One has to do with

8:25

this issue of stigma. And

8:28

many people are subliminally

8:30

frightened if not terrified of

8:32

this issue. It's very

8:34

hard for a lot of people to

8:36

process because it's so contrary to everything

8:38

they've been taught and everything they believed.

8:42

What we find though is,

8:44

for example, there was a

8:46

study of astronomers by an

8:48

astronomer at Stanford, and what

8:50

he found was that when

8:52

astronomers who had been exposed

8:54

to information about UAP, the

8:56

more exposure they had, the

8:59

more likely they were to support

9:01

scientific research. So a lot

9:03

of it is just plain ignorance. When

9:05

you actually look at the historical record,

9:07

it's overwhelming. So Sturrick

9:09

found, Professor Sturrick, that

9:11

if astronomers had had 50

9:14

hours of exposure to

9:16

UAP, two -thirds of them

9:18

supported scientific involvement by the

9:20

government and the scientific

9:22

community. So ignorance is a

9:24

huge factor. I would say cognitive dissonance

9:26

is a huge factor. And

9:29

this is sort of

9:31

a circular argument, because what

9:33

happens is people who

9:35

are skeptical resist collecting

9:37

the information or efforts to

9:39

collect it, and then therefore we

9:41

don't have the information to

9:43

show people, which reinforces the skepticism.

9:45

And the government has

9:47

been failing to release

9:49

even unclassified information. And

9:52

part of my message

9:54

to congressmen is that there

9:56

is a trove of

9:58

information that should be unclassified,

10:00

that is inappropriately classified,

10:02

or simply no one has

10:04

made the effort to

10:06

submit it to be released.

10:09

I think I took three

10:11

videos that were unclassified to

10:13

the press in 2018, 2017,

10:16

as you know, New York

10:18

Times, Washington Post. That

10:20

was, I was investigated, the

10:22

Air Force confirmed that they were

10:24

truly unclassified. Two years

10:26

later, they created a classification guide

10:28

that tries to suggest that exactly the

10:30

same kinds of videos are now

10:33

suddenly a threat to national security. Well,

10:35

how is that possible? It makes no

10:37

sense whatsoever. And

10:39

yet that's what they've done. If

10:41

I may, I'd like to read a

10:43

short excerpt from testimony before Congress of

10:45

the Defense Department. So

10:48

Mr. Bray from the Office of

10:50

Naval Intelligence was asked if they

10:52

have a clear and repeatable process

10:54

for considering public release. And

10:56

he says, quote, what I will commit

10:58

to, at least for that material is under

11:00

my authority as Deputy Director of Naval

11:03

Intelligence, For information we have

11:05

that does not involve sources or

11:07

methods, et cetera,

11:09

I commit to declassifying

11:11

that. I believe very

11:13

much in the transparency of this,

11:15

and we worked very hard to balance

11:17

that with national security. For

11:19

the best of my knowledge, they

11:21

haven't declassified a single video since then.

11:24

That was three years ago,

11:27

and we're now at

11:29

over 1 ,800 official reports. You're

11:31

telling me that none of those?

11:34

We're unclassified. We know that a good

11:36

number of them are people using

11:38

iPhones. How is that a

11:40

sensitive source of method it's made in China?

11:43

Some of them are guys using

11:45

night vision goggles or handheld camcorders

11:47

on the decks of Navy ships. Same

11:50

question arises. What

11:52

about the same targeting pod that was

11:55

used to collect the videos, gimbal, and

11:57

FLIR and so forth that I shared

11:59

with the press? that actually helped

12:01

national security. There are probably a

12:03

couple dozen at least of those in

12:05

the system, taken in the same

12:07

areas that haven't been released. So

12:10

I think that this pledge

12:12

has not been acted on.

12:14

I think they're in breach

12:16

of that commitment. And

12:19

my understanding from talking recently with

12:21

government officials as part of the problem

12:23

is there's nobody in the system

12:25

who's an advocate for doing this. So

12:27

he comes in, it sits on the computer,

12:29

and there's not a single person who thinks,

12:32

oh, the public has the right to see this,

12:34

or we should get this out, or oh, by

12:36

the way, didn't we tell Congress we were going

12:38

to do this? There are two

12:40

problems. First one

12:43

is the sources and

12:45

methods Boogeyman. Once you

12:47

bracket the disclosure and with

12:49

all due respect to your intelligence

12:51

background within the DoD and every other

12:53

government agency. Once you guys

12:55

say, as long as it's not

12:57

sources and methods, I know as

12:59

a journalist, I'm not going to

13:01

get what I want because you

13:03

guys can tuck anything you want

13:05

under that category. So how much

13:08

of a kind of an obstacle

13:10

is that just automatically? Well,

13:13

this is this is what

13:15

I'm trying to say. I believe

13:17

the current classification guy that you're

13:19

referring to violates the executive president's

13:21

executive order on classification. I

13:23

think they have

13:25

classified inappropriately in violation

13:27

of that order

13:30

a considerable amount of

13:32

UAP material and

13:34

there are some Wrinkles

13:37

in here, sometimes this information

13:39

sits on a communication backbone

13:42

that mixes classified and unclassified.

13:45

And so they have to go

13:47

through a process, but they're

13:49

clearly not making good on this

13:51

commitment. And at the time,

13:53

I argued against this declassification guide.

13:55

It was clear to me

13:57

that it was greatly overstepping its

13:59

bounds and unnecessarily and inappropriately

14:01

doing so. I don't know how

14:03

you can say that an

14:05

iPhone video is a sources and

14:07

methods issue, unless it's in

14:10

a denied area or it's showing

14:12

something of ours that is

14:14

very secret. Of course, there are

14:16

those kind of situations. Setting

14:18

all that aside, there's no doubt

14:21

in my mind that there is

14:23

a pile of imagery that would

14:25

be useful for educating the public.

14:27

It would be useful to the

14:29

scientific community. It would be useful

14:31

to Congress. And

14:33

remember that even the

14:36

congressmen who have access

14:38

to classified material theoretically, it's

14:41

not often that it gets outside. It's

14:43

not often that it's actually shared with them.

14:45

And what it is, it's a limited number of

14:47

committees. The best way to

14:49

get this information to Congress is

14:51

also through the press. And

14:54

so the failure

14:56

in that regard, I

14:58

think, is

15:01

huge. Support

15:04

comes from Cozy

15:06

Earth. Oh, I love

15:08

my Cozy Earth.

15:10

Why? I love the materials

15:12

that they use because I like

15:14

responsible companies and I like people

15:16

who are thinking about the environmental

15:18

effects of what they do. But

15:20

also, I love the wear factor.

15:22

It feels quality. It holds up

15:24

well, no matter how often you

15:26

wash and dry it. And that's

15:29

important to me. Those

15:31

Cozy Earth bamboo sheet sets They're

15:33

the real deal for me,

15:35

okay? Soft, cool, breathable. Best I've

15:37

ever owned. There's no question

15:39

about it. My wife agrees. So,

15:41

still on the fence? Try

15:43

cozy earth risk -free for a

15:46

hundred nights. If you don't like

15:48

it, just send it back.

