TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @ScottAdamsSays

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - November 2, 2025 at 9:29 AM
Saved - November 3, 2025 at 12:34 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
On Monday I will ask President Trump, via X, to help save my life. He offered to help if I needed it. I need it. I have metastasized prostate cancer. Kaiser Northern California approved Pluvicto, but they dropped the ball scheduling the IV. I’ll ask Trump to get Kaiser to respond and schedule it for Monday to give me a fighting chance. Not a cure, but it yields good results for many.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

On Monday, I will ask President Trump, via X, to help save my life. He offered to help me if I needed it. I need it. As many of you know, I have metastasized prostate cancer. My healthcare provider, Kaiser of Northern California, has approved my application to receive a newly FDA-approved drug called Pluvicto. But they have dropped the ball in scheduling the brief IV to administer it and I can’t seem to fix that. I am declining fast. I will ask President Trump if he can get Kaiser of Northern California to respond and schedule it for Monday. That will give me a fighting chance to stick around on this planet a little bit longer. It is not a cure, but it does give good results to many people.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - February 19, 2025 at 8:02 PM
Saved - February 20, 2025 at 3:08 AM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I'll never fly again.

@EndWokeness - End Wokeness

The plane that crashed in Toronto was a Delta flight operated by Endeavor Air, a small airline obsessed with all-female "unmanned" flights https://t.co/pYMS3kdpQy

Video Transcript AI Summary
I don't think we should leave shaping the world to just men. Absolutely not. And getting into Harvard? Please! Like it's even difficult? As for our group name, we're called "The Click." That's C-L-I-C-K. Let's get started.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Girl, come on. Leave the shape of the world to the men? I don't think so. I don't think so. I don't think so. No. No. We ain't getting no You got into Harvard long? What? Like it's hard? Sir, what is your name as a group? The click. Click or click? Click. Let's do it.
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 10:26 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I was reflecting on how naive we were in 2016, simply preferring Trump without much thought. Since then, we've faced shaming, cancel culture, threats, and a deeper understanding of the corruption in our country. Now, we're more aware, tougher, and fueled by anger. We have powerful reinforcements and a commitment that goes beyond mere support. It's about protecting the Constitution and making necessary changes. We've made our decisions, and there's no turning back.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Yesterday, I was remembering how innocent we were in 2016. Or at least I was. We just preferred Trump, no big deal. Then came the shaming, the canceling, the physical threats, the intimidation, the social stigmas, the economic attacks, the fake news, the corruption, and eventually the revelation of the entire corrupt architecture of the country. Now we're smarter, and not so innocent. We're tougher. We're mad. And we have reinforcements that are more powerful than anything we have ever seen. We're not just supporters with a preference this time. Now it's ride or die. We will protect the Constitution. We will right the ship. Decisions have been made.

@Cernovich - Cernovich

I don’t want to speak carelessly or with bravado. But Im not going back. I will not submit, ever or in any way, to what we lived under 4 years ago. A hostile occupying regime. I just won't.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - February 3, 2025 at 12:43 PM
Saved - February 3, 2025 at 3:35 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

DOGE already drilled through untold layers of government bureaucracy and found the heart of the Deep State beast. USAID Amazingly, this made all the Deep State puppets in our government "prairie dog" to complain, so we can easily spot them going forward. Don't miss that part of the show.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - January 20, 2025 at 9:50 PM
Saved - January 21, 2025 at 2:12 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe the narrative pushed by CNN and MSNBC suggests that those involved in January 6 knew Trump lost, which I find unknowable due to our election system's design. In my view, they were acting to challenge what many saw as a stolen election. While I disavow the violence and regret it happened, I empathize with the situation that led to it. If you're a Democrat unaware of this perspective, I think you've been misled. My stance is clear: free them all.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Your CNN and MSNBC brainwashers want you to believe the J6ers knew Trump lost — which is unknowable given our election systems design — and were therefore trying to overthrow the government that day. Reality: They were trying to stop what half the country believed was an obviously stolen election. I disavow the violence and I hate that it happened. But I hate the situation they were placed in even more. If you are a Democrat who didn’t know this, you were brainwashed. Literally. Free them all.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - October 29, 2024 at 12:21 PM
Saved - October 29, 2024 at 10:47 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I came across a clip where an MSNBC host questioned the likelihood of five generals lying about what Trump supposedly said privately. This made me reflect on various instances where groups of professionals have misled the public, such as the 51 intelligence experts regarding Hunter's laptop, numerous individuals about Russian collusion, and many about the Fine People Hoax. Additionally, millions of medical professionals provided misleading information during the pandemic, and many scientists have been untruthful about climate model reliability. So, five generals lying doesn’t seem far-fetched to me.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I saw a clips today in which an MSNBC propagandist was asking how likely it was that five generals would lie about what Trump allegedly said behind closed doors. Well... 51 Intel professionals lied about Hunter's laptop. Hundreds of government and media pros lied about Russian Collusion Thousands of government and media pros lied about the Fine People Hoax (and dozens of other Trump hoaxes). Millions of medical professionals lied during the pandemic. Millions of scientists are lying about the reliability of climate models. Five lying generals isn't even a stretch.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - July 23, 2024 at 4:48 PM
Saved - July 23, 2024 at 4:54 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Too many sentence fragments nonsensically grafted together to be AI. An AI fake would make him sound more fluid. But he didn’t pause for the applause. Twice. Sounds like prerecorded bits spliced together. Does not sound live.

@AutismCapital - Autism Capital 🧩

Guys, this is AI 😂 https://t.co/UpZRH7lpfa

Video Transcript AI Summary
President Biden thanked his campaign team for their hard work and dedication, acknowledging the recent changes in the campaign. He expressed his commitment to continue working alongside Kamala Harris, focusing on passing legislation and campaigning. Biden emphasized the importance of democracy, addressing issues such as gun control, healthcare, and climate change. He also mentioned efforts to end the conflict in Gaza and promote Middle East peace. Biden reassured his team that he will remain actively engaged despite not being on the ticket, urging them to support Harris.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Let's listen into president Biden calling into this campaign event. Keep me out of out of people's hair for the next 3 or 4 days, but I'm gonna be on the road. And I'm not going anywhere. I'm gonna it's it's kept me away a little bit, but, you know, I want people to remember that what we have done has been incredible, and we get so much more we're gonna get done. And so I wanna say hello to Kamala. She can hear me. I know she's gonna be speaking shortly, and I wanted to say to the team, embrace her. She's the best. I wanna call the day to thank everybody everybody in this effort. I know yesterday's news is surprising, and, and it's hard for you to hear, but it was the right thing to do. It's, I I I know it's hard because you poured your heart and soul into me so you can help us win this thing. Help me get this nomination. Help me win the nomination, and then go on to win the win the the presidency. But, you know, you're an amazing team, but we've got a great great I think we made the right decision. I know how hard you've worked, how many sacrifices you've made. And so many of you so many of you uprooted your lives for me and the kind of commitment few people make or anything these days, but you made it. And I've been honored and humbled. I mean, this is from the bottom of my heart. My word is a Biden that for all you've done for me and my family. And you we built the best campaign in organ organization in history. I've been doing this. I can't always kid and say, I know I'm only 40, but I've been around a long time. I don't know of a better campaign organization, grassroots campaign. You know, we have over 230 offices opened. We have over 2,000 paid staff, and we have literally several 1,000 volunteers on a regular basis, thousands of them. And they've been relentless and tireless in reaching out and contacting voters. The leadership of this campaign has been amazing. Jenna Mele, Dylan, Julie Quinn, Michael Tyler, Rob Flaherty, Rufus on raising money, and so many more. You've built this team. You've brought them together. You brought us together. You've inspired them, and, and and you've done what leaders do. Now now we gotta you know, the name has changed at the top of the ticket, but the mission hasn't changed at all. And by the way, I'm not going anywhere. I'm gonna be out there in the campaign with her, with Kamala. I'm gonna be working like hell, both as a sitting president, getting legislation passed, as well as and campaigning. You know, what we still need to save is democracy. And Trump Trump is still a danger to the community. He's a danger to the nation. And, just you're satisfied, foreign policy colleagues, my counterparts, and other people around the world and at home. Look. So I'm hoping you'll give every bit of your heart and soul that you gave to me to come on. And, and and I want you to know, I won't be on the ticket, but I'm still gonna be fully, fully engaged. I've got 6 months left in my presidency. I'm determined to get much done as I possibly can, both foreign policy and domestic policy. Keep lowering costs for families, continue to speak out on guns and child care, elder care, prescription drugs, and climate. Climate still is the existential threat that we face, and we have if we don't if we don't win this thing, it's all in jeopardy. And we gotta keep working for an aim to the war in Gaza. I'll be working very closely with the with the Israelis and with the Palestinians to try to work out how we can get the Gaza war to end and Middle East peace and get all those hostages home. I think we're on a verge of being able to do that, and we gotta keep our alliances together. It's critically important. It took a while for me to build these alliances. Most of these are my colleagues have acknowledged that, but it's critically, critically important for our safety and security. And I know, I'll be doing whatever Kamala wants me or needs me to do in addition. So let me be real clear. We're still fighting in this fight together. I'm not going anywhere. And I want you to know I've always you've always had my back. And I promise you, I will always have your back, and I'm anxious to for you all to hear from Camelot. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Julie. You're the best.
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - July 22, 2024 at 10:02 PM
Saved - July 23, 2024 at 2:13 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

If you don't recognize this as drunken behavior, you haven't been around many drinkers.

@RNCResearch - RNC Research

Kamala Harris: "I'm excited about electric school buses. I LOVE electric school buses. I just love them! For so many reasons. Maybe because I went to school on a school bus. Hey, raise your hand if you went to school on a school bus!" https://t.co/SyzHT5JeiT

Video Transcript AI Summary
I'm really excited about electric school buses. I love them for many reasons, maybe because I rode one to school. Who else rode a school bus to school?
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know what also excites me? What I'm I among the many things, I'm excited about electric school buses. I love electric school buses. I just love them for so many reasons. Maybe because I went to school on a school bus. Raise your hand if you went to school on a school bus. Right?
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - March 29, 2024 at 9:38 PM
Saved - March 30, 2024 at 2:20 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
The Jan 6th trial lacks fairness as both judges and jurors were victims of a mass brainwashing operation. The success of this operation explains the lack of awareness in the courts and among individuals. As a trained hypnotist, I witnessed the brainwashing in real time, even though you may not be aware of it.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

It isn’t possible to get a fair trial involving Jan6th because every judge and every juror was a victim of the same mass brainwashing op. Literally brainwashing. Literally. Why are the courts (and maybe you) not aware of this massive brainwashing operation? Because it worked. I’m speaking as a trained hypnotist. You wouldn’t know you were brainwashed. But I would know you were. I watched it happen in real time.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - March 17, 2024 at 9:32 PM
Saved - March 17, 2024 at 11:59 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The mind-reading doesn't align with Trump's presidency. Republicans see him as a typical NY candidate. Labeling supporters as White Supremacists primes violence. The transparent gaslighting on the Bloodshed Hoax is entertaining. Comparing it to Watergate is exaggerated.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

The mind-reading here doesn’t correlate with the observed four years of the Trump presidency. To Republicans, Trump sounds like a guy from NY running for office. Branding Trump supporters as White Supremacists is an order of magnitude worse in terms of priming for violence. The gaslighting on this Bloodshed Hoax is so transparent it is entertaining. Once the gears of the machine become visible it all looks different. Worse than Watergate! Lol.

