Matthew Brown Exposes How Whistleblowers Are Being Set Up

These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to progressive

and save hundreds, because progressive offers discounts for paying and full, owning a home, and more. Plus, you can count on their great customer service to help when you need it, so your dollar goes a long way. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save on car insurance. Progressive casualty insurance company and affiliates, potential savings will vary, not available in all states or situations.

It's because no sales will be in.

And I raised my concerns about the October 7th attack on Israel and intelligence.

I was very familiar with from the region. It is a very telling sign what they did afterwards with my concerns about the actions of Israel and our government.

“We found one of the key players in the legacy security architecture lately or currently at North”

Amendment. There have been coordinated online attacks against myself to enroll in the David Grush who lives on to Dr. Satelli. A point is, is it's systematic and it's ongoing to this day. We have identified the main players and found that they are active duty service members or reserve service members with active clearances doing this on their work time from work computers. This is weaponized.

Due to the sensitive nature of some of the material discussed in this interview, several names have been redacted to protect the safety of all parties involved. So Matt Brown, a macular constellation, those two words that name is now out in the world and has received a lot of attention. And I went and looked online to see what the current evaluation of it is and it's got,

you know, it's got the legs. It's kind of story that's got leg. It was introduced to Congress in 2024. And we talked to you for weaponized in three episodes and got a huge reaction from people. We're curious about how it has changed your life, how the subject matter has gained itself, so I wanted to catch up with you. Thank you George. Thank you Jeremy. It's been a long

“nine months. I think we're not quite at the anniversary yet, but that's good to be here,”

catch up on that and see where things go next. So you've called the immaculate constellation the two-faced God. Maybe that's a good place to start. For those who didn't see the earlier episodes that we did with you, why do you call it that? What was it? What is it? J.S. So I mean that analogy was used related to how it processes data, right? And sequester is that data from people who aren't

cleared to view it. Macad constellation as a program, you know, since I was never formally

read into it, I cannot authoritatively state what that was, but it certainly involved, you know, the intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance of UAP and RV around the world, especially, you know, in relation to our adversaries and their interactions with the phenomenon. One thing that, you know, kind of took off was identifying a macadric constellation with a specific platform or, you know, a specific, like cyber capability, right? And one thing I want to point out that I tried to,

“at our first interview as well, which is the key here is, you know, who was being briefed on this”

and that's OSD policy, who is in charge of the oversight for a specific category of snaps and those are operations and logistics. So people who are saying immaculate constellation is an AI or is the sentient program from NRO or is XYZ, the reverse engineering program, the speculation, what is certain is that we're found it and it's mission described fits with it being an operational sound. USAP was, is that would it fits into that an unacknowledged

oversight of snaps, like there's three bins for oversight generally and control. So you will have like intelligence, you will have your acquisition in sustainment and then you will have, you know,

“policy overseeing the operations and logistics. So, you know, your key here is to look at”

the office, the office isn't building stealth bombers, it isn't managing surveillance and reconnaissance networks, it's setting the objectives for the pentagon, setting the objectives, for what we are doing on a day-to-day basis and what we do on a day-to-day basis are operations that are very often when they're classified controlled in special programs and this is one of those to the best of my knowledge. Well, you described it to us and then the description given to

Congress is this is an AI program that basically scowers all the databases and archives and platforms and military intelligence agencies and scoops up really good UFO, UAP, UASO, video,

images, things like that and puts it somewhere else. Right, as if it never existed on those platforms.

That certainly appears to be one of the main functions or a capability that is part of the lack of the constellation, right? Since it's an operation, again, it's not just one platform, not just one capability, one of the things that is involved is what you just said, rect identifying collection events of anomalous phenomena, sequestering them outside of Fito, the general population or the general in coming stream of intelligence and make sure that it

goes to where it's supposed to go within the legacy program I would assume or more broadly just the defense and intelligence community as a whole. So, you know, it is AI used clearly, right? That is a massive amount of data. Is our claim destined surveillance platform is used? Yes, they're collecting the data. They are all part of an operation, right? So, one way that sap structure is like nests. So, you'll have a parent sap bovum and it oversees many smaller programs,

right? Issues programs might have a very specific mission, like specifically managing the classification standards, right? One's will actually be tasked with identifying where and when to collect

in the first place to task things and then the operation itself. These are all distinct roles and

responsibilities. But since you're at the pentagon, you're at headquarters. These all filter up into

“one comprehensive, strategic view where you see everything and that's what's incorporated here”

in the Immaculate Constellation Report. So, what is on display or are many capabilities, many programs overseen biomaclic constellation? That's a pretty good summary. You know, people have said is that you saw one document about some war games in 2018. You misinterpreted it, and it means way less than you're suggesting. And you've read all the other kind of criticisms that have popped up since you introduced this or rather Michael Schellenberg, the journalist who wrote

a 12-page report. It was a 11-page, Jeremy. I'm kidding with you. I am so pissed right now. I've got two questions. I'm not about that. I'm angry today and I got to be honest because you're going to see it. So, two questions. One is, today are you able to tell us more? So,

everybody should go look at your first interview and they'll understand who you are. They'll

understand what your career was like and then they can catch up to being here now with us. Okay, but everybody should do that. Two questions for you. One is, are you able to say and talk more today than you were more freely today than you were the first time we interviewed you publicly on camera? Are you able to say more today than you were before? In general, in general, yes, is it relates to a matter of the constellation and many, many, many, many documents and bodies of

owners that I consulted, you know, that we're all non-public. I'm not able to speak any more about those. I'm able to speak about what I received clearance for from the State Department to speak about. But I am able to speak about, you know, what has happened in my life since. I'm no longer government employee. You're about to pause that. We're going to get there so George, you're

“making a joke and it's funny, but we should dissect that for people later. I think what's real”

important right now is fundamentally. People need to go back and look at what Matt said,

And that's a loaded question because we know the answer, but now we're just, you know,