15:50

No questions asked. Plus, every bedding

15:52

product comes with a 10 -year

15:54

warranty for long -lasting comfort. 10

15:56

years! How can you go

15:58

wrong? Make sleep a priority now.

16:01

Visit CozyEarth.com and use my

16:03

exclusive code, Chris. for up

16:05

to 40 % off Cozy

16:07

Earth's best -selling sheets, towels, pajamas,

16:10

and more. That's CozyEarth.com Code Chris. And

16:12

if you get a post -purchase survey,

16:14

please tell them you heard about

16:16

Cozy Earth right here in the Chris

16:19

Cuomo Project. So

16:23

as a result of the

16:25

lack of transparency, it has

16:27

fueled the fantastical notions, the

16:29

paranoia, and How do you

16:32

deal with the question of

16:34

the unknown being explained as

16:36

a function of the extraterrestrial?

16:38

That if they won't tell

16:40

us what it is, that's

16:42

because it's from out of

16:44

this world. Yeah,

16:46

so it's possible some

16:48

of these things are from

16:50

out of this world

16:52

and that's a legitimate hypothesis.

16:54

It's natural that in

16:56

a case like the Nimitz,

16:58

case that people would

17:00

go to that hypothesis because

17:02

it actually works. I

17:05

think their failure to

17:07

be more forthcoming obviously supports

17:10

all kinds of conspiracy

17:12

theories and discontent and so

17:14

forth. This administration has

17:16

been good on the JFK

17:18

issue for what I

17:20

can see and they're moving

17:22

to get MLK records

17:24

out. They've got this declassification

17:27

task force uh represented burleson has

17:29

said he's going to hold hearings

17:31

he's going to use issue of

17:34

subpoenas where necessary so we may

17:36

see uh some new information coming

17:38

forward i certainly hope so i

17:40

think there's an opportunity here to

17:42

do that and i think the

17:44

public has a right but not

17:46

only is there a right in

17:49

principle there are actual you know

17:51

utilitarian benefits from this If the

17:53

public didn't know about the Soviet

17:55

Union putting a satellite in orbit,

17:57

we wouldn't have had the space

17:59

program and we wouldn't have gotten

18:01

to the moon when we did.

18:04

Thankfully, the intelligence community was not able

18:06

to snuff that and they would have

18:08

if they could have and kept it

18:10

out on the public knowledge and domain. So

18:14

I think it's really important where

18:16

we can that we make this information

18:18

available. It also makes the public

18:20

more resilient. in the event

18:22

that something happens beyond our

18:24

control, the more background knowledge and

18:26

information people have, the more

18:28

resilient the population is. If they

18:30

know this has been going

18:32

on for decades, maybe hundreds of

18:34

years, we haven't seen

18:36

aggression. They're more likely in

18:38

the event that something shocking

18:40

happens to be able to

18:42

accommodate it without overreacting. What

18:44

do you make of the

18:46

idea when you say, well,

18:48

there is a hypothesis where

18:51

you introduce the possibility

18:53

that this comes from

18:55

somewhere other than this

18:57

planet, that you immediately

19:00

lose credibility. As soon

19:02

as you say that three quarters,

19:04

maybe seven eighths of the

19:06

media and any politician who aspires

19:08

to hire office says, well,

19:10

that's crazy sauce right there. Yeah,

19:13

I've been careful. You

19:16

know, the problem is if you can't back

19:18

up a claim like that. I'm

19:21

prepared to say that if I can

19:23

back it up. I

19:25

don't have anything that I can

19:27

present to the public right

19:29

now that says the Tic Tac

19:31

was definitely an alien vehicle.

19:34

And in the meantime, our government

19:36

has not defined any criteria

19:38

that would let us say, okay,

19:41

this is so over the line.

19:43

It can't be Russia or China

19:45

or us. It's gotta be somebody

19:47

else. So they don't have any

19:49

any basis for they're deliberately leaving

19:51

it fudgy It's a very hard

19:54

issue for people to panic on

19:56

nobody wants to say the word

19:58

alien or think about this For

20:00

for these exact reasons. It's still

20:02

a there's still a lot of

20:04

stigma. That's still a big issue

20:07

So a lot of this is

20:09

about where we are also one

20:11

of the reasons I'm pushing it

20:13

As much as I do is

20:16

because we are at

20:18

the bottom of a

20:20

curve of trust right

20:22

now. And I've always

20:24

felt that this issue

20:26

is a layup for

20:29

restoring trust, okay? It's

20:31

not like, you know, and with all due

20:33

respect to people who have more wild notions

20:35

than I do, I don't believe

20:37

the US government can keep a

20:39

meaningful secret. Frankly, so if there was,

20:42

well, listen, we really have aliens

20:44

in a lab and they're just starting

20:46

to talk to us. So we

20:48

don't want to blow this up, you

20:50

know, or, you know, we got

20:52

them right in a room next to

20:54

Jesus and we don't want to

20:56

freak people out. If

20:59

even, you know, with

21:01

that kind of mythology in

21:03

the air, I don't

21:05

believe that that's the defense, is that

21:07

the government's protecting us from something that we

21:09

just can't handle. I think

21:11

it's more about giving people power

21:13

and their desire to want to use

21:16

it. and you need transparency right

21:18

now because there's such a dearth of

21:20

trust. And this to me is

21:22

like a layup because unless you got

21:24

Jesus in room, unless you got

21:26

little green men who are finally starting

21:28

to talk, you can tell people

21:30

about so much of this stuff and

21:32

make them have growing levels of

21:35

confidence in the men and women who

21:37

they put in power. Yeah,

21:40

I would disagree with you on

21:42

the issue of the government not

21:44

being able to keep secrets. In

21:48

fact, you

21:50

said meaningful secrets, so by

21:52

that you mean something that's

21:54

politically loaded, that's explosive or

21:56

something maybe, but I can

21:58

tell you that people have

22:01

such a lack of understanding

22:03

of how much information we

22:05

have secret. that they

22:07

don't appreciate the extent, the

22:09

massive extent of government secrecy and

22:11

the degree to which, in

22:13

some cases, nobody even in Congress

22:15

has a clue. So

22:18

when I was involved in

22:20

reviewing Black programs at DOD, I

22:23

won't state this precise

22:25

number, but we're talking lots,

22:27

hundreds, not a single one

22:29

of those leaked. And the

22:31

Director of Central Intelligence was not cleared for those.

22:33

I was not able to share some

22:36

of that information with the advisors

22:38

to the President and the National Security

22:40

Council in some cases. The

22:42

Department of Energy Black Programs, there

22:44

is no oversight committee in Congress except

22:47

for DOD approves and their black

22:49

programs I think are completely off the

22:51

radar and they have tens of

22:53

billions of dollars. There

22:55

are tons of black

22:57

programs out there that never

22:59

leak over decades and decades, some

23:02

of which are certainly newsworthy, much

23:05

as say the B2 bomber was

23:07

when it came out. Everybody was shocked.