@gtconway3d - George Conway

What matters is that he consistently uses apocalyptic and violent language in an indiscriminate fashion as a result of his psychopathy and correlative authoritarian tendencies, and because he’s just plain evil. 4/x

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - March 17, 2024 at 12:01 PM
Saved - March 17, 2024 at 1:53 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I updated the Hoax Quiz. How many hoaxes do you still believe? Some of the hoaxes mentioned include Russia collusion, Trump suggesting bleach for COVID, and Trump mocking a reporter's disability. Other hoaxes involve Russia's involvement in various events, such as bounties on US soldiers and Navalny's death.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I updated the Hoax Quiz. Hoax Quiz How many of these hoaxes do you still believe are true? Russia Collusion Hoax Steele Dossier hooker story Russia paying bounties on US soldiers in Afghanistan Trump called Neo-Nazis “Fine people.” Trump suggested drinking/injecting bleach to fight COVID Trump overfed koi fish in Japan Trump cleared protestors with tear gas for a bible photo op Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation. Elections were fair because no court found major fraud. January 6th was an “insurrection” to overthrow the government Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of The Beast Border Patrol Agents whipped illegal border crossers Trump stored nuclear secrets at Mar-a-Lago Governor Whitmer kidnapping plot Trump mocked a reporter’s disability Government spending to subsidize green products reduces “inflation.” Trump invited Nick Fuentes to dinner at Mar-a-Lago Twittergate was a dud. We learned nothing new or worrisome. Twitter doesn’t shadow ban. Twitter hate speech got worse under Musk Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd NATO Funding Hoax Trump vowed there would be a “bloodbath” if he’s not re-elected. Russia Hoaxes broken out 1. Russia collusion hoax (the original) 2. Russian bounties on American soldiers hoax 3. Hunter laptop was Russian disinfo hoax 4. Trump responsible for Navalny's death hoax 5. Trump invited Russia to attack a NATO country that doesn't pay its bills hoax 6. FBI informant for the Biden bribes is a Russian spy (probable hoax) 7. Putin blew up his own pipeline hoax. 8. NEW: Trump is romantically attracted to Putin. 9. Russia is behind the anti-vax movement (Peter Hotez) 10. Alfa Bank hoax 11. Hamilton 68 Hoax 12. Embassy sonic weapon hoax 13. Navalny died of a blood clot 14. Russia is losing in Ukraine

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - March 11, 2024 at 4:43 PM
Saved - March 11, 2024 at 5:56 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

DEI brainwashing is dangerous.

@stillgray - Ian Miles Cheong

Have you noticed a concerning tend in the viral videos of kids beating each other up? They're not just having a scuffle -- fights they can walk away from with their heads held high and a few scratches. The kids doing the beating are fighting to kill. The victims are always outnumbered. The assailants are always black. The victims, white. Has it always been like this? I don't think so. What caused this trend? The only thing that comes to mind is wokeness and DEI -- black kids are being "educated" by their teachers on how evil whites are. White kids are told to submit, to not fight back. That's the trend.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - March 3, 2024 at 11:01 PM
Saved - March 4, 2024 at 12:57 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
There are concerns about election rigging due to a lack of government transparency. Transparency is seen as the proof of innocence, different from scientific or legal proofs.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Looks like proof of election rigging to me. “Proof” in this context is any lack of transparency by the government. The government is always guilty until it can prove innocence via transparency. “Proof” is a different creature for science and for the courts. We don’t need those flavors of proofs when we have this.

@Rasmussen_Poll - Rasmussen Reports

Georgia: No records were created capturing 148,000 2020 mail-in ballot outer envelope signatures for matching to Fulton County records because their new electronic sig verification equipment - wasn't used. Here the wording is actually "Nothing was scanned, your honor." Uh Oh

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - February 16, 2024 at 5:46 PM
Saved - February 16, 2024 at 7:37 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

The most important thing you will ever hear.

@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson

Ep. 75 The national security state is the main driver of censorship and election interference in the United States. "What I’m describing is military rule," says Mike Benz. "It’s the inversion of democracy." https://t.co/hDTEjAf89T

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - February 8, 2024 at 2:39 PM
Saved - February 8, 2024 at 5:50 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The author believes that the problems in society can be attributed to a system issue caused by the introduction of Trump. They argue that fake news, white supremacist hysteria, and cancel culture have led to incompetence in various systems. They also claim that the government is corrupt and that people no longer trust science, elections, or the media. The author suggests that Soros has taken control of American systems, with fake news and fake science being the main issues. They believe that the X platform is the only counterforce, and that efforts are being made to remove it and target Musk.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I finally figured out what's wrong with "everything." It's a system problem. The introduction of Trump into the system(s) broke almost everything, and in multiple ways. The fake news created a White Supremacist hysteria, which led to the Fine People Hoax and the George Floyd Hoax, which led to massive DEI, which led to massive systemic incompetence in all of our systems at once. Add wokeness and cancelation and we can't discuss the issue, much less fix it. That's a system problem. The corrective mechanism (free speech) has been removed. On top of that, the Trump experience has made it clear all of our government systems are corrupt. They probably always were, but as long as we didn't notice, things limped along okay. Now we notice. Now we don't accept "the science" we know is corrupt. We don't accept the omnibus bills we know are corrupt. We don't accept the foreign wars that look sketchy. We don't accept elections we can't fully audit. We don't trust the news, for good reason. We don't trust our intel services to not be agents of one party. And we see the justice departments weaponized. While all that happened Soros found a way to take control of all American systems via funding of non-government entities and integrating them into the American systems. But at the head of the snake is the fake news and fake science. There is no correcting mechanism. The X platform is the only counterforce, and that's why the crooks are trying to take it out, and Musk at the same time.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - December 20, 2023 at 1:03 PM
Saved - December 20, 2023 at 4:00 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I'm loving the Colorado overreach. The decision will be reversed. Trump's poll numbers will go up. But best of all, this gives you permission to assume the 2020 election was rigged -- without proof -- because "stop Trump at any cost" is evident in this decision.

@alx - ALX 🇺🇸

TURLEY: “This country is a powder keg and this court is just throwing matches at it.. for people that say they are trying to protect democracy, this is hands down the most anti-democratic opinion I’ve seen in my lifetime.” https://t.co/g9bz6JWmbb

Video Transcript AI Summary
The court's decision to disqualify voters from voting for Donald Trump is seen as a dangerous move that undermines democracy. While holding those responsible for the January 6th riot accountable is important, labeling it as an insurrection for disqualification purposes sets a troubling precedent. This decision denies the voters their right to have a say and is viewed as an anti-democratic opinion. It is argued that this approach is not the right way to address concerns about Trump's responsibility for the events of that day.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, this court just handed partisans on both sides, the ultimate tool to try to shortcut elections. And it's very, very dangerous. I mean, this country is a powder keg and this court is just throwing matches at it. And I think that It's a real mistake, but I think that they're wrong on the law. You know, January 6th was many things, most of it not good. In my view, it was not insurrection. It was a riot. That doesn't mean that the people responsible for that day shouldn't be held accountable. But to call this an insurrection for the purpose of disqualification would create a slippery slope for every state in the union. This is a time when we actually need democracy. We need to allow the voters to vote. We need to hear their decision. And the court here just said, you're not gonna get that. In Colorado, We're not going to let you vote for Donald Trump. And, you know, you could dislike Trump. You could believe he's responsible for January 6, But this isn't the way to do it. I mean, it is, you know, for people that say they're trying to protect democracy, this is hands down the most anti democrat An opinion I've seen in my lifetime.
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - December 17, 2023 at 1:44 PM
Saved - December 17, 2023 at 6:50 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Democrats, I understand the influence of media on you. Brainwashing is powerful, and I empathize with your situation. Consider countries that support unchecked immigration and its consequences. If none exist, you may have been manipulated. Also, complex models cannot predict the future. Remember, our common enemy is the brainwashing system, not just the Right Wing. They can be wrong, but it's not always due to brainwashing.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Dear Democrats, I'm sorry your media has done this to you. I realize you have no mechanism for knowing how brainwashed you are, and as a trained hypnotist, I am genuinely empathetic about it. I mean no disrespect, because brainwashing is more powerful than brains. That's why it works. One way out of your mental prison is to ask yourself which countries are okay with changing the basic nature of their societies via unchecked immigration. If such countries exist, and unchecked immigration is working out great for them, you might be right that the Right Wingers and Trump are like Hitler. If no such country exists, consider that you have been the victim of brainwashing -- the real kind -- and that this type of manipulation is the basic nature of American society, and has been for decades. Next, ask yourself if anyone has ever used a complex model to predict anything about the future -- climate or otherwise. You will learn it isn't a thing, and never has been. Models do not predict the future. Nothing else does either. Your real enemies are the brainwashers in charge, not the so-called Right Wing. There is a common enemy. The political right can be deluded and wrong too, but it never looks like the result of organized brainwashing, just an attraction to conspiracy theories, too many of which have proven true.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - December 16, 2023 at 12:04 AM
Saved - December 17, 2023 at 1:12 AM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

The government has to be regarded as guilty until proven innocent when it chooses to avoid transparency, such as the number undercover J6ers. Only citizens have a presumption of innocence. For government, presume the opposite. Lack of transparency = guilt. You can treat it as a fact.

@VivekGRamaswamy - Vivek Ramaswamy

Too bad for the media, we’ll take the TRUTH on Jan. 6 mainstream. There is clear evidence that there was at the very least entrapment of peaceful protestors, similar to the fake Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot & countless other cases. The FBI won’t admit how many undercover officers were in the field on Jan 6, Capitol police on one hand fired rubber bullets & explosives into a peaceful crowd who they then willingly later allowed to enter the Capitol. That doesn’t add up & the actual evidence turns the prior narrative upside down: if the deep state is willing to manufacture an “insurrection” to take down its political opponents, they can do anything. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

Video Transcript AI Summary
There were peaceful protesters who were met with rubber bullets and tear gas, which made them angry. They then charged towards the Capitol, where they were allowed in by the Capitol police. The video footage released earlier only showed the protesters' response to the tear gas and rubber bullets. However, those who entered the Capitol have since been targeted and arrested. This is seen as entrapment by the government, which is against the law. Similar tactics were used in the past against civil rights activists and left-leaning individuals. This is a civil rights and civil liberties issue of our time. The speaker believes that the peaceful protesters should be pardoned because entrapment is wrong.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Sir, can you tell us a little bit more Yeah. About what happened? Yeah. About the whole group. Just the truth. Yeah. We all Absolutely. I mean, so so basically, Now, some people had potentially plans of being more violent or not, but mostly peaceful protesters there. Then they fire rubber bullets and tear gas. So then the people are pissed. So then they start charging. Then when they get to the capitol, the capitol police just open the door and say come on in. But the video footage that got released before was just the response Exactly. That's how it's to the tear gas Yep. And to the rubber bullets, Which they didn't show you before. Oh my. So the the rubber bullets and the tear gas create a massive response. They show angry people in response to the tear gas and the rubber bullets. Because these are peaceful people just saying I'm sitting and somebody's fine rubber bullets at you. Then you say, no. I'm mad I'm pissed at that. So that's what they then show. But then they get to the door, and then they have people on the inside just said, hey, come on in. And the people who are then coming on in, they're been the subject of a massive manhunt. Then Then they then arrest to say you were in the capital illegally when that's exactly what it was set up to do. So that's wrong. That's called entrapment, when the government puts you up to do something that you otherwise wouldn't have done, our law says the government can't do that. And it turns out and it's actually not just the conservatives. I mean, if you go to most of our history, like, they were doing this to actually the FBI tried to do this to people who were civil rights activists or people who were thought to be left leaning communist in the fifties or sixties. And so it was wrong then, but it's wrong now. But this is a civil rights and civil libertarian issue of our time. And so, you know what? There you go. Take somebody to talk about it. Right? This is not supposed to be they they did not want their viewers to hear what I have to say but they're gonna keep talking about because that's what the truth is. And every one of those peaceful protesters is gonna get a pardon from me because entrapment is wrong.
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - December 14, 2023 at 12:55 PM
Saved - December 14, 2023 at 2:30 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The US seems to want its adversaries to believe it possesses secret UFO technology, but the author doubts this is true. They also mention a secret sonic weapon allegedly used by the Russians on US embassy staff. The author sees Mr. Grusch as a patriotic individual who trusts his sources.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

It's only obvious the US wants our adversaries to think we have secret UFO technology. It is also obvious (to me anyway) that we have nothing of the sort, unless we keep it with the secret sonic weapon the Russians allegedly used on our embassy staff. Mr. Grusch looks like a patriot who believes what he heard from his sources.