“going to go for this and the answers, he did not, but there's a reason George's asking that,”

but before we go there, second and last question to tell, we move on, you keep saying,

immaculate constellation was an operation. Will you educate our viewership, why you're saying the word operation, rather than saying program, or would you like me to do it? I mean, you know, a program is is more generic, right? A program can be an operation. It can also be a scientific research, you know, agenda. It can also be, you know, buying things from Lockheed Martin, right? Those are all programs. Operation is is in the field. You are out in the real

world, using military intelligence assets to carry out change to advance the national interests to defend our country. So a program can be sitting in Idaho, you know, researching some

“cool nuclear fuel, but an operation is going to be out there, especially military operation,”

when the Pentagon, when this is happening. So you'll be out there in the world,

real-world risks, lives are on the line. So the other thing I would say about that is that a program, even if they put out a false name or they change the name and all this stuff, an operation and correct me from wrong, but in the way that we're using it, is that it is functional, right? But you're not going to necessarily go find an operation name the way you would find an official program name. So in the, in the White House, am I wrong in

that? That's okay. I think you are correct. People above me, I have access to tools and visibility that I don't. So I cannot say, you know, what they were or were not able to,

“you know, look up. Oh, we know for sure that, so so here's the thing,”

if somebody said Matt Brown made up a document that he was exposed to on a server that he reported shouldn't be on that server and then Matt wrote a report because he's a perfected, was a didactic memory, what's the word? We have got a perfect audio or a perfect visual memory. Mother photogenic photogenic. That's so good. You photographing. But anyway, so it's just funny like what people need to, what I think the audiences are saying is there was a report that you were

exposed to, then you wrote something. There was a briefing. So I'm sorry, a briefing that you were exposed to and then you wrote a report and you notified Congress, I don't know how you separate them all. You notified people. You got stuff through, you got stuff through a clearance through State Department. So I just wanted to clarify for audience what an operation is compared to, like if they go look up awesome, awesome as a program. It's different

than an operation. So this AI system, somewhere in the federal government and in the executive branch, it reaches out and scoops up, interesting images and information and takes it somewhere. And then what's done with it? What do they do with that? So I mean people have connected the dots between NROs, a sentient program, as being one of the artificial intelligence capabilities that our intelligence and military community has had access to for about a decade

now at least. So what does it do with it? I mean, again, I was never formally part of this

operation. I was never formally read in. I am deducing things from the briefing that was given, which was explicit about certain things, but it's again a PowerPoint. So I mean, it classifies data and sends that data to wherever there is the mission need and there's the clearance for it. So when we're talking about the UAP, problems that, you know, things like this are going to be since we're talking photographic or visual geospatial intelligence, right? It's going to be going through

NGA and then from there, you know, they will have a roster of the different units and then offices that are cleared for intelligence and will receive it to use it to either in their analysis or in their, you know, live day-to-day operations because again, UAP are real. They are in contact with our forces on a near daily basis, whether those forces happen to recognize that are not. There's a distinct operational need for that intelligence and theoretically this system is what

fulfills that need. While, while keeping people who are not cleared in the dark about the

watched this, you know, they're trying to assume because of mass words and his articulation

is so specific. Yes, there is an operation, a technological operation to siphon off the NHI contact, promised known, unknown, unsuspective suspected, planned, and it does use an artificial intelligence to keep everybody in the dark within the intelligence and military industrial complex that doesn't have a need to know, correct or incorrect. And that's a big thing that people kind of missed in your highlighting. And somebody like Susan Go at the Department of War can say, gosh,

that Matt Brown comes out with this stuff, we sort of tie a low through our records and we can't find anything that shows that immaculate constellation was ever within the Department of Defense

or Pentagon or D.O.W. And she'd be right. Apparently, you know, I question anything coming from

Ms. Go, Goff, public affairs, AKA perception management, how to D.O.D.s. But technically,

“it's not in within the D.O.D. or she's lying or she's lying or doesn't know. But I think you're right”

technically, it's under White House authority, it's under, yeah. And to jump out of the context of the time, which I try to stay in in this conversation, right? I try not to introduce information. I've learned since into my testimony or whatever, but I think that your task, what you're getting at, is true. It's been learned through multiple sources that, then, lack of constellation is housed or ran out of the National Security Council, yes, which makes perfect sense, given the

classification structure that's been, you know, kind of revealed by some very diligent researchers out. Independently verified by me and George separately multiple times independently verified by you independently verified by people that do verification for me and George. I mean, it's like, I'm a high confidence, as they'd say, that absolutely, that she might not be lying and her press statement directly because the authorities of a Machalic constellation that you're

looking at that, my niece painted my nail. Oh, yeah. My niece painted my nail. Sorry. Go ahead. Your niece. My freaking, that he's man. She's, yeah, my brother's gone. So, existed somewhere. I guess the, the most obvious question I have is, did it change as a result of you coming forward and sharing this information? Do you, I mean, I'm just asking to guess.

“You're not there anymore, but what do you think happened today? Circle of wagons give it a new name?”

What, what would have happened? Because he was an active, federal employee when he interviewed with us. Correct. Wow. Can you answer his question now? What happened with it? I mean, maybe they changed the name. If I had to guess, maybe my face is on a PowerPoint briefing is the next person to expose a Machalic constellation, although I apparently that honor goes to Mr. Lou Elizondo. Thank you,

Lou, for exposing a Machalic constellation. Did he do so accidentally and accidentally inside the intelligence community or purpose? Well, you know, the briefing itself set listed him through his exposure of A to POSAP as responsible for exposing a Machalic constellation. So, once it's exposed, maybe they changed the name, or maybe they didn't, maybe they're just

“cocky about that and just left the name immediately. Yeah, they changed the name immediately, yeah.”