23:09

We had this incredible technology. There

23:12

are other things like that today that

23:14

we have quite a few of them and

23:16

nobody has any idea. So

23:18

I would challenge the idea. The other thing I

23:20

would say that when it comes to this particular

23:22

issue, It's almost impossible to leak.

23:24

You cannot go to any major media

23:26

organization in this country. I can bring

23:28

people in there who claim they worked

23:30

on this program. They will

23:32

not write a story about it. They

23:34

won't publish it. They

23:37

won't touch it. People have tried to

23:39

leak this for years and years. And

23:41

that same idea of this is incredible.

23:44

We're going to be laughed at. The

23:46

mainstream news organizations won't touch it.

23:48

It's almost leak proof. Well,

23:51

I took Dave Regression, introduced him

23:53

to some editors at one

23:55

of the major outlets, and they

23:57

didn't feel there was anything

23:59

there worth publishing. Well, that's clearly

24:01

changed. And I

24:03

think News Nation actually has had

24:06

a good amount to do with

24:08

that, because it's obviously a legitimate

24:10

organization. It's owned by the largest

24:12

holder of local news stations in

24:14

America next door. So if

24:16

we're putting our name on it,

24:18

same as me having it on

24:20

my chest, it comes...

24:22

I will concede you were

24:24

a brave, shiny exception, but

24:26

over the years until the

24:28

news station came along, it's

24:30

very hard to find any

24:32

place that would It's scary

24:35

because having been an anchor

24:37

at ABC News at CNN,

24:39

even at Fox News before

24:41

that, people think you're unserious.

24:44

You're unserious. If you're talking about aliens,

24:46

you're unserious. Let's

24:49

deal with something that's a very

24:51

sticky bit about that. There are

24:54

so many people who call themselves

24:56

Christians who think it's absurd to

24:58

talk about the idea of life

25:00

outside of earth. So,

25:02

you have billions of people,

25:05

like me, who have chosen to

25:07

have faith. in something that

25:09

I cannot demonstrate in any way,

25:11

but I won't talk about

25:13

the possibility that this is the

25:15

only organic matter that has

25:17

been able to use carbon the

25:19

way has been used on

25:21

earth anywhere in the universe. Somewhat

25:23

laughable when you look at it

25:25

that way, but it's too deep

25:28

for media and politics. I agree

25:30

with what you said about secrets

25:32

and that there are many things

25:34

in the unknown, knowable space. I

25:36

agree with you. I don't know

25:38

what you know. But I agree

25:40

with you. I'm talking about this,

25:42

that if there were aliens among

25:44

us, I think that people would

25:47

have a sense of it by

25:49

now. I think that'd be too

25:51

hard to keep. That's just my

25:53

suspicion. But the most

25:55

important and accessible part

25:57

of this is that

25:59

whatever the interest is

26:02

in discretion by those

26:04

with the information, It

26:06

is backfiring. Nobody believes that

26:09

things are being kept from

26:11

the American people for their

26:13

own good or for national

26:15

security when it comes to

26:17

this. They believe it's either

26:20

deep state elitism or it's

26:22

nonsense, but the lack of

26:24

transparency, I think, hurts. Nobody

26:26

has confidence that it's being

26:28

withheld for the right reasons.

26:31

Yeah, I can't argue with

26:34

you on that. And

26:36

there is a lot

26:38

of work to be done

26:40

to restore faith in

26:42

the government and restore trust.

26:44

This issue in particular

26:46

is one of the prime

26:49

examples, and it does

26:51

lead to all manner of

26:53

conspiracy theories and beliefs. I

26:57

think the best antidote is getting

26:59

to the ground truth to the extent

27:01

we can. I know

27:03

that there is some unclassified information

27:05

right now in the hands

27:07

of the government that is the

27:09

kind of thing that would

27:11

have some impact that would change

27:13

some lines or at least

27:15

open some to considering this issue.

27:18

That information is available

27:20

to make public. I

27:23

can't imagine any a

27:25

legitimate argument for classification. And

27:29

so I'm hoping that with

27:31

this new pressure from Congress and

27:33

from people like yourself raising

27:35

this issue, that information

27:37

will start to get to the public

27:39

to help them better decide for

27:41

themselves, not to convince them of a

27:44

particular point of view, but to

27:46

help them better appreciate what people in

27:48

the government are seeing, what the

27:50

military is seeing, and what the bottom

27:52

line is. Right. And

27:54

it's a double -edged sword. So

27:56

there's the, you won't tell us

27:58

anything. And then

28:01

there's the... you'll tell us

28:03

some things. So that takes us

28:05

to the JFK issue. My

28:07

problem with the disclosure there is

28:09

whatever you don't release becomes

28:11

the most powerful aspect of the

28:14

pursuit. So they dumped a

28:16

bunch of JFK files. Everybody hires

28:18

people and different AI tools

28:20

for search engines to go through

28:22

it. The collective response now

28:24

other than a bullshit story that

28:26

came out about John F. Kennedy

28:28

Jr. sending a letter to someone

28:30

he never sent. who was fake,

28:33

nothing really came

28:35

out that changed

28:37

anybody's understanding. And

28:39

so all it does is raise

28:42

suspicions as to what they haven't released.

28:44

And now I'm not as worried

28:46

about it with JFK, frankly, as I

28:48

am with Dr. King. And the

28:50

obvious reason is because of the added

28:52

layer of suspicion based on race

28:54

and preference. So that I'm worried that

28:56

when that story doesn't come out

28:59

in full, It now

29:01

has a really dark

29:03

aspect, no pun intended, about,

29:06

well, why aren't they telling us this? What's

29:08

being covered up? And there's going to

29:10

be a whole new cottage industry of who

29:12

killed Dr. King, which is not great

29:14

for his family. And I don't think it's

29:16

great for the country. So what is

29:18

your best advice for the men and women

29:20

doing the job when it comes to,

29:22

if you're going to disclose stuff, what

29:24

should you keep in mind

29:27

as government workers? Well,

29:30

the executive order and

29:32

classification tries to

29:35

strike a reasonable going

29:37

-in position, which is

29:39

when in doubt,

29:41

declassify it. That is

29:43

what we're supposed to be doing under

29:45

the executive order. If it's

29:47

ambiguous at all, whether it's going

29:49

to damage national security, you should

29:51

err on the side of releasing

29:53

it. We're not doing

29:55

that. In the UAP area, where

29:57

it's particularly difficult because

30:00

there are clearly systems

30:02

involved that are so

30:04

intimately tied to supporting

30:07

combat operations, military

30:09

systems that there

30:11

is a definitely legitimate

30:13

argument for retaining

30:15

classification of some of

30:18

that data. the

30:20

government needs to lean forward

30:22

and show that it's doing

30:24

what they can consistent with

30:27

national security and the best interests of

30:29

the country and they're not, they're

30:31

clearly not doing that. I think

30:33

if you establish the baseline of

30:35

credibility and we're putting out a

30:37

lot of this data and seem to

30:39

be trying to answer the mail,

30:41

people might give you more slack when

30:44

they come, when they, at the

30:46

point where they say, well, we're sorry

30:48

that this particular satellite image we

30:50

can't release because of, you know,

30:52

X or Y. That would

30:54

have more credibility. We're not

30:57

there. We're long way from that.