@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson

Ep. 51 It’s becoming obvious that the US government has made contact with nonhuman beings. So why are they lying to us about it? We asked UFO whistleblower Dave Grusch. https://t.co/IP1dV29KnI

Video Transcript AI Summary
This video discusses the increasing number of UFO sightings and the experiences of former government officials who claim to have knowledge of UFOs. Dave Grush, a former military intelligence officer, asserts that the US government has retrieved bodies and materials from crashed UFOs. The video highlights the culture of secrecy and overclassification surrounding this topic, hindering progress in understanding UFOs. The speaker also suggests that the government may be hiding information about the Kennedy assassination and UFOs to avoid scrutiny. They emphasize the need for transparency and the potential implications of contact with nonhuman intelligences. The speaker expresses personal concerns about potential harm and urges the passing of legislation to disclose information about UFOs.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Human beings have recorded seeing strange moving lights in the sky since, well, the beginning of known history. Record goes back thousands of years. What is that? We don't know. In the United States, people have been talking a lot about these strange lights UFOs since the Second World War when military pilots recorded seeing things they called Foo Fighters out their cockpit windows. They had no idea what they were. The last 80 years, it seems like there has been a continuous increase in the sightings of these things, these UFOs or UAPs, And there's a whole industry that has grown up around describing what they are or may be. But it wasn't until very recently in the last 18 months that former government officials began stepping forward in public to say what they believe they are people with direct firsthand knowledge of the government's interactions with these objects or vehicles or people or whatever they are. One such person who has come forward recently is a longtime military intelligence officer, an Air Force Major, called Dave Grush. He's made a number of very interesting claims in public, including at congressional hearings. For example, here he is telling the Congress, in fact, the US government has retrieved bodies, or as he puts it, biologics, from crashed UAPs. Watch. Speaker 1: Do you believe that officials at the highest levels of our national security apparatus have unlawfully withheld information from Congress and subverted, our oversight authority? Speaker 2: There are certain elected leaders that had more information that I'm not sure what they've shared with certain gang event members or etcetera, but, certainly, I would not be surprised. Speaker 1: Okay. You've stated that the government is in possession of potentially non human spacecraft. Based on your experience and extensive conversations with experts, do you believe our government has made contact with intelligence extraterrestrials? Speaker 2: Something I can't discuss in public setting. Speaker 1: Okay. I can't ask when you think this occurred. If you believe we have crashed craft, stated earlier, do we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted this craft? Speaker 2: As I've stated publicly already in my NewsNation interview, biologics came with some of these recoveries. Yeah. Speaker 1: Were they, I guess, human or non human biologics? Speaker 2: Non human, and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge on the program I talked to that are currently still on the program. Speaker 1: And was this documentary evidence, this video, photos, eyewitness, like how would that be determined? Speaker 2: The specific documentation I would have to talk to you and a SCIF about. Speaker 0: SCIF being a secure location where the highest classified intelligence can be discussed among people who have permission to hear it. Dave Rush is the man you just saw in that video he joins us now. Thanks so much for coming on. So before you get into fleshing out some of what you told Nancy Mace in that clip, could you tell us about your background? Who are you? Where are you from? What have you spent your life doing? Speaker 2: Yeah, I spent my entire life growing up in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, you know, son of, you know, very normal income, you know, typical family. Spent most of my my youth playing basketball and tennis and I ended up going to the University of Pittsburgh, where I went into Air Force ROTC. I had a full scholarship in physics at the time, and, yeah, born and bred in Pittsburgh. And then once I graduated Pitts, ended up commissioning in the Air Force as a 2nd Lieutenant and, went on active duty, and I ended up spending, 14 years in the Air Force, both active duty and reserve, And also I became a government civilian at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency and I was lucky enough to be Brought in at the the GS fifteen level which is equivalent to like a full bird colonel, civilian. Speaker 0: National Geospatial on MacArthur Boulevard in DC. Speaker 2: It's in Springfield, Virginia. Speaker 0: Oh, it is? Speaker 2: For for Bevoir. Speaker 0: Right. What is that, by the way? Speaker 2: So that agency collects All imagery, other types of visual intelligence to make fuse products called geospatial intelligence products. So think about the National Reconnaissance Office, you know, flies the bus, so to speak, they fly the satellites. The National Geospatial Intelligence Agency processes Speaker 0: That intelligence Okay. So if there's stuff floating above the earth, it's their job to know about it, I assume? Speaker 2: Process the intelligence coming off, you know, satellites flying around The Earth. Yes. Speaker 0: So you spent over 14 years in this world. Speaker 2: Yes. Speaker 0: And then Suddenly, the rest of us encounter you in public saying that the U. S. Government has very detailed knowledge of what these things are and has for a long time. Speaker 2: Yeah. I had no personal interest in the UFO subject, really. You know, certainly, I, you know, grew up and I saw stuff in the history, you know, that kind of thing. But Having studied physics, became an intel officer, I was very agnostic about the subject, and I was in a position of extreme trust. You Now I handled the Presidential Daily Brief for my agency's director at the National Constance Office when I was an Air Force Reserve officer. It was widely cleared, to most black programs in the Department of Defense. Speaker 0: What's a black program? Speaker 2: You know, special access program. Right? And, I figured kind of, That I would know if if that kind of program exists. It was kind of a joke between, you know, myself and other colleagues over the years, like, when when are we gonna get read into, you know, the UFO stuff? And we thought that it was a total joke, but it wasn't until, you know, I saw the New York Times article in in 2017, and and I What was that article? So that was a a story about, Lou Elizondo and other individuals that ran the, the AATIP program and the AAWSAT program. So fancy aerospace weapon systems applications To be clear, Speaker 0: I think the government has never admitted that he was or denied, in fact, Elizondo was involved with. Speaker 2: No. He certainly was. I remember, in a very senior official's office in McLean, Briefing that senior official into about a couple 100 special access programs because at the time, I was a trusted individual, advising the Joint Chiefs on Certain black programs. And I remember that individual who was a co worker of, you know, Lou Elizondo, mentioned, Oh, there's this guy named named Lou Elizondo over at the Pentagon. He's running some UFO program. We think he lost his mind. He's giving the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence a hard time, and this was 6 months prior to that Leslie Clean and Ralph Blumenthal article in December 2017. And I was like, I don't know who this Lou guy is. He sounds crazy to me because I don't know about some UFO program. And but little did I know, about six 7 months after that, I saw that on the news and that's what caught my attention because I'm like, I heard about this guy, didn't realize that program was for real and it turns out it was. And, and then, I spent a year kind of just doing like an open source lit review. And then in early 2019, just by happenstance, my boss forwarded me an email from the UAP Task Force director asking, hey, we need a rep From the NRO to help the task force, you got anybody? And, you know, my my boss knew I was a reservist and I was looking for something to do To put on my performance report, and, of course, I said yes, so because I figured, I'd figure out if it was something prosaic, like natural phenomena, If it's a blue US program that people are seeing that, you know, people think is a UFO, but it's not, or it's maybe some adversarial program That maybe our intelligence community, missed in their intelligence collection analysis. Yeah. Speaker 0: So I went All fair guesses. Speaker 2: Yeah. I went in proving a negative. I didn't I mean, I was open to the idea of, you know, nonhuman intelligence because, you know, as a guy got his bachelor's in physics, there's something called the Drake equation, Calculates the number of, potential civilizations in the, you know, the Milky Way based on certain factors, and people can Google that and play around with it. So I was open to it, but I didn't think that was going to be the answer. Speaker 0: So so so you were detailed to this? Speaker 2: I was. It was my official duty as an Air Force officer, and then eventually, When NGA hired me as a government civilian, the UAP portfolio came to myself and a few other individuals within our agency, to support the UAP task force initially, but of course, that office transitioned to the ARRW office, the, you know, Old domain anomaly resolution office. Speaker 0: So you'd, by this point, worked in the government for a long time? Speaker 2: Yeah. I did. Yeah. I mean, become my cadet time in uniform. I've, you know, been in uniform, you know, 18 years. Speaker 0: So how is this different? Speaker 2: This was different because I started to uncover, you know, some very disturbing Facts. I had people come to me. I had access to the classified, archives from those previous UFO programs that Lou Elizondo and others ran Years prior and, you know, I saw I read some extremely interesting foreign intelligence that was derived by You know, clandestine human sources overseas espousing, and this is, you know, something they're And noting about the US, they're like, yeah, the US has a retrieval program, reverse engineering program, and I'm like, woah, woah, woah, Speaker 0: woah, woah. This was the assessment of Speaker 2: Other countries, yeah. And I and by the way, I ran all this through DOD security and pre publication review, mind you, so anything I say in detail, I'm I'm a steward of security. I care about national security, and I would never want to say something publicly, that would, you know, hamper national security. Just to put that out there. Speaker 0: But but what an interesting way to find out. You're reading the assessment of countries that are spying on us, and we've spied on their assessments of us. Speaker 2: Yes. And, I had a chain of custody on how we got that information and, you know, I thought maybe, oh, this is passage material. We got to be Careful which passage material would be like a form of disinformation to try to trick a case officer to develop a, you know, relationship with said asset. So I I was like, wait a minute, is this true? It a certain adversary of ours thinks, apparently, this is true. And you know, one thing led to another And, you know, I did talk to extremely, extremely, you know, senior officials, both former directors of certain agencies. I had the privilege of having relationship with them, and I talked to them about this issue, and they confirmed those details. And what was really interesting In the previous UFO program's records, so the AUSAP program, which ran roughly 2008 to 2010 or so. And that was in the Defense Intelligence Agency, and this is, this has been released by FOIA. You can actually go to DIA's website and And read this, but, the the paperwork included this very odd request from senator Harry Reid. He sent a letter to the Deputy Secretary of Defense asking for something called a provisional special access program or PSAP. I've never seen in my career a member of Congress ask the Department of Defense to develop a very classified program. Usually, it's the reverse, Right. Congress wants more transparency and reclassification. Look, this is very odd. I don't I don't know what's going on here. Why is Harry Reid Saying that the OSAP program found something they needed to develop this, provisional special access program that is Waived and bigoted, which is the most serious of SAPs, waived means it's limited congressionally reported. That's 10 U. S. Code Section 119 And bigoted means it's like by name. And there was a list of individuals that needed to be briefed, of course, Senator Reed, Inouye and a couple, you know, members of Gang of 8, wanted to be on it. And so I asked people that both worked on that program, But also people that were tangential to it that worked in certain intelligence agencies. So what was this about? Well, you know, a certain clear defense contractor wanted to transfer some of their material holdings to DIA for our program. It was all crash Retrieval material, and this was a way to horizontally protect, as we call it, that information and that physical material, from a certain other government program and custodian that lent that that contractor material in the past. And I was like, wait, are you you saying we have UFO material? That's crazy. Are you sure it's UFO material? Like, this isn't like we we went and got a wreckage of a Russian bomber and it just happened to be weird or Something like that. And now they were dead serious. So I mean, what was Speaker 0: their sort of tone or effect when they said like, of course or Speaker 2: Well, they certainly, I guess they're a little bit jaded and, you know, the reality to them is not shocking, but I was So intrigued by this, not only did I interview 10 people that were in the meetings that, you know, talked to the Clear Defense contractor, we're involved in trying to persuade the government customer to release custodianship to give it, ultimately to DIA and Bigelow Aerospace. I actually flew, to Las Vegas and I actually met with Senator Harry Reid himself after he retired. Of course, you know, the former majority leader, and I wanted to hear it right from his mouth. He had Speaker 0: a longtime interest in this topic. Speaker 2: Yeah. And, you know, he confirmed that to me. He's like, yes, I was told This clear defense contractor had material. This is the way to get it, and, you know, he told me that he he knew that contractor had material for decades. However, The Pentagon has always denied him access to actually go see that and he literally told me that in his living room To my face, and, he ultimately made that disclosure to the New Yorker. Speaker 0: If I could just ask you to pause. Yeah. How could the Pentagon, which has no authority of any kind except to the extent it serves elected officials. It's not its own country. Yeah. They're they're just employees like your housekeeper. They work for politicians who are elected by the people. How can they deny an elected official access to something? Speaker 2: Yeah and that's part of why I whistleblower this Constitutional branch of government Speaker 0: Thank you. Exactly. Speaker 2: So and and and elected leaders, even in the normal black pro SAP Community, they're treated as second class citizens. Oh, we're gonna waive reporting. I'm depsec def. I can sign an order saying we're not gonna fully brief Certain committees on programs. That is in public law, tenuous code section 119, And that is congressional oversight of SAPS is the title of that part of public law. But the Department, which I find, You know, in retrospect, very weird where you, you know, the legislators authorize and appropriate these programs, But they're not afforded full access, and occasionally Gang of 8 will get those kind of briefings, but but literally, they could withhold, you know, besides notifying a program got stood up, the entire congress that we're doing some kind of clandestine activity. Speaker 0: It's almost unbelievable. I mean, they they have no moral authority to do that, of course, under our constitution. Speaker 2: Yeah. And, you know, and and I'm I'm Speaker 0: not up in this because it's the least interesting part but it is I think significant. What about the executive? Do you believe they withheld Information from sitting president? Speaker 2: Yeah, it's funny you asked that. So the executive was initially involved in The secrecy on the UAP topic, they transposed the Manhattan Project secrecy construct onto this, Eventually, and then they formed, you know, the Atomic Energy Act, what was McMahon Act of 46, the Atomic Energy Act of 54, And they purposely diluted the definition of like special nuclear material. If you actually read section 51 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, it says, You