Like, well, I wouldn't be surprised. But if again, asking you a guess, there's no way they made it go away. Oh, absolutely not. It's an operation. It is a mission. The mission doesn't go away just because of public exposure. Hey, they're weaponized listeners. When I put on the right clothing, it feels like armor. It thoughtfully built wardrobe comes down to pieces that mix well and blast. That's where Quince shines premium fabrics considered design and everyday essentials,

the feel effortless to wear and dependable, even as the seasons change or the sky's fill with

things we can't explain. Here's what I can tell you, and some of it is classified. Quince has the

everyday essentials. I actually reach for lightweight cashmere sweaters, short sleeve Mongolian cashmere polos, linen bottoms and shorts, t's in 100% Pima cotton and European jersey linen. These are the versatile pieces that make a wardrobe actually work, season to season mission, to mission. They go direct to factories, no middlemen, no brand markup, no fancy retail store, your subsidizing, just quality clothing, simple, clean, almost suspiciously good. And they only

work with factories that meet serious standards for craftsmanship and ethical production. And I

need a few pieces that actually work for your cosmic closet. Right now, go to Quince.com/weaponized

for free shipping and 365 day returns. That's a full year to build your wardrobe and love it. And you will. Now, available in Canada too, don't keep settling for clothes that don't last. Go to QU-I-N-C-E.com/weaponized for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com/weaponized.

“See you on the next episode. How's it been for you? How's your life gone since then?”

And take your time on this, because there's a lot of angles of like the pursuit, but you know, Gerby took you to Congress. He introduced you to a number of people who were involved in these hearings. And you know, then the information was introduced onto the record by journalist, and there have been continued inquiries and questions about it from the members of Congress and media. But I don't think a lot of people think about you and what this means. I know we hear

almost every day from somebody who'll say, "Come on, whistleblower, step forward, spill the beans." There's no way they'd ever take a prosecuting you for telling the truth. You have nothing to worry about and give it to us, because we're have been sitting here on

“acts for three, four months now, and I'm really impatient, and I need it now.”

The reality for whistleblowers, people like yourself who step forward had to share information, do you say like considerable risk to your personal reputation, your personal lives, your future employment, and other aspects of your life that no one seems to care about. This shit is scary. You say it, you make the sacrifice, put yourself at risk, and then okay, get out of the way. Who's next? That's the public view.

Unfortunately, that's basically true. One thing that hasn't changed is the treatment of this subject

as entertainment. It's not entertainment. This is gravely serious, and it affects every single person in a way that every single person should be aware, and taking themselves about how to adapt to this current environment that has been hidden. The emerging reality, the emerging consensus reality correct. How has my life been? It's been pretty terrible. I will start with some positives, though. It has been very positive to see the people who did listen, and who did take that interview to

go start do their own research, and then find their own conclusions. That's for someone like me, very gratifying to see the kind words from people who are warriors in this space longer than me, matters a lot, and the friends behind the scenes who were helping you then, or who have come my way since very grateful for all those things. Those are positives. Negative. I mean, I lost my job. I wasn't really in a good position to experience. Did you lose your job or did you

quit? I lost my job. You did. Yes. I did not quit. Technically, we were doged at the time. Hit that you learn. By Elon, it's a verb. It was a verb. It is a verb. It is a verb. I was a doge, casualty, along with other people in my office. It was a very convenient way to ensure my exit.

Right. That is what I mean. You'll never answer. No. You'll never enter again. You'll never get another

government job. Certainly nothing involved being a clearest. Well, you finally mentioned that. I was recently told by someone from ODI and I that all of my clearances and tickets are good to go. So, you were told by ODI recently that your clearances are good to go. And then theoretically, there's no nothing blocking you from getting another government job and have been in the intelligence around. ODI and I told you that ODI and I means for our viewers. The office of the director of

National Intelligence is run by Tulsi Gavir and she created something called The Dig.

“Well, we'll come back with that. But I mean, is there a way for you to check?”

Is it dependent of what you were told? Are my clearances still good? Not that I am familiar with. I'm sure there is a way to formally request your records and see when it wasn't in access. But in a practical sense, no, the easiest way to find out is to apply for a job and have someone on the inside verify that your tickets are in order. So weird. The ODI and I would tell you that because, man, I heard the absolute opposite about

you from ODI and I. It's weird. Bad stuff. Oh, yeah. No, I heard the book will talk later

ironic. You know, I don't know how people are out there living a life, especially like,

you know, where they support a family after being a whistleblower. Because in my experience, this is the very opposite of lucrative. I'm just to talk money. I'm very grateful for all the support I get. But it amounts to less than a thousand dollars a month. You know, that's not a career. That's not a, I became a whistleblower and made it big and, you know, map around is set. No, it has been, it's quite the opposite. There is, it's my experience of no money in

you apology. And I'm not interested in a career in you apology. It is my experience that anything

people can do to not confront what you're telling people they'll do. So, one, because it's

“like an ontological shock. It's like, if you have to confront extra life, if we're going to call”

it that or whatever we call nonhuman intelligence, then we have to confront what it means to be a human being. And that's fucking hard. Dude, you know, you're worried about like make a dimmer and stuff, you know? So, those things will fall away like the shadows fall away naturally when you just keep telling it like it is. So, I know because we talk all the time what you went through to get your words. You didn't even take the opportunity to be public. I walked you into offices. I put you in front

of three individuals in private meetings. He'd you as a camera person and they trusted me enough to hear you out. And you chose not to try to go out there with your face. And I think that that's so bold of you to do this now. But it has had a toll on you. And I think people should know like people should know how it's affected you negatively. And if I'm going to somewhere we don't need to go, well, let's ask and see who our ends up in a personal, extremely personal sense. I think

“is where he was asking. Yes. Yeah. I want people to see even. So, I think it's important to note”

that when I went to those meetings, I was still a state department employee. Took some time off work to do that. And I was a state department employee all the times before that too. You were nervous that day. That day when I would do the triple set. Well, absolutely. It was a tough day. Series of days. Yeah. Series of days. So, I don't really know what to say. Well, you're married. Right? Yeah. This has got a land on your wife like a giant animal I would think. She didn't

opt in. That was not her choice, right? She didn't opt in. Yeah. I feel terrible. She is suffered immensely

because of what I'm doing. She's an amazing woman. She is strong and courageous. She has

lifelong health issues, genetic. It's hard. It's very hard on her. And she's also a very artistic and career-driven woman. And so, having to manage my inability to provide and my psychological turmoil is a very unparabird into her. So, it's, um, you know, shit rolls downhill and he ain't got the truth. People psychological turmoil, meaning, you know, emotional effects

“of coming forward and the consequences that you're facing. I mean, the ways on your all-time, right?”