30:59

Right. And look, part of

31:01

the frustration with St. Grush is

31:03

that to hear him say, look,

31:06

I'm telling you, I'm not allowed

31:09

to say, but I'm telling you there

31:11

are things here to be known. I

31:13

don't want to get prosecuted for telling

31:16

it when you guys won't protect me, but

31:18

I'm telling you there's stuff to know

31:20

that is very knowable. You know, the American

31:22

people hear it, and they're like, all

31:24

right, this guy can't say it because he doesn't want to

31:26

have the rest of his life ruined. This is ballsy enough for

31:28

him to come out in the first place. And

31:30

now all these people are gonna say he's a nut

31:32

job. But it just reinforces

31:34

everything. I think the JFK disclosures

31:37

did it. I mean, the Trump administration

31:39

is trying to take a victory

31:41

lap. I don't know why. And

31:43

I think they're gonna have the same

31:45

problem with MLK that they had with UAPs.

31:47

It's just not as many people cared.

31:49

about UAPs as they do about JFK and

31:52

even more going to care about Dr.

31:54

King, depending on how it's spun. You

31:56

know, you guys, not you, but the government gets

31:58

a lot of break on UAP because people think

32:00

it's silly. Yeah.

32:02

Yeah. I don't know why

32:04

there would be anything that

32:06

couldn't be released regarding JFK

32:08

and Martin Luther King. Right.

32:10

I don't know. I mean,

32:12

everybody's dead. Yeah, after this

32:14

period of time, it's hard

32:17

to imagine what sensitive source or

32:19

method there possibly be So

32:21

and I do think that as

32:23

you said correctly that the

32:25

bits that you don't release if

32:27

you hold on to anything

32:29

that immediately becomes the fills the

32:31

vacuum of Every conspiracy theorist

32:33

that you know, aha Yeah. You

32:35

know, they're not releasing that

32:37

part because that's the part that

32:39

says there's a second gunman

32:41

or whatever. And it's weaponized. It's

32:43

weaponized information based on a

32:45

lack of disclosure and knowledge. Like,

32:47

for instance, okay, on a

32:49

very easy level to deal with.

32:52

I still have people from

32:54

Bush Two's administration, George

32:56

W. Bush, telling me that

32:58

there was yellow cake. They did

33:00

find weapons in Iraq. There was

33:02

stuff there that that stuff wasn't

33:04

all fake, that brought down Colin

33:06

Powell, that led us into war

33:08

with Iraq that was completely Fugazi

33:10

and people like me who went

33:12

there and embed programs, there was

33:14

never anything found like that. They

33:16

still say it, Chris. They

33:18

still say. Oh no, there was. There

33:20

was some stuff. See, that's part of

33:22

the issue here. I hear Ari Fleischer.

33:25

Oh, no, no, no, no, there was

33:27

stuff. I mean, we had real reason

33:29

to believe it's all bullshit. But that's

33:31

the recognition of it. bullshit. I was

33:33

at the Pentagon and I was also

33:35

at the Senate Intelligence Committee during that

33:38

time. And they found absolutely nothing except

33:40

for some forged documents. And

33:43

it was outrageous. And

33:45

that is a whole

33:47

subject unto itself. They

33:51

were blaming the intelligence community

33:53

when, in fact, there were

33:55

policymakers who were putting memos

33:57

on top of the intelligence

33:59

reports going forward saying, oh,

34:01

this is bunk, ignore the

34:03

intelligence. We're telling you

34:05

that Saddam really has links to terrorist

34:07

groups and so forth and so on

34:09

to advance the war effort. There's

34:16

no question that he had

34:18

no no WFD program whatsoever.

34:21

But that is he that's the power.

34:23

Here that we're dealing with right? No,

34:25

you don't know Chris, but I know

34:27

and I'm telling you just trust me

34:30

This is why we have to and

34:32

then fill in the blank go to

34:34

war fear Russia. I now believe the

34:36

same thing and again I'm not a

34:38

conspiracist and I'm not even cynical. I'm

34:40

really not even 25 years into this

34:42

business. I'm a hopeless optimist Which I

34:45

know is a little bit of an

34:47

oxymoron, but it's where my it's where

34:49

my my head is. I believe the

34:51

Cold War was a

34:53

complete fabrication. I

34:55

believe that we decided to exaggerate

34:57

Russia's potential and it allowed the

34:59

industrial military complex to build up

35:01

and everybody's agenda was soothed here

35:03

at home and there was no

35:06

real downside because nobody loved Russia

35:08

to begin with ever since the

35:10

Yalta conference and the suspicions that

35:12

grew out of that and it

35:14

hit home for me and again

35:16

I'm not I'm not a conspiracist.

35:18

I'm always open to being wrong.

35:21

It just, it just feels understanding. When

35:23

Luger and Nun did that great program

35:25

where they were trying to clean up nukes,

35:27

I went over to Russia as part

35:29

of the entree and then they sent me

35:32

out into Siberia. We

35:34

were in Moscow and then St. Petersburg,

35:36

but eventually we wound up in outer

35:38

Siberia, a place called Shucha. And

35:40

one of the many

35:43

places they kept small

35:45

biological and maybe potentially

35:47

nuclear weapons. And

35:50

they were keeping them in a

35:52

barn, okay? And when

35:54

we walked into the barn, we

35:56

walked up to the barn, I

35:58

noticed that all the Russian military I

36:00

saw had mixed matched uniforms on

36:02

and almost none of them had weapons.

36:04

And I was like, I don't

36:06

understand, they're guarding this. And the guys

36:08

like, well, a lot of them

36:10

sell the weapons. And then we get

36:12

there and the door is locked

36:14

with a string and a wax seal.

36:17

And the guy says, well, if the wax seal is broken, we

36:20

knew people came in. You

36:22

mean like the Chechens that are

36:24

like a 50 minute helicopter ride

36:26

away and wanna kill all of

36:28

you right now? And I realized,

36:32

and then Ukraine, so right then, this was

36:34

many years ago, I was like, these

36:36

people are not us, okay? There's

36:38

no way these guys can run with us,

36:40

okay? But they have nukes, I get it,

36:42

you don't wanna mess with them, they have

36:44

nukes, okay. Then Ukraine

36:46

happens. And only

36:48

in Trump land is there any

36:50

understanding that Russia is kicking

36:53

Ukraine's ass, okay? And you

36:55

lived it, I lived it. Nobody

36:57

thought that this was gonna last more

36:59

than a few days, right? They were gonna

37:01

roll right over and into Kiev. But

37:04

it turns out... and now the new

37:06

answer is oh well Russia doesn't want

37:08

to use its citizens Oh, that's why

37:10

he just called up another hundred and

37:12

twenty two thousand of them, right? Oh,

37:14

they're just using all the prisoners because

37:16

he doesn't want to use the real

37:18

military here like he just wants to

37:20

use a farm team I think it's

37:22

all bullshit and that's the need for

37:24

transparency Chris is that if you start

37:26

with something easy when nobody gets hurt,

37:28

which is like What's in the air?