know, besides normal nuclear material, we can also protect stuff that is similar and it's a very like broad definition And that's basically the justification of the secrecy on this topic is the material that we recover sometimes does have radioactive properties. And so where, you know, they legally and gymnastically, you know, twisted the public law to justify the secrecy. Speaker 0: I have so many questions for you, and I'm getting in the way of your narrative, which is terrific. Thank you. So before I interrupted you, you were saying so you All of a sudden realized this is real. Mhmm. And then it sounds like you said you interviewed 10 people. It sounds like you decided to find out as much Speaker 2: Yeah. We interviewed roughly 40 people, many of which, you know, had firsthand knowledge. Like I said, you know, I we were privileged To interview, you know, people at the same kind of level as as Harry Reid, for example. And, you know, Harry was just so concerned about this, topic. You know, when I left the meeting with him, he said he was gonna go talk to President Biden. Him and President Biden had like a weekly call And this is about 9 months before his death. Certainly his mind was sharp, but, you know, he was struggling with his health issues. For sure. But, you know, he was so concerned about our conversation, which was unclassified because I was in his living room. But he was gonna go talk to the president because he understood stood that even himself as a Gang of Eight member and the majority leader, for goodness sakes, was denied access. And going back to your earlier question about presidents, You know, many administrations ago, a lot of the presidents were in the know, right. However, it's vacillated over the years where certain chief executives necessarily briefed all aspects of the program. So you have, you know, commander in chief is also our chief diplomat and they do need to know, if there is a foreign entity, adversary, friend, whatever, out there so they can form, foreign policy for the country. But when you are not telling it's like classifying the existence of Russia. Speaker 0: It's like but it's also they have no moral authority to do it. They have no authority to even have their jobs without the authority that comes from the votes of the population through the elected officials. So like this, Speaker 2: Well, that's the issue you have. It's a symptom of the overclassification of this whole secret national security state that was formed in 1947 And, they're basically classifying basic physics, basic astrobiology, that kind of stuff, and that's, Do we classify nuclear physics? No. You can study at a university. Speaker 0: So let's, since I keep interrupting, let's just go to the beginning. Tell us what you know about the genesis of this. You I'll start with the most obvious question, which is you said the secrecy surrounding these programs derived from the secrecy surrounding the Manhattan Project. Is there any connection between the 2? Speaker 2: Not overtly, but certainly during the Manhattan Project. Speaker 0: No, let me be more specific. Do you think that the development of nuclear Weapons was derived anyway from technology, from these No, no, no, no. But I think That was totally independent. Speaker 2: But I think it might have precipitated Interest from, you know Speaker 0: From these objects. Speaker 2: From these objects, yes. Speaker 0: Okay. So, the most famous, obviously, Roswell 1947, You know? Speaker 2: Yeah. I can't talk about many retrievals. The only one I've stated publicly is the 1933 Italian event. So Speaker 0: tell us what that is. Speaker 2: So I picked that event, specifically because it was not U. S. Centric And I wanted to espouse that this is a worldwide problem, not just a US centric problem. So that was a, you know, recovery of an artifact By the Axis powers Italy and Germany and Magenta, Italy in 1933. Much of that information, ironically, was in the public vernacular Starting in the early 2000, there were certain researchers at Italy that uncovered these documents that Mussolini sent To the Gestapo or the Italian equivalent of the Gestapo and and, otherwise. However, that was one specific A recovery that was briefed to me by a senior intelligence officer. Well, I Speaker 0: mean, since it was, you know, 90 years ago and in Fascist Italy, I think we can we're safe in telling what we know, correct? So, like what happened? Speaker 2: So, you know, they recovered this object. It looked like an acorn and the intelligence officer that briefed me and, we'll just say, senior officials On Capitol Hill, during a certain private session, described how the edges of this, It was like a lenticular disk looking thing, but the edges broke off when it hit the earth. So it looked like an acorn or like a bell shape, when they recovered it, it was just an artifact. They didn't find anything with it. And, you know, the Italians kept custody of that Towards the end of the war and then, you know, the Americans came in and recovered it. And we knew about it because it turns out the Vatican through Pope Pius the 12th And the OSS, they sent a communique back to FDR saying, hey, we got something kind of weird that, you know, crashed in Italy. And, you know, so this this history is longer than most people think. It is not those, Seminole events that, you know, you may have mentioned to me, but it actually goes back much farther. And I wanted to use 1933 as an example Not only to garner international interest, but to, you know, explain that this is, you know, a longer activity than than most people think. Speaker 0: So but what you're saying is even, You know, Italy falls in 1945, the Muslim government, and the US army military swoops in and takes this. Yes. And then it disappears behind the veil of secrecy. Mhmm. Why? So they were secretive about it even then. Yeah. How come? Speaker 2: Well, it was one of those things. It's like a Pandora's box, Right. If you could analyze it and garner some kind of information from it, from like a reverse engineering perspective, it may give you like an ace in the hole, Asymmetric advantage over your adversary and, well, we want to figure this out. We don't know if Russia's ever found any of this stuff, you know, at the time. And, is this and of course, they didn't know the origin of it. We they just wanted to make sure it wasn't one of our adversaries, so they spent years looking at it And developing an intelligence infrastructure to figure out what was going on. Speaker 0: So that's the is that the first that you know of? Speaker 2: No, but that was one of the ones I ran through DOD security and Speaker 0: So you believe they're earlier incidents? Speaker 2: I want to add, I don't want to comment either way. Yeah, there's, I know about many other events, but however, those, that's the only one that I've cleared through security. Speaker 0: Okay. But you can say for at least This 80 years, the US government has Speaker 2: Yeah. At least from 1933 was at about 90 or so, if I'm doing the math right. Speaker 0: Well, you said the US government tend to take custody till the end of Speaker 2: That particular one, yes. Speaker 0: Okay. But you are saying the US government had knowledge in in the thirties? Speaker 2: They were aware of the issue back then. Yeah. Speaker 0: Wow stupid question but one that keeps occurring to me Why would advanced technology like this crash so often? Speaker 2: Yeah. People ask that. I think one of the the tropes that a lot of skeptics Put out like, oh, it traveled so far. Why did it crash? Did it crash by accident or on purpose? And there's something called the concept of Von Neumann Replicating probes, which you can, you know, Google that. You know, a physicist postulated that if you're advanced, you might have throwaway Probes. I mean, think of like the Voyager spacecraft, for example, right? Well, we don't care what the disposition is at the end. We just wanted to go as far as possible. So the crashes aren't necessarily on purpose and I'm not just saying that as my own personal theory. You know, I talked to scientists That were on this program and this was one of their legitimate theories that, you know, that is a possibility. Speaker 0: But you say these subjects came from so far. Do we know that? Well, that's Speaker 2: the thing is you don't really know the origin. You know, people, even certain directors of government agencies we talked to about this issue and they were Well aware of this program, you know, they like to use the term extraterrestrial, but I'm a little skeptical about that. That's why, you know, I like I used the term NHI, and that also is nonhuman intelligence, and that is also a term that Chuck Schumer, in the Schumer Amendment, you know, so Chuck Schumer, Senator Gillibrand, Rubio, Rounds, and Young, proposed an act called the UAP Disclosure Act of 2023. It's an amendment within the fiscal year 24 National Defense Authorization Act, 67 pages, publicly available. It is currently in conference right now And they use the term non human intelligence, biologics, so, I'm not the only one using those terms. That is, The majority leader, Chuck Schumer, who by the way was friends with Harry Reid, and other notable senators are also pushing for transparency in this matter. Speaker 0: Is there any evidence that these objects are coming from far away through space into our atmosphere? Speaker 2: That touches some sensitive natural technical capabilities I can't Cross. But Speaker 0: Sounds like there's some suggestion they're coming from under the ocean. Speaker 2: I think it's a multidomain issue. And, there are A bunch of potential origins that are based either in physics theory or biological theory. And, you know, I'm open to all possibilities. Speaker 0: Is it known so far as you know where they come from? Speaker 2: There are reasonably confident theories. However, I have not seen all the data and and I don't always, you know, trust everything certain interview subjects espouse because I might have, like, an intellectual Or data analytical kind of difference in opinion. So, but I do encourage the President, and through this Act, Make, you know, all data as it relates to origin, you know, transparent to the American people. Speaker 0: Well, that's I mean, if if if you can't even say it now Speaker 2: Mhmm. Speaker 0: There's a and I want to get into that, like why the secrecy, actually. Speaker 2: Well, that's the problem is it's actually hindering national security by keeping it so tight because you don't have Broad industrial base and broad academic study. So, just like nuclear physics, you can go and get a PhD in it. You can read about it. You can study it. How you build nuclear weapons, that's classified and that's fine. I just want the subject to basically be horizontally protected like nuclear Secrets, like true nuclear secrets, where the broad study of which should be open to the public and anything that is really, Dangerous to release because of weaponization or something. Keep that classified, but 95% should be open to study throughout the Speaker 0: world especially since it sounds pretty clear that the U. S. Government's been in contact with whatever these are You wouldn't confirm or deny that in your congressional testimony. It seems very clear to me. And I won't ask you because you already have an answer, but That's being done in the name of the U. S. Taxpayer of citizens of voters and at some point they have a right to know that Like, I don't I can't imagine what the justification for keeping that from the public, who you work for, Speaker 2: could what could that be? Yeah. I think it's an abuse. You know, so executive order 13,526, if you read that, delineates the 8 reasons you classify information. And the only thing that this falls under is, you know, Scientific and technical information that has national security implications is is boilerplate, and it's really just an abuse At this point, and we're overclassifying things out of fear of the socioeconomic, theological, And counterintelligence implications because I remember talking to, a former director of a three letter agency that we happen Trudeau personally and we met with. And, you know, that former director's biggest issue was the counterintelligence implications. We can't let Russia and China Figure this. Okay. I get that. I used to work counterintelligence to protect U. S. Programs in a previous job, when I was a young Air Force officer, But there's got to be a middle grounds and not, oh, well, we don't know what to do, so we're just going to keep everything unacknowledged. It's ridiculous. Speaker 0: But it also suggests that there's more going on here. I mean, in your own life or my life, the life any person, the things that you hide, the things you try to keep secret the most assiduously are the things you're most embarrassed about. Speaker 2: That is true. So there was a recent administration that had an informal, off-site meeting. And I talked to multiple individuals that were in this in person meeting, with, we'll just say, National Security Council staff of this former administration. And one of the biggest issues that they raised was white collar crime, illegal contracting. So there's something called the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the FAR. And if you only give a couple contractors full access for decades of this stuff And you don't let other contractors compete for work, for money. You're giving, certain companies an unfair competitive advantage, that violates literal U. S. Law. So it's, you know, we're not going to release anything because then we have to deal. And I remember These individuals telling me they were worried that contractors would sue the U. S. Government and it would be litigated to the Supreme Court. Well, we're out of 1,000,000,000 of dollars because you sole sourced it to these couple companies. Of course. Speaker 0: Well, but and there are darker explanations. Speaker 2: And there's darker things, I'm sure, but but some of the most Obvious ones that they told me were very rudimentary and it's like, well, yeah. Well, I'm sorry you guys did that. And and let's be clear, I'm not here to admonish The entire US government, I mean, I know a lot of good people. I would have to think I was a good person, a good, you know, intelligence officer. Speaker 0: Well, I I'm the son of a federal employee. I you don't need to convince me. I know. Speaker 2: So I'm not here to overly admonish everybody. I think there needs to be, you know, a, Called a truth and reconciliation process. You know, we're not here to shackle people. We're not here to get people necessarily in Trouble unless they did something grossly illegal and immoral and unethical. And I suspect based on people I talk to, there is going to be limited situations where People are going to be found, culpable in that. But I'm here. You know, it's time to reconcile this. We need to heal from this. You know, we need to disclose the basics. The fact that we're we're not alone. We've recovered material And we've recovered the occupants. And beyond that, you know, the president can decide what should be disclosed. It's above my pay grade, But the the basics should be acknowledged. And I think it's a more ontologically shocking, but also uniting Thing in an era of divisiveness, I think we need Speaker 0: to agree with that. Speaker 2: I mean, what else is gonna unite the left, the right, And potentially our adversaries, I mean, you saw the hearing that you played the clip, I had AOC and Matt Gaetz agreeing on something in the same room And not arguing. It was crazy. So this topic, I think, is maybe we're at a point in our, you know, our society, Especially the the decay we've seen over the last 30 years and the divisiveness rather whether you're on the left or on the right, this is the one topic that I think can basically be a reset button. Speaker 0: So can you just give us a sense of the scale of these recoveries? It's like 3 or is it Speaker 2: It is double digit and I've mentioned that publicly. I am familiar with the exact numbers. We had multiple intel officers brief us on all the numbers and Where went one warehouse? Speaker 0: Where is all the stuff kept? I mean, I assume that Speaker 2: I do know of some specific locations. Speaker 0: The Boeing Raytheon warehouse. Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, Harry Reid knew about one specific location, and that was the material that he was denied access to. Speaker 0: Why didn't he show up with armed guards and demand to see it? I don't understand. Everyone's so passive. Yeah. You're the Senate majority leader. Show it to me now. Speaker 2: Yeah. You would think that there's some kind of enforcement tactic he could use. He didn't Expels anything else besides they he was trying to get access administratively by sponsoring that special access program. Speaker 0: So that kind of raises An interesting and having spent my life in Washington you know you hear this stuff you don't really know if it's true you know about Unauthorized and dark things going on in the United States to people who tell its secrets. But it does raise the question, like, why you? It's been going on for, well, you said, I guess, 90 years at least. You're suggesting longer, actually, but certainly most of the century, and No one's really come forward. Like, why is that? Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, there there have been other people that have come forward. Certainly was more stigmatized in the past. Why me? I was just a guy in the right place in the right time. I happened to be ultra cleared in the DoD and IC at the time and I generally knew who to talk To where the skeletons were for other US activities and But what's your motive? My motive really is just, you know, Air Force core values, you know, service before self, Integrity first, and and I just did not want to, you know, look back 30 years from now and be like, hush. I've done something when this topic was, you know, acceptable in Congress. We had all this momentum. I just did not want to live out my life keeping a secret like these other, gentlemen and ladies that came to me and my group on the UAP Task Force because they wanted a change. You know, some of them were in tears because they were threatened Over the years and Threatened by whom? Both the program because you can imagine, hey, we're gonna read you in. This is treason. You will go to the Leavenworth And, you know, you'll be executed if you ever, you know, divulge these secrets, right? So they were intimidated. Speaker 0: Have fun at trial. Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, The judicial process doesn't work quite the same on that program, but that's sensitivity. Speaker 0: They don't have the constitution in place. Why doesn't someone just tear down the U. S. Government? This is so rotten that it's kind of hard to believe it's actually in existence. Speaker 2: I know. I lost a lot of sleep on this. But when I started getting attacked on the inside And the reprisal started happening for 3 years. You know, I knew I was over the target, so to speak. You take fire when you're over the target, as we say in the Air Force, And it just got so crazy. I had 3 agencies investigate me at the same time. Somehow Which ones? Don't want to say because there's an ongoing reprisal investigation on my behalf by the inspector general to look in into all this that's going on. So I don't want to compromise that investigation by saying too many details. But I was investigated by 3 agencies at once. They tried to dig up anything they could find on me. They tried to use, mental health issues I reported in my past. I've been in Afghanistan. I got PTSD. I have a VA disability rating because of that. I had a friend that blew up. I had a friend that had killed himself And, you know, that impacted me when I was a younger guy in my twenties, but I got help. No problem. I maintained my clearance, but they dug up stuff From almost a decade ago saying, oh, he has, you know, ongoing issues, that kind of thing. And certainly was not the case. I was taking care of myself. You know, I have High functioning autism and, you know, and I had to learn how to manage my emotions and got help, maintained my clearance. So when that didn't work, they just made up stuff. And it turns out I found out after the fact, I was under criminal investigation for 4 months. I was never interviewed. I didn't even know what it was about. But then I found out afterwards when they, you know, tried to use that to revoke my clearance. Now, mind you, you know, I have a good attorney, the former inspector general, And, you know, we litigated that, we rebutted that, and, you know, everything was, I was cleared of any wrongdoing. I maintained my clearance, you know, I resigned from NGA with my Clearance eligibility intact, but I even FOIA ed that agency who put me under criminal investigation And I got a denial of my whole file citing something called like a B7 alpha FOIA exemption, which means we could compromise a law enforcement investigation. But they wouldn't even give me anything, not even redacted papers. They just gave me a denial letter, and I'm like, okay. So you said I did something bad, which wasn't even true. You never interviewed me and you were trying to use that information to fire me. That's crazy. And luckily, you know, there is an open investigation to look at this kind of wrongdoing, and that's one of the reasons I went public. I'm a patriot. I shouldn't be treated like this. Of course not. If there was a sensitive program I uncovered, come to the table with me. Tell me, knock it off, Dave. Sign this piece. Speaker 0: But where's everybody else? And where's everyone else been for the last 90 years? I know so outrageous that it suggests to me that the threats, the ones you alluded to, are real. People are afraid Speaker 2: of being hurt. And luckily, people are coming out. So remember the DIA AUSET program I mentioned earlier. So a man named Doctor. James Katzie ran it. He's a PhD level, former DIA officer, now retired. So he wrote 2 books. 1 is called Skinwalkers at the Pentagon And on page 152 to 153, if anybody's watching and happens to have the book, you'll note that they talked about a sequester technology and they were trying to get access Says to it, well, that's what I just told you earlier in this interview is Harry Reid was literally trying to get them access to that technology and and people are like, Oh, well, Harry was funding some paranormal program. They were looking at Skinwalker Ranch. It was some woo woo thing. I'm like, well, the real story is The 21 or $22,000,000 appropriated was meant to set up material analysis equipments At, a Bigelow Aerospace facility to look at the material that a clear defense contractor was supposed to transfer to them. But when that ended, They ended up doing other stuff with that money because, well, they wanted to study this phenomenon in some way, shape, or form, so they looked at some of the more, You know, paranormal aspects, if you will. I've never been to Skinwalker Ranch in Utah, but, you know, allegedly, things are going on out there. And then they wrote these, documents called Defense Intelligence Reference documents in lieu of what that the core reason for that money. So a lot of Naysayers, in social media, oh, Harry Reid, he was just into the paranormal and and he wanted to study, you know, Skinwalker Ranch and ghosts. That's not entirely accurate. There was a real reason for it. Speaker 0: No. But I'm just saying what they're doing is what it sounds like they Did you, which is try to discredit you by calling you a nut? Speaker 2: Yeah. And 1 week after the congressional hearing, there was a hit piece on The Intercept. Somebody verbally tipped off that reporter and he admitted it on an interview on the Hill, and he FOIA ed for some records that pointed towards, You know, some, you know, struggles I had several years ago where I, you know, checked myself in because I was feeling depressed at a hospital and, you know, I'm not ashamed of that. You know, A lot of veterans go through that, but it was very interesting, 1 week after the hearing, this hit piece comes out of the intercept, Killing the messenger, but not the message, you know, saying I'm crazy. I have mental problems. And Speaker 0: it was kind Speaker 2: of crazy. Speaker 0: Why would why would an intercept reporter do that. Speaker 2: You would think because, weren't they pro whistleblower? Didn't Glenn Greenwald create them to actually support whistleblowers? Speaker 0: And if some, you know, A high level bureaucrat comes to you to, you know, crush a subordinate you because he's revealing things that public really has a right to know you think the reporters who actually, I want to hear more about the program. What is this? Do you have UFOs or don't you? Speaker 2: Yeah. It's like, why don't you actually look into it? It's very lazy journalism and there's very few investigative journalists and I'm sure you know this that even exists anymore. Speaker 0: I'm very aware of it. And yes I'm very aware of that but I just want to get back to like the core of what's going on here. It doesn't actually add up. So the idea is that For 90 years, we've been collecting the stuff, monitoring it, studying it in order to improve military technology to give us an edge and ace in the hole as you said. Speaker 2: Yeah. There there were certainly good breakthroughs that I'm aware of that did help certain, black programs that are conventional in nature. And I understand that. Speaker 0: Can you be more detailed than any of that? Speaker 2: No, I can't. Speaker 0: And a Speaker 2: lot of those programs are still classified. Right. Speaker 0: Well, that's kind of the point I'm making. A lot of these programs are So old that no person participated in them is still alive. Speaker 2: No. That was the issue is I I had to find some of the old timers before they died because There's a brain drain. I have there's a senior intelligence officer that's currently on the program that, you know, told us that They have they struggle hiring even the right technical people because of the obtuse security. Imagine the best person in quantum gravity smokes marijuana. Are they getting a TS clearance? No. So they can't even bring in the right people. And once again, like you just said, a lot of the Breakthroughs have not matriculated into civil society for the most part, and in an era of climate change and other things going on, you know, and we can debate the genesis thereof. But this is the time to bring it out because it's gonna take 20, 30 years to commercialize anything anyways Speaker 0: but it does suggest that there's something more going on here it suggests that the US government They've kept the Kennedy assassination files thousands of pages classified for 60 years this month because the CIA of course, he was in contact with Oswald and had knowledge of the conspiracy to kill Kennedy. I'm not speculating. I talked to someone who read the documents. So they have hidden those documents in order to check themselves from public scrutiny of their own illegal, immoral behavior. I'm kinda be surprised if something similar is not going on here. Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, there's a famous quote. There's a John Stossel interview where he interviews Mike Pompeo about 2 or 3 years ago where, interesting, he makes a weird very odd Insequeter, after he discusses the JFK files ironically, and he says, if I get this quote correctly, I've seen the UFO file. We have bigger problems is what, you know, the former CIA director says to John Stossel in a taped interview. And If you even go back, most people don't know this, there's a taped interview from senator Barry Goldwater in the late eighties. He was famously A 2 star general in the Air Force Reserve, but of Goldwater Nichols Act famed in in the eighties. And there's an interview of him, which you can YouTube, if you like, that's, he phoned General Curtis LeMay many years ago and asked, hey, I heard there's a room where you keep all this UFO material. Can I have access? And General LeMay basically chewed out Senator Goldwater, who was, I think Gang of 8 member at the time, and denied him access. So there's something wrong when, you know, certain people like that, Try to dig into it. Speaker 0: But right. But there's a reason that they're keeping it secret. Speaker 2: There may be other reasons. I don't claim to be omnipotent and know all the issues and that's why I'm not here to disclose, this should be the president of United States and his cabinet, because There may be issues that I'm not even aware of that may precipitate a certain form of acknowledgement or disclosure. I do agree. There is probably something darker and deeper and more disturbing, and I, you know, I did see inklings of that When I did interview, so many people of high caliber. Speaker 0: So what is the truth about these claims of abduction? Speaker 2: I don't know. Nobody I interviewed Had any firsthand knowledge on that phenomenon. I certainly believe people have experienced stuff like that. At least they believe it because you look at, doctor John Mack, who's a Harvard trained psychologist and psychiatrist, you know, looked at The phenomenon of abduction in the nineties and early 2000s before his death. And he affirmed that the people he, psychoanalyze certainly experienced something real to them. But what is the abduction phenomenon? I really don't know. I'm not sure. Speaker 0: Are are you is there any indication the US government has studied this? Speaker 2: I would imagine that a part of the program that I uncovered Probably would have analyzed that situation because it is it is data, data, even if it's, you know, oral testimony data, but I really don't know Do you think anything about it? Speaker 0: Do you think, and I've read a couple, not just this country but others, former government officials saying they believe there's some There's a spiritual connection to these things. Speaker 2: Well, I think, you know, if you were to back out to the 100,000 foot level, There certainly is a phenomenon. And and how do we quantify that? Well, theologically, we can quantify that as, you know, angels, demons, that Kind of thing. You know, many people with religious belief systems espouse faith in that regard, and they believe that a phenomenon exists. And really, what we're seeing here with the UFO UAP subject is probably just another facet of that same phenomenon. So I think this is not something that's gonna destroy I mean, even the Vatican chief astronomer in 2009 or 2010 said the Vatican's okay with, nonhuman intelligence? It doesn't hurt Catholic theology, Speaker 0: so The Vatican maintains an observatory, I think. Speaker 2: They do. Yes. Yes. Speaker 0: In the United States? Speaker 2: I believe it is in the Rome area, but I'm not I'm not an expert on the Vatican. Okay. Speaker 0: I mean, of course be mistaken. I'm not either. Do other countries have these materials? Speaker 2: Well, what I said in my initial interview with NewsNation is that it Ultimately became a Cold War arms race sub rose under the noise floor. And, other countries Do you have their own programs? And I can't get into those details because that's something I did not put through security review. However, I will point out, like, the South China Morning Post in June 2021 put out an article saying, oh, yeah, we have a UAP task force too and we're using artificial intelligence to Analyze UAPs. But other than that public announcement, you know, our adversaries have kept their mouth shut on this issue for the most part. Speaker 0: You know, technology, aircraft technology has not actually progressed very far. No. We've plateaued many, many, many years. Speaker 2: Bypass turbofan was designed, I think, by Henkel in the late thirties. Speaker 0: Exactly. Speaker 2: And, and that's also my issue, right? You know, you know, I'm, you know, I'm 36. I represent kind of the under 40 generation. Well, where's our asymptote leap? Where's the next Propulsion and we're stuck you know, if people care about, you know, carbon neutrality and green energy, well, If we have something that's only being studied for military purposes that may, you know, unlock the next level of either energy, propulsion, whatever, I don't know. We should be openly studying at this point because look what's happening to the planet. Speaker 0: Okay. So but so that suggests what? That military contractors are incompetent, that it's so compartmentalized it can't but our military aircraft haven't you know, progressed to some crazy level either. Speaker 2: Obviously, at least, based on what the public knows. However, You know, we've had multistar generals that we talked to as well, both current and former, that, you know, said that this, you know, program is just, You know, the wild, wild west in some sense, where there's all these silos of activity, there's no monolithic, You know, director of all these activities, and it just became this uncontrolled, unmanaged black abyss. I'm looking into this and That's so disjointed, the people aren't even talking to each other and it's very similar to the special access programs I saw. So this is really not That's shocking to me. I mean, there were times where I was working on a certain intelligence community program that's compartmented And they're like and I see what they're doing. I'm like, you do know the DOD already has that, right? And then I would have to get them cross briefed. And this is just a symptom of that same ecosystem. Speaker 0: Yeah. We've seen this for a long Speaker 2: time. Speaker 0: It's just too big. Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, the Department of Defense, I saw their audit came out yesterday And they couldn't account for 50% of their assets. And, their financial Speaker 0: Try that on your tax return. Speaker 2: Well, their financial management system has been on Yeah. It's been on the GAO's watch since 1995 and the, I think I read in the article in The Hill, they spend $5,000,000,000 a year on financial management software? Okay. Well, like, so when I when I hear, like, well, the the SecDef doesn't know anything about a program, well, you can't even account for $3,800,000,000,000 of your own assets. So how do you know what the department actually has without ordering an investigation? Speaker 0: No. That's exactly right. Speaker 2: At what point will this become public? So I'm glad you asked that. So, I mentioned the Schumer amendments, UAP Disclosure Act of 23, it's currently in conference. It's part of the fiscal year 24 National Defense Authorization Act, which is what funds the DOD and IC. But right now, it's in a perilous position because, as I'm told by staffers on the Hill, the House Armed Services and Intelligence Committees Are trying to block it, specifically Mike Rogers and Mike Turner. They believe it's duplicative. It's not going to assist Arrow in any way. However, Having Mike Rogers Speaker 0: and Mike Turner. Speaker 2: The Mike's. And and the thing is, is this provides Some Speaker 0: of the dumbest people in Washington. So It's pure tools of the national Speaker 2: security system. So it helps them give top cover. It helps them declassify things. And, you know, Mike Turner, You know who his biggest donors are. And he represents, you know, the Wright Patterson Air Force Base District. And his biggest donors are Lockheed, Raytheon and Boeing. Speaker 0: He's a shameful career. Speaker 2: Well, it's very interesting because his committee, the House Intel Committee, is precisely the committee I gave multiple hours of classified testimony to last year. But Mike Turner seems to just go on Fox Business after the congressional hearing and say, And he doesn't use my name, but he says the whistleblower doesn't know what he's talking about, nothing to see here. I'm like, really, Mike Turner? The mayor of Dayton for many years, were you ever in the intelligence community? Were you ever a military officer? Have you ever handled special access program material For 14 years? Oh, I have. And why didn't you call me into your office if you thought my testimony was incomplete? I mean, the guy shouldn't even be reelected. No. And did you know that Mike Turner is trying to, hurt Tim Burchett's reelection in Tennessee? He's trying to fund an opposing candidate Because Tim Burchette is one of the leading Republican UAP proponents in the house, he's taken it upon himself not only to try to block the Schumer amendments, Ruin representative Burchette's reelection chances because he's speaking out too much about this issue, and he is, basically defaming me and discrediting me on national TV, when, I'm sorry, Representative Turner, you have no idea what we're talking about. And if you want me to Speaker 0: But he probably does. He's Speaker 2: Or he does. Or he's Speaker 0: carrying water for people who don't want the public to know what Speaker 2: to do. And Lockheed has his ear. So I'm a private citizen. I can be critical of my elected officials. And I encourage, their constituents, both Mike Rogers and Mike Turner, But call their offices and say, no. We do not want this bill to be blocked because if this bill gets signed into law, president Biden signs this. And, oh, by the way, the White House is okay with this amendment. You don't think Chuck Schumer called the president or national security adviser before proposing this legislation? Of course, he did. Right. And this allows a, basically, a 6 year process because it forms a panel of experts, a 9 person panel. There's an economist, a scientist, a lawyer. I mean, it's what you would expect. And this was modeled off the JFK Records Act Of a 92, I believe. Speaker 0: The one they keep ignoring. Speaker 2: The one they keep ignoring. But we added some teeth to it to try to, you know, get this, all the way through, And this sets up a presidential panel and associated agency to assist ARO and other parts of the executive branch to come up with A literal disclosure plan. And I encourage people to read the amendment. It is obvious if you read it, we're talking about Nonhuman technology, nonhuman biologics, and we're talking about disclosure of these facts In an honest way by the chief executive, if this passes. So if this doesn't pass, I mean, this is probably the most important law in US history, let's be real. And if this doesn't pass, if it's successfully blocked by the house, I mean, it's a total disgusting Speaker 0: Well, it's also I mean, we're bumping up against criminal behavior at some point. So it's like, why wouldn't people just do what generations of whistleblowers have done and just leak the material to the public? Speaker 2: I never wanted to be like that. I always follow the rules. I color in the lines. Anything I talk about publicly that's sensitive, I literally make sure I can say that from a security perspective. Just think about it. There are foreign intelligence services watching this interview right now. I am not here to hurt national security. However, I am here as a Back witness because we have an oversight issue and I want things to change. My generation wants things to change. And For all the reasons I've enumerated earlier. Speaker 0: And they're self evident. I think they're self evident. So this this is a question about a topic that cannot be classified because it is illegal. But you have any reason to believe that the U. S. Government has hurt or killed anybody connected to these programs, American citizens. Speaker 2: There were concerns, like I stated during the hearing, of people, that have espoused that to me. And, of course, I brought some of those officers, to the inspector general, intelligence community inspector general, because I'm like, this is serious. And I'm like, here's here's Here's the law enforcement people you want to talk to because I'm hands off. If that's true, you need to look into it. Speaker 0: The allegation was murder? Speaker 2: Yes. And then physical harm. And I will say, while I won't get into the specifics, because it's part of my open investigation, you know, besides the administrative stuff, And I don't know, it's an unknown entity to me. I do not know who did this, but their displeasure in me was made known in my personal life And that, you know, it affected my wife and I, and I had to report that, to a certain counterintelligence element and a certain law enforcement element because Right before I filed my whistleblower complaint, you know, I felt that my life was in jeopardy. And that's what I was alluding to During the hearing because, you know, we'll just say if you, when you come home and you see something, you know, you made somebody unhappy. And I, to this day, I don't know who it was. I don't think it was a foreign entity, but there is some element That I extremely angered and I don't say that flippantly. I said it very seriously because I thought my life was in danger. Speaker 0: You can't get into details because it's part of the investigation. It's part Speaker 2: of the investigation. At some point, I'm happy to talk about it publicly. And also, as they say in the intelligence business, you don't acknowledge your tail. So I don't want to acknowledge some other things I've I've noticed that maybe But Speaker 0: it sounds like you believe you've been surveilled and threatened. Speaker 2: Oh, 100%. It was obvious to me. And, you know, I mean, it was blatant, we'll just say, what I observed. And it was So concerning, I I had I ended up reporting it to the authorities, and and I asked my agency for certain protective measures. I can't get into that that detail, but I was certainly petrified. And the, at the same time that those things were happening to me personally, they were happening at the same time to a certain other public figure, that is known to the world, we'll just say, And another former intelligence officer near my home as well. And it was some kind of, planned, Multi person intimidation, activity that was very disturbing, and I'll just leave it at that. But in so I I'm not doing this for fun. I'm serious. I'm doing this interview because this is protective for me. I don't I don't wanna be anonymous. Of course. So I'm not here for attention. I don't even this is a nightmare to even be public. Right. You know, I I'm used to working in a vault and briefing generals. This is Not me. I'm not a public communicator, although I'm trying. And that's why I'm doing a very Speaker 0: good communicator. Speaker 2: I appreciate it. But this is A serious subject with serious consequences. And I suffered a lot of serious consequences. Speaker 0: So as you know, you've totally convinced me of your sincerity. There was a lot of whispering about your motives. This is an op. Why now? Why are we learning all this Speaker 2: now? Yes. People think that I'm a part of some CIA SIOP or something like that. First of all, I've never signed any kind of paperwork to be a part of an operation in that regard. Unfortunately, There isn't a plan. I'm not a part of a plan. I ended up becoming a leader of a of a faction of, you know, former government officials and current government officials would like change in a legal way. And, you know, I encourage, if there are people watching that Have participated in those programs. There are multiple legal avenues such as going to the ARO office, Going through the ICIG like I did, Intelligence Community Inspector General, or another cognizant Inspectors General, to legally provide this information. Speaker 0: And there are also illegal but morally defensible avenues like coming on this show and I'd be delighted to host anyone who wants to tell the truth about what he's seen and there's no justification for hiding this that that's my evaluation. So I'd be happy to take that risk to have that person on. But it sounds like when so given your own experience, when people say to you, US government employees said to you, wow, someone was killed by the US government for talking about this or planning to talk about it. It sounds like you would have to take those claims seriously. Speaker 2: I did. And I remember a very, very credible senior intelligence officer precisely made those allegations in front of Senior officials on Capitol Hill, I was in the room. Speaker 0: Elected officials? Speaker 2: Their staff, I'll just say. I don't want to get into details. Speaker 0: Crazy I mean so it's like at that point if somebody says the US government killed an American citizen without a trial because he was going to tell the truth about something That's kind of when everything stops. You can't have that in a free country. Speaker 2: I mean, I think people are just paralyzed in fear because that's a reality, and I remember the Certain professional staff members being very upset in the room and, I mean, they're rightly so, but, like, we need to do something about that because that's Not good. And most of the people that even I interviewed, I'm like, do you wanna go to the inspector general with me? And they're like, we'll back you up, but we don't want our name on any complaints because they were just living in Speaker 0: Fear. So, like, for my whole life, you know, I'd never even thought UFOs were real until fairly recently. Speaker 2: Me either. 4 years ago, I If you asked me 4 or 5 years ago if I thought UFOs are real, I would have laughed. Speaker 0: I completely agree. But the conventional explanation for the US government among those who believed it was hiding These facts that can explanation for why was the government does want to so panic, does not admit weakness in the face of its adversaries, etcetera, etcetera. Those explanations do not account for the behavior you're describing. They're hiding something real that implicates them. And if they're talking to these entities, whatever they are, and I believe in the basis of evidence that the US government has made contact and has had continuous or at least sporadic, but over beer to beers contact. You don't need to nod or shake your head but that is my belief based on talking to people like what is that. Speaker 2: Yeah. If there's certainly, you know, a relationship that was cultivated with nonhuman intelligences, hypothetically, I guess, you know, to play off of what you just said, Good or bad, it's almost like we were afraid after 9/11. Dirty bombs, terrorists. Okay. Well, That's nature. That's life. Yin and Yang in the universe. If there is malevolent nonhuman intelligences, okay, well, that's a fact of life. Don't hide it because what if the US populace needs to be prepared for something, something hypothetically? Speaker 0: And it's also not their right to hide it because they don't own the government. Public does, actually. Speaker 2: Exactly. And it's just, I understand the reasons at first, but like you said, I think it's just the moral decay And the decay in leadership. And once again, well, we don't want to admit we did all this stuff years ago. Speaker 0: But also if the US government has had contact with These entities and again, it is my informed belief that the U. S. Government has had contact what are they talking about? What is that? Speaker 2: Hey. I would like to know too. I mean, I grew up watching Star Trek. So I mean, I say that kind of, you know Yeah. Whimsically, but, like, Well, great. I mean, of my generation under 40, that's like, we're not shocked. That's cool. Like, a Gen Z er who's Team would want to study physics if they found out this stuff was real. Yes. Like, this is how you boost STEM in this country, for goodness sakes. I mean, this is like the most exciting, Yes. A little scary, but overall, it's exciting. I mean, nothing's happened. You know, we're still living. I'm able to talk about this and nothing's happening, you know, to the, you know, The world if you will. So it's I think it's exciting for for young people and I think it's the right time to do this. Speaker 0: Going back in history, I mean there, You know, there are all sorts of mysteries about history that we just can't explain even now. But it sounds like it would not be surprising to learn that people 1000 years ago had contact with these Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, you look at the works of Jacques Vallee, a famous researcher, his character was portrayed in as the French character in Close Encounters of the Third Kind by Steven Spielberg. That guy exists. His name is Jacques Mallet. And he has a PhD and he's a smart scientist, but looked at this and, there's a couple books, like Passport to Mongolia and some other stuff, I'm probably butchering the name, where he looked into antiquity, this phenomenon, some people say, oh, it's probably adversarial technology, etcetera. We've been seeing the same stuff Since antiquity. And this should also potentially enforce stories in theological texts, say the Bible or whatever, That people actually saw Ezekiel Ezekiel's wheels as Tim Burschett has espoused publicly. Maybe that actually happened. Now, Unfortunately, you're you're you're bursting maybe a worldview or a bubble for some people, but it actually Ultimately, it might enforce people's belief systems because stories in the religious texts weren't fable allegory or whatever, They happened. And I'm not saying all of them did, but there might be evidence if we were openly and honestly studying the subject in more detail. Amazing. Speaker 0: Last question small question but there includes some connection between Nuclear weapons, nuclear energy, and the sightings of these things. I mean, they've been seen around the US military installations with nuclear. So what is that? Speaker 2: Yeah. You wonder if the nuclear testing was almost like a beacon. You know, anybody observing from far distance like, woah, the the monkey has the Has discovered 10 to the 6 tons of TNT energy extraction. They're close. Maybe they're only an order of magnitude A way of energy extraction to develop technology that, maybe they have, you know, hypothetically. Speaker 0: Right. Speaker 2: And it might have been just like a lighthouse, So we turned it on and now they became more interested. And it might be also a symptom of what we call collection bias, We're modern society. We were more calibrated to look for that kind of stuff because there was like sci fi movies in the 30s 40s and maybe people We're looking up more maybe. But certainly, there is some kind of nuclear connection. What does it mean? I don't know. They're obviously performing some kind of, Reconnaissance, and surveillance of us as it relates to not only our nuclear weapons and nuclear facilities. If anybody wants to read a book called UFOs and Nukes by Robert Hastings, he spent 40 plus years looking at, interviewing Air Force missileers, other credible witnesses and, you know, very famous incident in 1967, Bob Salas, right? Speaker 0: Shut down the base. Speaker 2: Shut down the nukes And, you know, we should take those observers seriously. They're trained. They have clearances. They have their, you know, jobs on the line, You know, lying in that regard. And so there is a nuclear connection. I encourage people to read that book, but what does it mean? I don't even know. No idea. Speaker 0: Well you're a brave man and I'll be honest I know what to think because there's a lot of whispering about you but I think you're totally sincere and I really appreciate you're doing this.
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - December 1, 2023 at 6:51 PM
Saved - December 3, 2023 at 3:17 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Underestimating the impact, I predicted Trump's growing popularity post-2020. The right's brightest minds dismantled brainwashing for 2 years. Trump remains himself. Brace for an extraordinary show.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I predicted after 2020 that Trump would start looking better every passing day. I underestimated how big this could get. The strongest minds on the right have been chipping away at the brainwashing industrial complex for two years. And Trump is Trump. You’re about to see the best show on earth.