Those, but I think, you know, I cry basically every morning. And it's mainly because men cry, dude. Yep. It's mainly because humanity is failing to meet the challenge of our time. We are not doing the right thing collectively. And, you know, the vast majority of that responsibility rests on our leadership. It has rested on our leadership. But that fact does not abrogate people's responsibility to change their conditions. And it is not going to come from above.

It has to come from below. The sooner people get off their phones and start thinking about how they can adapt to this reality, which includes a government that does not honor them, does not respect the Constitutional rule of law and is subverted by foreign interests. Talking about it on Twitter isn't going to change that. Going to a protest isn't going to change that. At one point,

starts with a very correct understanding of our reality and our place in it. So, on a personal level,

“it affects you financially. You don't have that job anymore. It affects your marriage and whether”

it was a good idea or bad idea has to come up with a conversation I would think often. You know, financial and emotional turmoil. She has health issues. You're not able to really help.

You don't have coverage anymore, do you? No. I do not. And I was a contractor. So, I never

really had insurance and of worth speaking up. Again, the idea of whistleblower. Yeah, right. Come on. Go forward. Go whistleblowers. We got your back. Oh, you Twitter. Twitter got his back. Twitter other social media platforms. Oh, the organization. The reality is, "No, what he has your back." Outside of my friends and family, no, there is friends and family or the only support I have found institutionally. It's not even worth mentioning. We got your back. Yes, of course.

Yeah, of course he did. But to your point, George, the broader public and government. Absolutely not. You do have some new friends you didn't have before. So, you know, November, 2024, this comes out.

And then in September of 2025, there's another hearing. And there's a group of people that Jeremy

arranged to be there in the room. And you've got the know some of those guys. Some of the people who testified is their support there. And could you talk about those relationships that are developed? Yeah, I mean, in general, I can talk in general, these people, I don't want to betray confidence who are put their names out there. But yeah, behind the scenes, there's some very welcome support, including from other whistleblowers that, you know, testified that day under oath. Everybody tests. If I,

I'm going to, everybody tests. If I got your back, Matt Brown. Yeah. So, without that support, I don't think, well, number one, I wouldn't have gotten to being in a position to do

“anything I did. But certainly since then, it's been the only thing that I've really had to lean on.”

You talked to him. Hey, we've been there. We've done that. The guys who have testified and have

come forward and have done some of what you have done. There is a level of support, emotional at least. Yeah, Jeff, Alex, Dylan, yourself, all fantastic individuals. I can count on course Jeremy, you know, Miracle Worker. And then just just people that the public doesn't know, I talk to you every day. I know that a lot of people, you each other. A lot of people you don't know did talk to me. So, there we go. After that hearing in September of 2025, Jeremy and I went

and met with some people, shared information that was amazingly candid and seemingly supported of what we've been doing instead of federal organization. What was it in intelligence agents? It is. Do they run all the intelligence agencies in America? They do. They are umbrella organizations. Would it be ODI? It is. That's good. It was almost like you were there for this. So, they asked, they told us, we're going to get the bottom of this. We're really digging in. We're

authorized by the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who was interested in this issue to go out and find credible information, credible sources of information. And they asked us if we would share names of people that we would recommend. Yours was one of them. So, can you confirm on the record that you met with those folks? I did it. I met with the dig, the dig that was tasked to the UAP portion of the, yeah, the dig. The Director's initiative

in under Tulsi Gabbard, who told she, she, she, she said it up with multiple parts. And one of

“those parts was the deep diving investigation on a federal level into UAP. That's what you're”

talking about, for our audience. Absolutely. There's been a little news of the dig publicly now, since the, uh, some publication about work that she's done on election fraud, I believe. She's a gangster. I just want to be really clear. Tulsi Gabbard is a gangster. She is more than 100% on the level. And she knows bullshit when she hears it. And she stood up, uh, an operation. Okay. So, that's all I'm going to say. Continue. Well, I just acknowledging the fact that yes, I, uh, was

reached out to by those people, um, and on the recommendation of friends and other whistleblowers who went and talked with them, um, I, I went and spoke with them as well. How deep did they dig? I mean, they ask you to tell the whole story all over again. How deep did dig dig? Yeah, I guess. It's not

We can go into that, but maybe we, we set the scene a little bit for that day, but yeah,

“we'll go ahead and said it. Okay. So, um, so this, the time frame is important. It's shortly after”

the September 9th hearing, uh, you know, in moments of some triumph, but thank for us. We got, some very credible people to the stand. Um, and my personal level is very meaningful to see, Dylan Borland, uh, on the stand under oath. Um, him and I talked about that moment from, for years, and, uh, worked very hard to, to help, to make that happen. So after that hearing, you know, the word comes into the network that this dig is started up and the man named

name rejected is running it, and he's, uh, interviewing the, the big names, the UAPP will sublowers, who's, uh, name redacted. Um, and so this man reaches out to me, uh, through, uh, others.

That's okay. You can talk freely. And, basically, just gets down to, hey, we want to meet

“Saw your work. Uh, we know UAPR real. We want to get to the bottom of it. Come in and meet with us”

and then tell us your story. And, oh, by the way, we've stood up this UAP whistleblower protection program. We want to tell you about it and have you come sign on the dotted line and learning from their behaviors, uh, what's their agenda and what's going on. And, you know, that's, that's not, the mindset going in. Um, but there was certainly a large amount of caution and weariness of the trail. In fact, we talked extensively prior to your going in because we had a good friend

one that I'm speaking of right now that we had, uh, go in and kind of like full monty, open

kimono, show the cards. Now, that operation, I'm going to call it, they have talked with everybody that we have sent them. Everybody, but Matt was early on. He was low hanging fruit in the sense that we didn't know what we know about them now. So it was, so Matt, my point is we were cautiously optimistic as that fair to say when you went in. Yeah, and people that I had talked to who had been in related positive experience. Um, and we're led to believe that, you know, there

would be further meetings. And we're led to believe that there would be a cooperative investigation that they would be a part of like Dylan as an example, maybe. That's a good example. Good example. Okay. Have you talked to Dylan about your mutual experiences then in front of with these people? Absolutely. We taught notice when we talk every day. Like, we video call. Yeah, is there,

“is there a conclusion or are you have you had an agreement in terms of assessing how it went?”