37:31

Who's flying stuff around here that we have

37:33

to figure out about? Who should be

37:35

allowed? Who shouldn't be allowed? This

37:38

is not geopolitical in a way that we

37:40

see with Russia and Ukraine. You're not going

37:42

to scare anybody. It's

37:44

not an army of Martians.

37:46

I just believe it's

37:48

a huge missed opportunity that

37:50

has magnified the animus

37:52

towards government. Well,

37:54

you're certainly right about

37:56

that. And that's partly reflected

37:58

in President Trump's election

38:01

and support that he got

38:03

from many people who

38:05

are fed up with this

38:07

kind of thing and

38:09

suspicious of the government. But

38:11

we have a huge issue here.

38:13

Two comments briefly. One was, regarding

38:15

the Soviet Union, when

38:18

I was responsible for reviewing

38:20

counterintelligence security for the Secretary

38:22

of Defense, One of the

38:24

things I used to remind our

38:26

officers was that we didn't defeat

38:28

the Soviet Union because we were

38:30

better at keeping secrets. We

38:32

defeated them because we were

38:34

better at sharing information in

38:36

free markets and through the

38:38

free press that made us

38:40

more innovative, productive, efficient, and

38:42

all those kinds of things.

38:45

So, you know, it's not

38:47

about making protecting information

38:49

and generally is the top

38:51

priority or the key

38:53

to security. The

38:55

second thing I would say is

38:57

that in this wintered information

39:00

environment where people are getting their

39:02

information from partisan sources and

39:04

so forth, I don't know

39:06

how we get back to the

39:08

days once that we had with

39:10

Walter Cronkite and people that were

39:12

reasonably nonpartisan and we had sort

39:15

of a common information base. It's

39:17

very hard to debate, discuss policy

39:19

options when you can't even agree

39:21

on the basic facts. And I

39:23

don't know, I've often been thinking,

39:25

you know, is there a possibility

39:28

we could get some kind of

39:30

a news information source that's truly

39:32

bipartisan where you have buy -in

39:34

from, you know, maybe representatives from

39:36

both parties or some kind of,

39:38

or none of the people there

39:41

are registered to either party or

39:43

something. I don't think

39:45

people have good options right

39:47

now for sources they can

39:49

rely on and feel are

39:51

really independent. Rightly or

39:53

wrongly, you hear that from

39:55

both sides. Yeah, look, I

39:58

don't know. I mean, look, that's why I'm

40:00

doing this, right? That's why I'm at

40:02

News Nation and yet and yet. One,

40:07

no podcast can compete except on

40:09

a one -off basis with a

40:11

legitimate media organization. You don't

40:13

have the resources. You don't have

40:15

the sourcing. You don't have

40:18

the reach. You don't have

40:20

the layers. Reporting is

40:22

about layers, not unlike

40:24

your acumen within the intelligence

40:26

world. It's layers. It's

40:28

what adds, what subtracts,

40:30

what qualifies, what contextualizes. That's

40:32

why investigative reporting is

40:34

both expensive, but more importantly,

40:37

timely. So

40:40

I believe there's a little bit of player

40:42

hating that goes on with independent versus legacy

40:44

media on the basis of wanting market share.

40:47

So Joe Rogan, don't trust anybody but me.

40:49

I have everyone here on. Yeah, you

40:51

just don't know what the fuck you're talking

40:53

about and can't ask a critical question. So

40:56

there's a little bit of

40:58

that to me that's specious on

41:01

its face. As an independent,

41:03

you know, operator within it who's also

41:05

been within the media, I know I can't

41:07

out report CNN or ABC News. They're

41:09

gonna beat me on a story. I may

41:11

have you one day, right? I may

41:13

have Chris and Chris told me something that

41:15

they didn't have and now I advance

41:17

a story, but that's a one -off. Over

41:19

time, resources matter,

41:22

reporting matters. Walter

41:24

Cronkite was good to me. He and his

41:26

wife, Betty, were good to me. I enjoyed time

41:29

with them socially. I enjoyed

41:31

mentoring from Walter. Walter

41:33

Cronkite, may rest in peace, would have been

41:35

the first to say what follows. Walter

41:37

Cronkite was never Walter

41:39

Cronkite. What you had

41:41

was three options. And

41:44

for a while, you really only

41:46

had two. At first, you really just

41:48

had CBS. Then you had CBS

41:50

and NBC. Then you had CBS, NBC

41:52

and ABC, okay? So you really

41:54

just had scarcity. So you

41:56

had three guys and you

41:58

had a different culture what

42:01

we now call democratization

42:03

of media. Everybody's got a

42:06

platform now. And

42:08

you have media that has

42:10

become not just multiplied, but

42:12

has become much more competitive

42:14

in terms of what works

42:17

and like every other market.

42:19

you always go to what's

42:21

easiest, right? And what's easiest?

42:24

Provocativeness, salaciousness,

42:26

sex, those kinds of

42:28

scandal, those things. So we just

42:30

see more of what has always existed.

42:32

Walter Cronkite took one big swing

42:34

in his career. And again, this, I

42:36

know Walter would absolutely endorse everything

42:39

I'm saying right now and probably

42:41

is pissed that I haven't talked

42:43

about him more sooner about correcting

42:45

this idea of an earlier perfect

42:47

past. He

42:49

complained about the war he

42:52

cried because he what he

42:54

knew was happening he cried

42:56

because he realized that As

42:58

he explained to me that

43:00

he had been so wrong

43:03

in what he had relied

43:05

on for so long and

43:07

That hurt his credibility now.

43:09

It's what we point to

43:11

about Walter Cronkite in that

43:13

moment It hurt Walter a

43:16

lot and made him seem like

43:18

a closet pinco and all this

43:20

other stuff that they said about

43:22

him. So it's very interesting how

43:24

history, you know, reveals itself and

43:26

heals itself. So where are

43:28

we today? We

43:30

are in a space of opportunity

43:32

that is being used and

43:34

abused on a nano scale, that

43:36

it's happening so fast in

43:38

such small increments all the time

43:40

that it's very tough to

43:42

get a read, but within it

43:44

is an opportunity, which is

43:46

why I have such a value on

43:48

you and why I have a dual

43:50

platform, right? Because When you're on TV,

43:52

why would you also have a podcast?