@kylenabecker - Kyle Becker

Flashback: Remember when Trump got interrupted by NBC hack @kwelkernbc for saying the J6 committee 'destroyed all the evidence'? "The January 6th Unselect Committee of Thugs and Horrible People... destroyed all the evidence," Trump said. "They say they didn't do that," Welker interrupted. "We did ask them. We did ask the January 6th committee." "Well, they announced that they destroyed and deleted most of the evidence." "They say some of the evidence is still under review. I want to know about your perspective..." she went on. "Wait. Kristen, I want to ask. They put out an announcement that they destroyed the evidence and they destroyed all the stuff having to do with Nancy Pelosi and they wouldn't let her testify." "We said, why isn't she testifying? It was a whole rigged deal. Why isn't she testifying? I offered them 10,000 soldiers. She turned them down..." Now, it comes out that there are witness depositions that have reportedly 'vanished.' Donald Trump was right. And the corporate media is part of the J6 committee cover-up. Unbelievable.

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker claims that the police commissioner was rude to someone who declined an offer. They accuse the January 6th committee of destroying evidence, although the committee denies this. The speaker questions why Nancy Pelosi was not allowed to testify and mentions offering money for her testimony. The transcript ends abruptly.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He turned it down flat, and the police commissioner was very nasty about it to her, and he testified. And here's what happened. The January 6th unselect unselect committee of thugs and horrible people, the unselect committee destroyed all the evidence. They say they didn't do that. They we did ask them. We did ask the January 6th well, they announced that they destroyed and deleted most of the evidence. They say some of the evidence is still under review. I wanna know what well, well, well, I wanna know about your Mister White Crescent I wanna ask you they put out an announcement that they destroyed the evidence, and they destroyed all the stuff having to do with Nancy Pelosi, and they wouldn't let her testify. We said, why isn't she testify? You know, it was a whole rig deal. Why isn't she testifying? I offered them 10,000 to 12 as she turned them. I
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - November 16, 2023 at 1:10 PM
Saved - November 17, 2023 at 8:10 AM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I could watch this all day long.

@bennyjohnson - Benny Johnson

WATCH: CNN hack reporter just tried to bait Vivek into turning on Trump Instead, Vivek instantly flipped the script on her leaving her in shocked bewilderment on LIVE TV— PURE FIRE. 🔥 "You know what's vermin? What's running around San Francisco on any given day before Gavin Newsom cleaned it up on a dime to roll out the red carpet for Xi Jinping."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 asks if the language used by Donald Trump is neo-Nazi rhetoric. Speaker 1 criticizes the mainstream media for focusing on specific words without addressing the underlying issues. Speaker 1 mentions Antifa's violent actions, the border crisis, economic stagnation, national identity crisis, and dependence on China. Speaker 1 argues that the media should focus on substance and policy debates instead of fixating on one word from Trump's speech. They also criticize San Francisco's problems and Gavin Newsom's response. Speaker 1 concludes by expressing frustration with the media's approach and asks for a focus on policy substance.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That language, they live like vermin, do you believe that that is, as your, Republican colleague, Chris Christie, has said, neo Nazi rhetoric? Speaker 1: This is a classic mainstream media move. Pick Some individual phrase of Donald Trump focus on literally that word without actually interrogating the substance Of what's at issue? Speaker 0: The word was Joseph for a reason. Speaker 1: Of a cultural war in this country. Speaker 0: The word is Joseph for a reason. Speaker 1: Describing a series of behaviors. You have Antifa and other related groups that have been burning down cities for the last 3 years in this country. Speaker 0: Would you describe the law firm? Speaker 1: Violating the rule of law. We have an invasion on our southern border. We have millions of people crossing our southern border. Let's talk about the substance Okay. Of why we have to recognize that we're not in ordinary times. Speaker 0: Would you use that language, sir? Speaker 1: Or not is not what's important. Well, I haven't used that language. Speaker 0: So if you look Speaker 1: at my my track record on the campaign trail, I talk about the issues. We all talk about them differently. But what I'm not gonna do is play some game of focusing on some word that somebody else said without ignoring entirely the substance of what we're actually talking about. A border crisis of historic proportion, economic stagnation we haven't seen in 50 years, a national identity crisis, and a loss of national pride In the next generation, that's potentially existential for this country. Let's talk about our dependence on China. Today, we're actually talking about Xi Jinping, Picking on Donald Trump's word vermin to talk about that status quo. You know what's vermin? What's running around San Francisco on a given day before Gavin Newsom cleaned it up on a dime to To roll out the red carpet for Xi Jinping. If he could do that for Xi Jinping, he could have done it on ordinary day, and yet we're here sitting talking not about the substance of that, But on one word that Donald Trump said in some speech in Miami, this is what's wrong with the mainstream media. Focus on the substance, and let's have an actual policy debate Rather than talking to a presidential candidate instead of the policy substance Of what's actually going on in the country, picking on some word that Donald Trump said on a certain day and asking me for comment on it, give me a break.
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - November 2, 2023 at 5:19 PM
Saved - November 3, 2023 at 6:54 AM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

No one reads the room and hits the long ball like Trump. This is perfect.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - October 23, 2023 at 5:55 PM
Saved - October 24, 2023 at 4:40 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Democrats ran the Jan6 Insurrection Hoax to avoid exposing their brainwashing tactics after years of calling Trump Hitler. They couldn't risk Trump's last day in office to debunk their Big Lie. If they truly believed their own propaganda, the 2020 election wouldn't have been rigged. Illusions are fading.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Democrats had to run the Jan6 Insurrection Hoax because otherwise six years of calling Trump Hitler would look exactly like the brainwashing it was. Trump’s last day in office was the last day to make their Big Lie stick. Would they leave it to chance? Alternately, the only way the 2020 election WASN’T rigged by Democrats is if they never believed their own “Hitler” propaganda about Trump. The illusions are melting.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - October 14, 2023 at 12:21 PM
Saved - October 14, 2023 at 2:46 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Trust science.