I think so. I think we've arrived at that and the conclusion is in the negative. When you hear that, ODI and I started an initiative to get to the bottom of things and a very broad kind of objectives of finding out the truth about UFOs, gathering all up and doing something with it. Are you encouraged to that? That sounds like, I know how we reacted. Great. Good. Let's get to it. But did we, so we reacted that way? But was that what we were thinking? Well, you know what we were thinking. We're suspicious.

I am. But ODI and doesn't know what we were thinking? What were we thinking? Well, I know I would be suspicious of that kind of a setup because we've seen it too many times over a lot of decades of boys, time we get to the bottom of this and then really they all either have ulterior motives of their fizzle. This we heard, we spoke to people, pasted face and what they were saying is what we wanted to hear. I just recall that when we got an invitation to go meet with these folks,

we were suspicious and then we sat down and spent several hours going through this. They explained what the objectives were and we were encouraged. We leave that meeting and go in. Well, shed, if this is a therson, seeer, this isn't really a great thing. If they were, you know, did we, did you know suspicious by nature? Did you notice that we had a choice of meeting in a cafe, meeting in the visitor center, or meeting in a skiff, and I chose, or us, the visitor center

because that was a nice middle ground, which was like, if they were going to fuck with our phones, which we left, name redacted, then that would be interesting and we would have prepared for that. If we didn't go into a skiff because then maybe that information would, we would be told, you can't talk about. So we went to the visitor center and that's different than that.

Correct. Okay. Is that fair George for me to say? Okay. So now go ahead and tell us what the

“fuck happened. Yeah. So I was invited to come to Liberty Crossing, which is an intelligence facility,”

and you're familiar with it. I've been there multiple, multiple, multiple times in my career. So yes, I'm quite familiar with it. I mean, so I was invited there. I was told, you know, access will be a problem. All your clearances are up to date. So you are cleared to come into our facility and you will put you in a room with us. We can talk about anything in there. And it's supposed to be confidential 100%. Yeah, absolutely. So they couldn't tell a journalist what

you talked about in there. I was certainly hoping not. Okay. So the day comes. I go to this location. I take the metro there. I meet the contact a name redacted in a car in the parking lot, and I'm taking to Liberty Crossing. Check in like, in normal visitors process to

“a intelligence facility. So, you know, it's like I'm back in school. Right. Did you bring your”

drone? No, I didn't bring any technology with me. Well, I had learned from others who had gone that people who went to Liberty Crossing and brought their phone with them came out of their meeting and found that their phone had been hacked. The entire content on it duplicated and that when Odinai security wasn't formed of that, they were told that it wasn't them who had messed with their phone. And that's just very strange. Sorry. So to me, that seems like a very good reason to not

bring an electronic device. Is there to say that also as a patriot that you've been warned about foreign intelligence gathering on you and you wanted to protect the United States of America by giving whistleblower statement. And so you also were preparing to not allow that to happen. Yeah. And after that, you know, I, so taking an Uber, I took the metro. So, you know, I didn't you know, make any sort of big deal about what was going on. It was just supposed to be another

day. And then I just leave the house and I come back and nothing strange happened. Apparently the fact that I took such measures, simple as they are, it upset some people. Maybe a super spy.

But no, I am always concerned from day one about foreign intelligence, tracking my activities and my

words. It was your job. You worked in nuclear matters. Yeah. And so, you know, to this day, I still, that's part of my daily risk assessment. So, I go there. We are taken to the basement. This is in the middle of the government shutdown. So, it was kind of a ghost town. And I'm expecting to go to like the formal conference room is in the basement, but we end up going to essentially a conference room converted into storage/working office space, very

ex files, molder in the basement with boxes. Was that set up for you, do you think? Or did they even reference the fact that they were like the ex files office in the basement of the building? So, again, the whole reason of me being there, at least for me, is to find out about a UAP whistleblower protection program. And, you know, find out what that is and get myself into it. So, they're going to protect you because they recognize you as a UAP whistleblower. Correct. And that's

why you're going in. And this program have been offered to friends who had gone in before. You know,

they received a document, reviewed it, and signed it. And I'm basically expecting, you know,

“that's how our meeting starts. Here about this program, get into it, relay the basics of my story.”

They already saw the interview. So, what more do you need? And then figure out, you know, what can I do to help? I'm also bringing in additional information that was not from government sources and providing that to them as a gesture of goodwill and trust. So, you know, that's that's the experience I'm expecting to have. And the experience I got was a very wide-ranging reflowing conversation. Definitely some specific questions built in there. But in a skiff, yes,

we were in a skiff, absolutely. And are you legally allowed to say what happened in that skiff? Unclear. I think I'm okay to talk about what I talked about, but not the details of why I

of having that meeting, I never came about. The UAP whistleblower program by ODI and I was never

“offered to me. I was never briefed on it. The only thing I wasn't formed of was that, you know,”

would do I want to become an ICIG, UAP whistleblower, very different thing. And I'm like, no, I see no advantage in that. Based on my friends experience who have done the same thing, it is a trap. I want to learn that. Correct. And that was the end of that conversation. And that happened maybe 15 to 30 minutes in. Certainly not how we started out. And moved on from there. It's very concerning, but I didn't raise my concern at the time because I'm waiting. You know,

maybe we get to the end and they talk about this. So they didn't, like I was told by them,

they didn't offer you a piece of paper to sign to protect yourself and you didn't decline to sign it. No, I was told. Is that correct? Correct. No paper was offered to me. No program was described to me. When I indicated my disinterest in joining the ICIG, with UAP whistleblower process, the conversation we've done and was not revisited. Man, I was lied to a bunch, George. Amazone beat it all, flushed back in an alternate in the Logistic Center in extra-family in Boni.

So we Anton, the gerade is a new goalkeeper in the home health. Your goalkeeper is for the most beautiful city of the world. That means it's the most beautiful city of all. Was there further contact with the two people in the room? Since since you were in the skiff and had that conversation, have you stayed in touch with them? And if so, can you share what the conversation was about? Name redacted.