43:54

There are very few people who do

43:56

it unless it's like a podcast on

43:58

grief or podcast on food, you know,

44:01

or some shit like that where it's

44:03

like your pet project. For me, the

44:05

reason to do it is because of the

44:07

opportunity for better. The bar,

44:10

the feelings are so low. I don't

44:12

know that you know or realize

44:14

or appreciate what you, what

44:16

Grush, even what Corbel,

44:19

even though he doesn't come, from

44:21

a government background, which makes

44:23

you much more valuable. You've been

44:25

so helpful to so many

44:27

American people, not because they've got

44:29

a shirt on that says

44:31

I was abducted, meet my wife,

44:33

but because... they trust that

44:35

you were somebody who did the

44:37

job for us, who's telling

44:40

us the truth about things and

44:42

that you exist. There's

44:44

only one thing that's more rare than

44:46

a Martian is someone in government that you

44:48

can trust, right? And that you,

44:50

Grush, a handful of others have

44:52

helped restore that. So I see

44:54

opportunity in it. Not that people

44:56

don't know where to go. People

44:59

are looking for echo chambers. They're

45:01

looking. for sucker,

45:03

S -U -C -C -O -R, in terms of

45:05

what they wanted to take in.

45:07

But I also think that there's

45:09

reaction formation to that. And what

45:11

we see in our market testing

45:14

at News Nation is that we're

45:16

over -weighted independent critical thinkers who

45:18

do not want to ascribe to

45:20

any allegiance. Not that they're

45:22

anti -America, but that they're, I'm not a Democrat,

45:24

I'm not a Republican. I'm offended

45:26

by them. I'm a critical thinker. I don't

45:28

believe you. Don't tell me what to

45:30

think. Just tell me why you think what

45:33

you think. Let me deal with it.

45:35

So I think that's growing also, Chris. And

45:37

I think that you probably see a

45:39

lot of that with who's following you

45:41

now and why that they're not just

45:43

hobbyists. Well,

45:46

thank you. If you're

45:48

kind words, I just the

45:50

truth try to follow a simple

45:53

dictum, which is simply to to

45:55

share what I can as I know it

45:57

and not go beyond that. And

45:59

it seems to keep me out

46:01

of trouble most of the

46:03

time. So

46:05

I feel passively about

46:08

these issues. I think

46:10

that, again, one of

46:12

the huge discrepancies between the

46:14

perspective of some of this who

46:16

are really seized with this

46:18

issue and the general public is

46:21

We're familiar with the huge

46:23

cumulative volume of history associated

46:25

with us. And we've had

46:27

personal discussions, interaction with the

46:29

Navy pilots and with the

46:31

radar operators and so forth.

46:33

And that cannot help but

46:35

have a powerful effect on

46:37

you. So,

46:39

I'm really honored

46:42

by your

46:44

comments. This being

46:46

in the government, I love serving

46:48

the country. I have no

46:50

regrets about my career. And

46:52

if I can help in some way from

46:54

out here in the past years of retirement,

46:56

I'm delighted to do so. What

46:59

do you think the

47:01

next couple of steps

47:03

are in the search

47:05

for truth? And

47:07

more importantly, strategy.

47:12

of what we need to do

47:14

where UAPs are involved. Great

47:17

question. So we're in

47:19

a bit of a, we've

47:21

lost some ground in the last

47:23

couple of years with Senator Rubio

47:25

going to the administration. For example,

47:27

he was a strong supporter on

47:29

the Senate Intelligence Committee. We

47:31

don't enjoy the support of

47:34

the chair or ranking of the

47:36

committees that have jurisdiction over DOD

47:38

in the intelligence community. That's a

47:41

huge problem. And we had more

47:43

support a few years ago. The

47:46

actions on the house side are

47:48

very helpful. But remember,

47:50

they are not cleared for

47:52

all of the information, even

47:54

in closed session, because they

47:56

don't serve on certain committees

47:58

and they don't have necessarily

48:01

the leverage the ability

48:03

to get language into the authorization

48:05

bills and so forth. I

48:07

think we need to, to

48:09

make headway, we need to build

48:11

more of a consensus on the Hill

48:13

as part of it. And you

48:15

do that in an incremental way. Some

48:17

people are swinging for the fences

48:19

in disclosure, you know, where

48:21

they envision, I guess a press conference where

48:24

the president comes out and just, you

48:26

know, bears everything. I doubt

48:28

that's going to happen anytime soon. So

48:30

I think in the meantime, The

48:33

best approach is to try

48:35

to produce more of this

48:37

information that will help to

48:39

inform the American people about

48:41

what's really going on. Part

48:43

of it is this declassification.

48:46

Part of it is

48:48

convincing the committees that

48:50

do have oversight and jurisdiction

48:52

of DOD to ask

48:54

more probing questions that'll

48:56

produce more information for

48:58

all concerned. So

49:00

for example, And then that

49:03

should engage other members and

49:05

we start to build out the

49:07

coalition and hopefully it becomes

49:09

a virtuous circle leading to greater

49:11

understanding for everyone. So for

49:13

example, if you ask the Air Force, there's

49:16

a strange thing I've been pointing out

49:18

for a number of years now, which

49:20

is why is it that all the

49:22

reports that we get are coming in

49:24

from ships and aircraft and these huge

49:26

radar systems that NORAD has are not

49:28

reporting anything? even when they're looking at

49:30

the same areas where all this activity

49:32

is happening. So is

49:34

this a Chinese balloon problem where they don't

49:36

have the filters set right or whatever it

49:38

is, we need to fix it because we're

49:40

dealing with a huge drone issue. If

49:43

Congress puts language in their authorization

49:45

bill requiring reports on this, which they

49:47

should absolutely because we have a

49:49

huge air defense issue, and

49:51

ask the question, for example, how

49:53

often did you launch jets from strip

49:55

alert? And what happened

49:58

in those circumstances? What did

50:00

you find? Because they

50:02

track thousands of uncorrelated targets

50:04

over North America every

50:06

year. And so they'll throw those

50:08

statistics at you, and it's kind of

50:10

like, where do you go from there?

50:12

If you ask the question, tell

50:14

us about the ones where you

50:16

actually launched armed aircraft from Strip

50:19

Alert. Those are the ones

50:21

where they really got excited about

50:23

something. And I know there

50:25

are cases that they haven't been telling

50:27

Arrow about where they've launched from Strip

50:29

Alert. I've proven that with a specific

50:31

case. I think there's

50:33

a lot of data that's not even reaching

50:35

Arrow, much less Congress than the American

50:37

people. And I think that

50:39

kind of information, which doesn't require

50:41

an appropriation, would help the taxpayer

50:43

and the oversight committees better understand

50:45

the effectiveness and the holes in

50:47

our air defense system, and

50:49

also could be very informative with

50:51

regard to UAP. So

50:53

I think there are questions that

50:55

can be asked that will

50:57

help to produce additional information that

50:59

will help to expand the

51:02

consensus and the number of members

51:04

who are interested and want

51:06

to take action and better inform

51:08

the public. And like the

51:10

ink blot strategy and counterinsurgency, you

51:12

build out from the beach. You know, you

51:15

build out from that. What

51:17

are your top three questions? Ah,

51:21

so, uh, I guess my

51:23

first question would be, what

51:25

are these massive multi -billion

51:27

-dollar air and space surveillance

51:29

systems seeing with regard

51:31

to UAP? We've been getting

51:34

essentially no reporting. They

51:36

cover immense areas, 365

51:40

by 24, and

51:43

we're talking all the oceans,

51:45

the Arctic, and everything else

51:47

in space. And

51:50

so I think we need to know how well

51:52

those systems are working for a whole lot of

51:54

reasons and what they're seeing with regard to UAP.