@drefanzor - drefanzor memes

At the 39 second mark it sounded like AOC farted; we put the video under thermal infrared to confirm that she did, in fact, pollute the environment. #DilleyMemeTeam https://t.co/MKBg4Ck4CG

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - October 6, 2023 at 12:33 PM
Saved - October 6, 2023 at 2:55 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Or as Hillary likes to say, they got deprogrammed.

@MrAndyNgo - Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈

The two leftists who were tragically killed within hours of one another this week both had something to say about @ScottAdamsSays.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - October 3, 2023 at 1:19 PM
Saved - October 3, 2023 at 2:52 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

This story displays the lowest level of journalistic integrity. Credibility: zero. John Kelly confirms Trump’s ‘suckers’ remark about war dead

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - September 2, 2023 at 9:06 PM
Saved - September 3, 2023 at 7:51 AM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Reminder: Phil Bump, who works for the corrupt Washington Post, was one of the prime pushers of the Fine People Hoax, which was created by a deceptive edit called a Rupar. Biden based his entire campaign on this Rupar, and it worked.

Analysis | Trump puts a fine point on it: He sides with the alt-right in Charlottesville Trump compared counterprotesters without a permit and George Washington to the Nazis and Robert E. Lee. washingtonpost.com
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - September 2, 2023 at 12:46 PM
Saved - September 3, 2023 at 2:57 AM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Is there finally enough information to start explaining to Democrats what happened to them? 1. Watch the Phil Bump meltdown to learn how fake news is the norm. 2. Look at the J6 sentencing compared to BLM/Antifa riots. 3. Look at the Hoax Quiz, etc.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - August 25, 2023 at 1:34 PM
Saved - August 25, 2023 at 10:39 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Biden's leadership appears absent as chaos ensues. Trump and Musk seem untouched by his administration's actions. This week's events tarnished Biden's legacy, leaving a leaderless and dysfunctional party. It's a criminal enterprise, resembling a palace overtaken by winged monkeys.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

I'll bet Trump and Musk would not be targeted by Biden's winged monkeys if Biden still had a functioning brain. What we are observing looks like winged monkeys took over the palace. No one is in charge. This week's events turned Biden's legacy to garbage. It's a criminal enterprise without a leader. Zombie party.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - August 16, 2023 at 1:06 PM
Saved - August 17, 2023 at 3:51 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Trump's "find votes" audio is a Rupar, a video/audio where removing a part reverses its meaning. Without mentioning winning the state, it seems like he's asking for fraud. Including it, he suggests a recount to prove his legitimacy. This adds to the list of Rupars, revealing how Biden won. The gears of the machine become clear.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

It took me until today to realize Trump's "find votes" audio is a Rupar! A "Rupar" is a video/audio in which removing one part reverses its meaning. Trump: “So look, all I want to do is this: I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is more than we have because we won the state.” If you leave out "...we won the state" -- as the media normally does -- it looks like he is asking for fraud. If you include it, he says a recount or better count would find him to be the legitimate winner. Add it to the list. Partial Rupar List: 1. Fine People Hoax 2. Drinking Bleach Hoax 3. Overfeeding koi in Japan Hoax 4. Covington Kids Hoax 5. Find Votes Hoax Once you see the gears of the machine, everything makes sense. Biden ran for office on the #1 Rupar, and won.

@CNN - CNN

CNN asked voters in Georgia to react to a key piece of evidence in the investigation of former President Donald Trump's efforts to overthrow the 2020 election https://cnn.it/3OXV0vy

Video Transcript AI Summary
CNN asked voters in Alpharetta, a politically moderate suburb, to listen to a clip of a call between Trump and Georgia's secretary of state. The call sparked an investigation into Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election. Some voters didn't see anything wrong with Trump's request for more votes, while others found it ridiculous and sad. Trump is currently leading the Republican field for the 2024 nomination, with around half of Republican voters supporting him. However, one voter in Alpharetta stated that the indictment wouldn't affect their vote, as they prioritize policies and character. They expressed disappointment in both Biden and Trump and mentioned a pattern of behavior that doesn't adhere to the rules.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah. That's a crime. Speaker 1: That statement or quote, in and of itself is not necessarily damning. Speaker 2: CNN asked voters at the Atlanta suburb of Alpharetta to listen to a short clip of a call president Donald Trump had With Georgia's Republican secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, that January 2021 call kicked off the local district attorney's investigation into Trump's efforts to overthrow the 2020 election. If Trump hopes to win in 2024, he will likely have to win over politically moderate suburbs like this one. Speaker 3: All I wanna do is this. I just wanna find 11,780 votes, which is one more that we have Because we won the state. Speaker 1: So do you think there's anything There's nothing wrong with it. No. It's not illegal. Speaker 4: I think that's ridiculous, That call that he made, it's like you can't accept a loss and which is very it's very sad for Speaker 0: the president of the United States To question that is just unbelievable. Speaker 1: I don't think any one particular of the indictments, you know, is is certainly not gonna sway my My my stance one way or another. Speaker 2: Trump is leading the Republican field for the 2024 nomination. Since the 1st indictment in March, national public polls have shown around half of Republican voters supporting Trump. CNN asked Republican voters how another possible indictment in Georgia could impact their vote. Speaker 1: My name is Gary Old Burchett. I live here in Alpharetta. This whole thing with Trump, it's BS. That's the best way to say it. The indictment plays no role in how I'm going to vote. The way I vote will depend on the policies and the people that I'm voting for. We need to elect people who have some integrity and have some character that we we're not getting at anymore. Unfortunately, I think that that's not the first time that That type of conversation has not occurred before. I don't approve of it. I am not up on legalities enough to know if this is An indictment is the right way to go. If Biden and Trump run against each other, I can't support either one of them. It's just Part of a pattern of of behavior and the rules don't apply to me that I think is just inappropriate. So if it caused me to lose support for Donald Trump, if somehow he gets the nomination, I'm afraid I'm gonna have to go to the polls and hold my nose and hit Donald Trump. And I'm afraid of that.
Trump's fourth indictment moves America closer to an election precipice | CNN Politics The most astonishing aspect of former President Donald Trump’s fourth criminal indictment is not the scale of an alleged multi-layered conspiracy to steal Georgia’s electoral votes in 2020 from their rightful winner. cnn.com
ScottAdamsSays
Posted - August 12, 2023 at 12:26 PM
Saved - August 12, 2023 at 5:53 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

Answer: I wasn't brainwashed into believing Republicans stage insurrections by wandering around in a building. It's an absurd narrative half the country believes. That's why you are so confused. You have literally been brainwashed by your team. (I'm a trained hypnotist, by the way, so I'm speaking as an expert.) Find out how many times you have had this same experience with this quiz.

@StephenKing - Stephen King

So here’s a question: if you consider yourself a loyal American, how can you possibly support a man who fomented insurrection in the United States Capitol?

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - August 3, 2023 at 12:18 PM
Saved - August 3, 2023 at 1:41 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The Trump indictments could expose flaws in the American election process, revealing its unreliability. Complex systems, like elections, tend to become corrupt over time. Congress and financial markets are already influenced or rigged. Our elections lack transparency and are vulnerable to hacking or manipulation. While we can't prove if the 2020 election was rigged, the system itself allows for rigging. Trusting the election requires trust in a party known for hoaxes. President Trump's experience suggests the election was manipulated. Betting against his instincts and assuming clean elections defy reality.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

The most entertaining (and therefore most likely?) outcome of the Trump indictments would be putting the American election process on trial and showing the country we don't have a reliable system for knowing who won ANY election. How hard would it be to convince one or more jurors an election MIGHT have been rigged? I could convince all twelve in five minutes and I wouldn't need any charts or data to do it. Don't believe me? I'll demonstrate here. Fact: Any system with lots of participants, complexity, and high stakes will become corrupt over time. That is true of every observed human-made system since the beginning of recorded history. The only mystery is WHEN the corruption happens. For example, we know Congress is influenced by the military-industrial complex, and we know the financial markets are increasingly rigged for the big players. Every complex human-made system of high value becomes corrupt over time, no matter what kind of controls are in place. There has never been an exception. That's because bad actors have an incentive to peck away until they find a hole to crawl through. Our elections are not fully auditable. We don't see the computer code for the machines. We don't know if mail-in ballots were discarded before reaching the drop box. We don't know if any bad actors hacked any part of it. And we certainly don't know if there are innovative ways to rig an election that have not yet been discovered. We can't know for sure if any particular election -- such as 2020 -- was rigged. But we can know for sure the current design of our election systems guarantees rigging at some point. And we can know for sure that the voting results for 2020 violated historical patterns so drastically any reasonable person would have some questions. A reasonable person can believe the 2020 election was fair, but ask yourself how much of your opinion is influenced by your patriotism and wishful thinking about how things should be? Trusting an American election requires trust in the party that brought you the Russia Collusion Hoax, the Hunter laptop hoax, and about 20 others. Would that cast of characters hesitate to rig an election if they could get away with it? Remember, no one was arrested for any of the hoax behavior. President Trump has lived in the real world of business and politics for longer than most of you have been alive. He knows how the real world works. He has seen it from the inside. His instincts told him the election was gamed in some way. How much of your own money would you bet that Mr. Trump's instincts about the election are wrong? Would you bet everything you have? In order to find Mr. Trump guilty, you have to bet against his experience in spotting sketchy behavior, and you have to believe all 50 states ran clean elections in the context of no other complex, human-made system of high value ever being entirely clean. -- end --

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - August 1, 2023 at 2:18 AM
Saved - August 1, 2023 at 1:23 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Condolences to those unaware of the monumental American political news today. The preparation paid off, as the biggest story broke. Laughing at you, President Tic Tac, a debate would be futile.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

My condolences to the half of the country that doesn’t know the biggest story in American politics — by far — broke today. This is what they prepped you for. It worked.

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

@BenMcCulley Archer

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

@PresidntTicTac I'll just laugh at you. Debate would be dumb.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - March 25, 2023 at 1:26 PM
Saved - March 26, 2023 at 1:56 AM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

What is the biggest source of racism in 2023?

@TheRabbitHole84 - The Rabbit Hole

@ScottAdamsSays Affirmative action. We have allowed systemic racism to exist under the guise of progress for far too long.

ScottAdamsSays
Posted - January 20, 2023 at 2:14 PM
Saved - January 21, 2023 at 2:22 PM

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

How do we interpret this? https://t.co/QtLFpactc2

@ScottAdamsSays - Scott Adams

@molsjames @CDCgov @CDCDirector Fair. FDA even worse. Obviously corrupt.

View Full Interactive Feed