There was limited contact afterwards. The meeting ended with me being invited to come back the very next week and talk with them again. Get into some of the details about the general issues I had raised and those general issues were UAP-related, but I also was invited to talk about hey, do you have any other concerns about your time? We're a black box. You can say anything

“here, it's safe, you know. Get out and I think did they ask you for names of other people that”

they should talk you? I can't recall that and I don't think I would have provided them. Of course you would. I just want to say George, I bet if Tulsi Gabber knew what people were doing on her behalf, that she would be fucking furious because I think she's on the level. So I just like, I hope this airs. I hope so too. So I think without crossing a line, I think the topics discussed, can be discussed here and you know, I came in, um, very skeptical

and so part of that skepticism shaped my behavior and that was to see, okay, if this is a real genuine initiative, this is going to be a continuing relationship, um, you know, they're going to seek to build a rapport with me and be concerned about my safety and well-being and if those, you know, indicators are not observed, then, you know, this is, you know, not as advertised,

or at least I am not perceived favorably. So I resolve to basically say as little as possible about my

UAP knowledge, especially anything outside of the Maclete cosplay show report itself. And I took that opportunity to raise other issues to see how they would react. In my mind, there is no greater issue to the United States government than the UAP and HI problems that. So I chose a lesser one and raised that topic to see how they would respond if they are, you know, serious, national security professionals. They'll recognize what I'm talking about and, um, be interested in investigating that

more. And so that issue was a specific to Israel and I raised my concerns about the October 7th attack on Israel and intelligence. I was very familiar with from the region. Very serious subject, but it still ranks below UAP. If they are not willing to engage in good faith on managing the apparent misdeeds by our closest ally, how can I trust them to handle our nation's most closely

“guarded secret? Because the biggest supposed to be looking at corruption, that's what Tulsi wanted,”

right? So is that what am I reading that right? Uh, you know, I'm not familiar with what Tulsi's objectives were, but she seems like a, you know, dedicated individual. Uh, it's not her fault or

intelligence from your professional career on something of national security. Yeah. And what did they wave you off? No, they actually wanted to know not so much about the specifics of that, but what information I had access to that led me to that conclusion. What compartments and sub compartments

I was reading, uh, basically by their questions, they wanted to know how I knew what I knew in order

to go correct to that in the future and so I didn't ensure that information was sequestered.

“Predictable. I don't know if that's the course taken, but that's why I expect was.”

So I want to go into the details about why I think those things because I am no longer government employee. I was not a government employee when I went into Odinai. I was told by them that I could speak freely in there, but I was offered no paperwork to confirm that. So I'm being cautious here, but also, you know, it is a very telling sign what they did afterwards with my concerns about the

actions of Israel and our governments and really what did they do afterwards? I think just briefly

here can state that they took my concerns about what happened that day and spun it as me having an anti-ju agenda, anti-want. Jew. Okay, like you hate the Jewish people, Jewish people, that I'm an anti-Semite. Okay. And that I, you know, have hatred in my heart because of October 7th, without Israel and the Jewish people. When I told them that he was at a Jewish wedding, mother fucker, we were just gone to one year. I know I was literally at my, one of my very

dear friends weddings, and it was a Jewish wedding. So, you know, like, muzzle calls, muzzles of it. They were trying to paint him. I'm going to really infuriate him, and I see him twitching, and I want to be careful because it's really painful, but I'm going to tell him the three things I was told about him that are untrue, that lies, but continue. I don't want to interrupt.

“George has a pressing question. Yeah, and I think the key thing is, you know, I didn't say”

what I was upset about. I said, I told them, because of who I am, and what I had access to, you know, I saw October 7th in a way, the vast majority of people didn't, and it greatly affected me. And I didn't say in which way, right? I didn't say it had swayed my beliefs to support the Israeli cause or swayed my belief to support the Palestinian cause. The truth of it is, it hardened my heart against the Palestinians. It made me hate them, seeing what they did to women, especially in babies

and children, hardened by heart to them, and I'm ashamed to admit it, but I did not tell Odenai that. So, of anything based on the reality of my reaction to that day, I would be very pro-semitic, and very pro is real in my actions. And they try to spit it out. So, because I'm not a political, George could maybe translate for me. I'm, um, stunted politically, but let me just tell you the brush with which you are painted directly after you were in the skip. It takes about

three weeks to, for them to flip their ID on me. Odenai contacted me and they told me, and just take this on the chin. This is what they said I want your response. They told me three things. They said, Matthew Brown is a racist Jew-hater. They said, not they, one individual from Odenai told me the in the skip. Matthew Brown is a racist Jew-hater.

“I believe those were the exact words I need to look at, you know, back in my brain,”

sure figured out. The other thing that was told to me was that Matthew Brown admitted to completely making up and fabricating that he saw an immaculate constellation document in the vials, right? And that he admitted to me that Matthew Brown made that up.

He came up with the name that he made it up. And the third big lie that was told to me,

if I recall was that, um, I think the, the third point of the brush that they painted with was that the words counter espionage and treason. I believe it was treason or a word like that. Okay, that's what was said to me by an official in Odenai who told me gossiping,

to be protected as a whistleblower. Will you address those three things right now?

So obviously I am not an antisemite. I'm not a Jew-hater. I grew up in elementary school with a

“large Jewish cohort in it. We, yeah, I don't remember it anymore, but we had to learn Hebrew at the time.”

I'd celebrate Hanika, um, since then, you know, it's, it's just so ridiculous. So the guy lied to me. Absolutely. Um, and I mean, yes, the day that I heard the news, you can't, you can't beat fate or, um, yeah, I'm at my dear friend's wedding and it's a Jewish wedding. Jew to dare told you. Yes, the day you told me on their celebrating is Jewish families.

I was never told that I can't tell you what you supposedly said in a skip to Odenai.