51:57

Are we seeing things in orbit, et

51:59

cetera? So

52:01

that would be a question

52:04

that serves a number of

52:06

different audiences, I think, the

52:08

UAP group as well as

52:10

national security, et cetera. That

52:12

would be the first. The second

52:14

is, when are you going to revise

52:17

those classification guides? And

52:20

what are you going to do

52:22

to a related problem? It's not just

52:24

the classification guides, but nobody feels

52:26

it's their job or their duty to

52:28

submit this stuff into the process

52:30

to get it out to the public,

52:32

to do the paperwork. So

52:34

who's going to be the advocate? Mr.

52:36

Bray said in this hearing that he's going to

52:38

do this for the Navy, but to the best

52:40

of my knowledge, they haven't produced a single, released

52:43

a single video. or photograph as

52:45

a result of this. So who's

52:47

going to be doing this if

52:49

they're not? That's

52:52

very doable and should be

52:54

done. And

52:56

we're going down the list. I

53:01

think I would love to see

53:03

a, again, doesn't even require an appropriation.

53:05

They bungled the history report requirement,

53:07

in my view, completely bungled. Congress asked

53:09

for the history of UAP and

53:12

the U .S. government. I

53:14

wrote a 14 ,000 -word article

53:16

dissecting that it was appallingly

53:18

bad, in my view. I

53:20

think they should ask for an

53:22

oral history of the UAP issue,

53:24

and they could get that we

53:27

have military historians and others in

53:29

the government who are official historians.

53:31

They have clearances. They can

53:33

do the interviews and skiffs. Get in the

53:35

former secretaries of the Air Force. Get

53:37

in the former heads of the National Security

53:39

Council. You can

53:41

even talk to former presidents,

53:43

former secretaries of defense. And

53:46

you wouldn't be able to release

53:48

it all immediately. We'd have something that

53:50

no one's ever done that would

53:52

be an invaluable historical record for the

53:54

future. And it might

53:56

settle a lot of these questions once and

53:59

for all, if not immediately, then down

54:01

the road. I think

54:03

that would be something that would

54:05

have enduring historical value. They

54:08

cost virtually nothing and

54:10

would be original historical

54:12

research as opposed to

54:14

them just sort of

54:16

regurgitating Project Blue Book

54:18

stuff and whatever. And

54:20

let me give one quick example

54:22

if I may of the kind

54:24

of things that could be surfaced.

54:26

So I was on the set

54:28

of a documentary being filmed talking

54:30

to former DNI Jim Clapper, and

54:33

he mentioned when he was

54:35

director of Air Force Intelligence, a

54:37

problem they were having with UAP flying

54:39

over one of our most sensitive test ranges.

54:42

Well, this didn't come out in the history

54:44

report. Nobody at Arrow, I think, has any

54:46

idea about this. And what

54:48

it demonstrates is how wrong

54:51

the report was that they

54:53

put out, which asserted that

54:56

Everybody's just seeing our stealth aircraft and

54:58

stuff. Well, it turns out the people

55:00

seeing our stealth aircraft were alarmed by

55:02

the UFOs they were seeing. And

55:04

they were actually putting in requests

55:06

to have a security response to

55:08

figure out where these UFOs were

55:10

coming from. So that's

55:13

the kind of thing. If you had an oral history,

55:15

how much of that kind of stuff would you service?

55:17

I don't know. But there'd be

55:19

a lot of new information that's

55:21

never been out there before. And

55:23

they couldn't address. a range of

55:25

issues from heavily recovered crashed materials

55:27

to, you know, what's

55:29

going on with these nuclear power

55:31

plants and ICBM facilities and all

55:33

that kind of stuff. Someone

55:35

said to me, and they really

55:38

captured it perfectly, that

55:40

all you need to

55:42

know about this subject is

55:44

that the only meaningful

55:47

disclosure or change that's happened

55:49

in the last several

55:51

years is changing vocabulary

55:54

from UFO to

55:56

UAP. And I

55:58

hadn't really thought other than having

56:00

some initial confusion as to why

56:02

I had to change my vernacular,

56:04

but then I never thought about

56:06

it again, because I just said,

56:08

how true is that? That why

56:10

did that change happen? And like,

56:12

who made that happen? And how

56:14

did it help anything? Well,

56:17

the UFO term is

56:19

so freighted with baggage,

56:22

and you say UFO, people

56:24

immediately think aliens. And

56:26

so part of it was just

56:28

a effort to get something that

56:30

was a little more neutral, a

56:32

little bit less loaded, that was part

56:34

of it. Part of it also was Looking

56:37

for terminology that would try

56:39

to express even that we're not

56:41

just interested. The Congress is

56:43

not just interested in aerial phenomenon.

56:46

It could be under the ocean. It could

56:48

be in space. They're interested in anomalies

56:50

wherever they occur. The Air

56:53

Force is an LA

56:55

and typical sort of response.

56:57

Initially, the term was unidentified aerial phenomenon. They

56:59

said, oh, we don't have to tell

57:02

you about anything in space then. You

57:04

didn't mention space, you just said aerial. So

57:07

that was partly why it

57:10

became, you know, an identified anomalous

57:12

phenomenon, all domain anomalous. But

57:14

I really wanted to hammer guys, we

57:16

really mean, you know, like wherever it is,

57:18

if you see something that looks like

57:20

it could be a breakthrough in technology that

57:22

we don't have, we want to know

57:24

about it because it's important. And

57:27

I don't know, I

57:29

had suggested Originally

57:31

a term anomaly resolution

57:34

office that would

57:36

take hard technical problems.