So I feel fine that I George, I was never told I can't tell them that. And then the last thing that just makes it really ridiculous is my family has Jewish blood in it. Oh, we've confirmed it through DNA testing. Um, so you're a celebrating Jew. Yeah, the, the very definition, right? Yeah. So it's, um, I was actually shocked that was the attack they took. I, uh, I thought they would try to discredit just the information about that, uh,

that October 7th, but no, they tried to discredit me. I need a beer. I'm sorry because, you know, the next, can I give you guys a beer? I'll take one. Okay. That's where it's called a bad ombre. This is mine in George's. Um, I just, I hate the beer. I love the can. It's a bit, um, bad ombre. Um, not a sponsor of weaponized. Okay, check it out. That's crazy, man, because what I'm thinking

“is, if that doesn't work, what's the opposite of that? And that's what Odenai will try to do,”

because I'm going to say it. So I know what the agenda of the UFO arm of the dig was to do underneath Tulsi Gabbard's nose directed by directed by I'm the CIA indirectly. Sure. But I know for sure. And I know as a fact what they were to do was to discredit you, Dylan, Lula Zondo, David Grush, huge target, didn't fall for it. Us. Oh, no, I'm not sure. It was to discredit us. It was for us to do the dirty work for them to mistrust the words told to us by the people I've

listed, including now, Jay Stratton, Eric Davis, how put off can I go on? Jive Lecatsky, Jim Lecats, James Lecatsky, Dr James Lecatsky, Dr Comkiller. Like, like, it just, that was the agenda. But let me just one level deeper. The true intent of the UFO dig project under Tulsi, which is not Tulsi's fault, and she's wise as fuck, is that they wanted to stand up an operation to influence Congress to put down the bone on UFOs by saying everybody that's ever stood up there, including Commander

David Fraver, Senior Chief Wiggins, everybody that that was the one that dropped the bone, and not, and then we had that an influence campaign set. That is an intelligence operation being run by the US intelligence community against the US Congress. That can't think of anything more illegal. So that is right, and I can prove it. Okay, so I get it. Their attack was going to be your anathicemic or something stupid. Okay, so low level bullshit. So now, and they're not really

reading the room. They're not reading the room. They didn't look at your DNA. They didn't look at when I called you. They didn't look at your, you bring in your fucking idiots. Okay, so now, so here's the next thing that you completely made up the immaculate constellation original

briefing you call it that that you saw that it was never there. And in fact, oh, when Matt Brown

found out that we have a perfect digital memory of what survives when on servers. Oh, that Matt, like, deflated. Is that what happened, Matt? No, no, no, what did happen? So I was asked specifically to walk through step by step my discovery of the immaculate constellation briefing, which occurred when I was a contractor for OST policy. And I did so just like I recited on weaponized because it's a boring story at this point. And so I will just say it in recentases.

“I was doing volunteer duty to clean a top secret SCI share drive. And by clean means to organize”

the files that do the course of business, just get left and scattered everywhere. The 2018 Shriver Wargame file stood out in no way. I just opened it so you figure out where it should be

I described the process of reporting the attempting to report it, just like I laid out on the show.

“You can go watch the hip. Yeah, watch the first episode of web. Yeah. So I mean nothing changed”

in that room at all, except that in from them, they said, okay, that makes sense. And then to you, they're saying that I made it up and that I am cringing when they're talking about a digital record. It's deflating. So did you make up that you saw, they're out at all. Right now. So you're not at all the report. Yeah, it is a briefing. It is a briefing. My work, you saw the briefing. Okay. Yes,

cool. Good. It's on the record now. What was the third thing that they told me that we're

going to tell you that you were running a camera intelligence operation. It was basically espionage in the American government. Why would they tell me that? And tell me the truth. Yeah. So that comes from the very end of our conversation. We're getting up to leave the room. Putting it short, actually, it was told to be for the six hour day where they're less than that. Yeah. So I get up from the room and I say, you know, I don't know why I'm telling you this,

but that amacket constellation report. You know, that was an opt. That was an operation. And that operation is why I have so much confidence that what I wrote down is true because I've vetted that information against, you know, people who would know. And you know, maybe next time when we're talking, you can talk about, you know, some of the people who I found that were lying by coordinating my report. Who was lie? Say their names or don't.

I don't want to say that here. Okay. Yeah. They also won't be names that people wouldn't know. Interesting. Okay. So because the world's going to go crazy, who was you about to say, did be names that people wouldn't know? Correct. Okay. So good. Don't tell me. Go.

“So, you know, a spicy thing to say, but it's, you know, it's a key part and it's part of the process”

of that report. So I'll lay it out for you exactly what that is. It's they didn't come back and ask, yeah. So what it is is, you know, to go back in time, I became a whistleblower, not with the report. I went into Sissy entirely verbal testimony and, you know, people can look back at the history of, you know, the outcomes from that. And then the genesis of, okay, you know, you're saying that you didn't write down what I told you that you didn't take notes that you didn't share your information with

Sask, Hask, Hipsy. I'm going to write a report when you give it to you is going to be your problem.

So that is when the field report first starts getting drafted. What am I writing that field report

about? Well, what are the questions of the day? It's the fact of UAP. It's the credibility of Mr. Elizondo and it's just the general denied blanket denial inside the National Security Enterprise of this, the UAP issue is being real. So the report addresses all those points. It doesn't address everything I know where everything I talked about with Sissy or Sask. And I'm a very conscientious person about my sourcing as you are with that. And so, you know, I'm putting something

forward, not just from me, but it's theoretically going to Congress to drive an investigation in action.

“That's what you're going to do. You want to do this. You want an action on what you”

ferret kit corruption, deception, lies, mouthpiece, senses that a word, Bronel, Fesons, harm, Fesons, arm done, if you harm done to people. Okay. And so, you know, there's seven categories

of evidence in the report. The first one is the briefing. And then when you get to the end, you know,

it says the sensitive sources from mouth to ear. What the fuck do that mean? That is an indication of the level of secrecy. Those are human behind that information. Human intelligence, human, yes, have you published that information? No, publicly. No, and I didn't even write it down. I compiled what I had learned into bullet points. That way, the information was aggregated and not being sourced to in a single individual. Can we publish that now for the world to see in some way?