57:39

Anomalies and work them with from

57:41

a lot of angles. And

57:43

I don't know if that. How

57:45

that morphed or where this

57:47

actually started, but I think. Largely,

57:50

it was an effort to get away from

57:52

UFO, which was so loaded. I mean, you

57:54

know, they just always say, oh, well, yeah,

57:56

I came out of the Pentagon. And I

57:58

always found that odd because they'd like want

58:01

to talk about this the least. And yet

58:03

the only thing that's really changed is what

58:05

they did. Yeah,

58:08

I don't know. I don't think

58:10

it started in the Pentagon. I

58:12

don't think that term could be

58:14

wrong. I think actually, I think

58:16

maybe Jay Stroudon has said that

58:18

he originated that. That's possible. I'm

58:20

not really certain. perhaps

58:22

it did come from over

58:24

there. They say the Pentagon's

58:26

unidentified aerial phenomena task force

58:28

UAPTF and its successor, the

58:30

all domain anomaly resolution office. That

58:33

came from Congress. That term

58:35

came from Congress. It's like, man,

58:37

we just twist ourselves up. Did

58:40

you see the term that DOD had

58:42

before that? A, I, O,

58:44

S, G, something or other that

58:46

they were proposing to call the

58:49

office? As awkward

58:51

as it is, they had something

58:53

that was even worse if

58:55

you could believe that. I do,

58:57

because I think it goes

58:59

to the desperation is probably the

59:01

best word to control. I

59:04

think ultimately the truth

59:06

of this, of this

59:08

frustration, of this difficulty,

59:10

of this hand -wringing

59:12

is about control. and

59:14

people being invested with power

59:16

who believe that that means

59:18

that they must control. And

59:21

I'm sure you've seen that many,

59:23

many different ways, many different times

59:25

in your work in the government.

59:27

And I've seen it myself is

59:29

that it's about control, the JFK,

59:32

the MLK. I remember the first time Trump

59:34

was president, everybody thought the JFK stuff

59:36

was going to come out. Next thing I

59:38

know, I'm hearing from one of his

59:40

guys, it's not going to happen. Why? Because

59:42

somebody made the case that you're going

59:44

to embarrass parts of the government that you're

59:46

now in control of and you need

59:48

them to like you and you don't. want

59:50

people to think that they shouldn't trust

59:52

you, it's not worth it, leave it alone.

59:55

And they were like, okay, if there's downside to this,

59:57

why would we do it? And it was as simple

59:59

as that. Like, you know, I was gonna do this

1:00:01

because I thought it was a layup. If it's not

1:00:03

a layup, if I might get some stink on me

1:00:06

because of this, I'm not doing it, who cares anyway,

1:00:08

the guy's dead. And that was it. And

1:00:10

it was gone. So I really believe it all

1:00:12

comes down to control. What is your, I'll

1:00:14

leave on this. What

1:00:17

is your best basis

1:00:21

for hope that we

1:00:23

get more and better

1:00:25

in terms of transparency on

1:00:28

this. Well, number

1:00:30

one, we do have still

1:00:32

some interested parties in Congress who

1:00:34

are willing to shake the

1:00:36

tree. That's extremely helpful. And I'm

1:00:38

hoping that there's still some

1:00:40

on the Senate side, although fewer

1:00:42

than there were a couple

1:00:44

of years ago. And I'm hoping

1:00:46

that will build rather than

1:00:48

recede. Secondly, We have a

1:00:50

lot of collection now that is

1:00:52

being established going on beyond the

1:00:55

government's control. So the

1:00:57

Galileo project, for example, is establishing

1:00:59

its own sensor sites. There's

1:01:01

an organization called Enigma Labs that

1:01:03

has got an app and people

1:01:05

can report and take videos and

1:01:07

submit them. And there's some other

1:01:10

organizations like Mufon that are doing

1:01:12

that. And I recently

1:01:14

just saw an iPhone video

1:01:16

that was very compelling. And

1:01:18

I hope it will, it's in

1:01:20

the government's hands. I hope it

1:01:23

will soon be released. So

1:01:26

I think those are

1:01:28

probably the leading causes for

1:01:30

optimism. This administration with

1:01:32

their, with this effort on

1:01:34

the JFK records and

1:01:36

so forth seems to be.

1:01:38

Leading towards responding to

1:01:40

this desire to to declassify

1:01:42

and get things out

1:01:44

the house task force. So

1:01:46

there are some positive

1:01:48

some positive developments. There are

1:01:50

still some whistleblowers coming

1:01:52

forward. So there are an

1:01:54

array of things that that are going

1:01:56

to continue that I think are going to

1:01:59

incrementally. Produce more information

1:02:01

and I think it's going to be

1:02:03

increasingly difficult. down the line

1:02:05

for the government to pretend there's

1:02:07

nothing there. There's no there

1:02:09

there. And in fact,

1:02:11

the current director, it's a very

1:02:13

refreshing change. Dr. Koslowski

1:02:15

has admitted UAP are real. We're

1:02:17

seeing things we don't understand. That

1:02:20

alone is a big

1:02:22

change from his predecessor at

1:02:24

any point in the

1:02:27

past. The U .S. government's

1:02:29

officially saying, yeah, UAP are real

1:02:31

and we're seeing things we don't

1:02:33

understand. Well, at least we're

1:02:35

all on the same page, even

1:02:37

if it's just page one. It

1:02:39

would be good for something to

1:02:41

change other than the acronyms. Christopher

1:02:44

Mellon, I appreciate your contribution

1:02:46

so much. Thank you for coming

1:02:48

to us at News Nation. Thank you for

1:02:50

coming to us here at the Chris Cuomo Project.

1:02:52

I'm always a call away if you have

1:02:54

anything to say to advance our understanding. Well,

1:02:56

thank you very much for having me and thank

1:02:59

you for interested in this topic. Really appreciate it.

1:03:05

Christopher Mellon, you can't say he

1:03:07

doesn't know. You can't say he

1:03:10

doesn't get government. You can't say

1:03:12

that this is too sophisticated for

1:03:14

him. The reality is that trust

1:03:16

comes from transparency. Transparency

1:03:18

builds trust. You want people

1:03:20

to feel differently about government?

1:03:22

Have government make them feel

1:03:24

differently? The only thing we've

1:03:26

changed is the acronyms. What

1:03:29

do they know? What

1:03:31

do we need to know? Christopher

1:03:33

Mellon laid it all out and I

1:03:35

appreciate you for being here with

1:03:38

me to get after it. I'm Chris

1:03:40

Cuomo. Thank you for subscribing and

1:03:42

following. Thank you for checking me out

1:03:44

at News Nation, 8p11p every weekday

1:03:46

night. Be an independent, critical

1:03:48

thinker. Forget the parties. Wear your

1:03:50

independence with your free agent gear.

1:03:52

You love the pod. You don't

1:03:54

want to go through the ads.

1:03:56

I love my sponsors, but I

1:03:58

get it. Join my sub spec

1:04:01

for just bucks a month, 50

1:04:03

bucks a year. That's a discount

1:04:05

of $10. I'll do the math

1:04:07

for you. And you also get

1:04:09

a lot of philosophy, a

1:04:11

lot of access to me and why

1:04:13

I'm covering what I'm covering and how.

1:04:15

And my wellness journey that involves fitness,

1:04:17

but also long COVID and what I'm

1:04:19

taking and what's working for me and

1:04:21

what isn't and why. It's all there

1:04:23

and it's cheap. And you get the

1:04:26

podcast ad free. All right, my friends,

1:04:28

the problems are real. so be our

1:04:30

approach. What do you control? What

1:04:32

do you not? Forget what you don't

1:04:34

and what you do. Let's get after it.