No. Okay. I had to check. No. It's human life. Okay. And, and to the day, it is supporting evidence. Right. That is a document. Seven bodies of evidence. Supporting one conclusion, UAPR real. I'm not going to burn people's names that are good people. Yeah. Just to satisfy curiosity. You did say, though, that you had access to a conversation between Sean Kirkpatrick and Rubio. Now, the question online has been, how did you get access to a document, a written document?

access when he was a senator to the information? Because you're not in a position to have that bro. So, how did you get the access to the information? If it's true and you're saying it is true,

“the Rubio and Copauchria in a room, and you said it ran my blood cold. I think at the last episode,”

you said that, I'm not going to ask you how you got access. How can you let me know? And George knows, and the world knows that that is accurate information. What is the way you can do that? You can FOIA the records of Ronald Maltry from OUSD Intelligence and Security.

Thank you. It was the guy at the first here. Correct. We didn't know anything.

Maybe I stick could do that for us. But to finish the immaculate con is a con. Okay. Line of reasoning. So, that document was circulated to very trusted people. Some of them turned out to not be trustworthy. And, you know, that is a vetting process of the information and ensuring that the conclusions that I'm putting forward to Congress on record, on the pain of my freedom and death, that it is true. You did it right and you still cost.

It is an operation, is an operation to verify truth and bring truth to Congress. I would have explained all of that gladly. But, you know, I said, I don't know why I'm telling you this. Name redacted. I'm telling him this as we leave a room that is most likely recorded. I'm telling him this in hallways. Oh, it was recorded. You're skiff meeting with name redacted. I'm sure that the point that I'm getting at is this, uh, tidbit of information, the Israel

information, uh, and a third thing we'll get to, uh, all were given to name redacted to see what he

would do. If this is a good faith effort, this information will be treated, uh, respectfully. And it will be used to conduct in a, a lawful investigation. If it is not a good faith effort, well, this information is very damning to me personally, uh, but it's not to the country. So you're

“testing, uh, ODI and I, um, not their fortitude, their agenda, their loyalty. Their loyalty to America?”

Yes, to the Constitution, to the Constitution. Right. The third thing that we talked about that I brought there of, of my concerns was, uh, whistleblowers and their treatment, um, since coming forward in public, specifically how there have been coordinated online, uh, attacks against myself, toe in Borlan, David Grush, Lulezando, Jeff News, the telly, um, I think Alex Skateha escaped, but, you know, the point is, is it systematic? And it's ongoing to this day, uh, we have

identified the main players and found that they are active duty service members or reserved service members with active clearances, doing this on their work time, from work computers, right? Um, and that this network of, uh, shit talkers is directly traced back to legacy program security, and that legacy program security is actively running, uh, disinformation operations and psychological operations against UAP whistleblowers, their friends and their family, worse than that they are

taking, uh, human intelligence methods and applying them to us in order to disrupt our lives and

basically to drive us to either commit suicide or become so ostracized from our friends and family

that we are no longer a threat. Specifically, they are sending office of special investigations agents to people's families, to break apart their families, to break apart marriages, to this date, to pull children away from their parents. And these are not the parents, uh, these are not parents who are whistleblowers. They are people who have helped us. Um, it's completely unacceptable. I took some of that evidence, uh, there and brought it up, and in fact, I took more than, uh, just

screenshots and posts and information about low-level players. We found, uh, one of the,

“one of the key players in the legacy security architecture, uh, lately or currently at North”

of Promenh, uh, and his name is named redacted. Just a photo of that. I have it right here. I know you do. Before we look at this photo, not only that, you could prove it, be on a shadow of a doubt in the court of law. And if anything were to happen to you or anybody, then it'll all be put out anyway. Yes. And it's not just me. Yes. You know, in my last interview, I said that it's been a long, hard road to find allies. How them now? And I do. And we're done

has been responsible for a lot of what you're talking about current day. Current day as it

relates to the UAP problem. He is a nexus point for legacy security. He's part of the dirty tricks department. People bring names that need to be handled to this individual. This person looks at those names matches it to the capabilities to go achieve XYZ objectives. And then the result is an ecosystem flooded with disinformation and psychological operations and targeted attacks against whistleblowers and their allies. So, how do you know? So, I cannot reveal everything about this

“because I am communicating it for others. And where, what is his current role in government if any?”

No role in government, but in the military industrial complex, he is most recently at North

Rupp Grumman. And the little title he has here that people might find interesting is Deputy

Sapko for DARPA. Wait, what is Sapko mean? And are you sure this is a photo of him? I'm 100% sure. And, you know, we have a career history outside of this one appointment in 2009. What does that mean? That means that name redacted has been exposed. We have mapped him, his history, and his network, and the people that he knows, he is done, he is off the board, at the chess board. Correct. You mean right now because we're showing his face?

Now publicly, but I brought that information to Odie and I specifically to let them know that I knew who he was. He showed Odie and I this photo. Yes, I will start. I sent them this photo.

How did they respond? And when you say you sent Odie and I, you sent it primarily.

“Name redacted with other documents on signal. Yeah. That document and other documents. How did he respond?”

No response. Zero. To anything that I gave them. It's funny. There's no response to Dylan about wanting to check what Dylan told him in that skip to double check that it was tampered with. And there's no, there has been no responses. But a government shutdown was a reason that was told to Dylan that he couldn't come back in to verify and you know what he said. But you went in during the government shutdown. So that doesn't make sense to me.

It's a bullshit excuse. It's both pre submitting the statement to Congress and after has there been surveillance of you, your house, your wife, your home, your phones, anything like that that you picked up on. So I said as much before yes, nothing I can ever prove. And that hasn't changed. I still have, you know, in boxes that people shouldn't be aware of receiving messages with attachments from junk emails. I still have, you know, strange occurrences

in terms of people walking by my house multiple times and just doing nothing and looking around. Somebody broke in your house and laid your wife's IDs out and as if they're filming them and they took your grandfather's ashes and smashed them as a trash can. Sorry, I was talking

“else since the weaponized. So if I had to talk about that in the last episode, do we reveal that?”

I think we did. Okay. So it doesn't hurt to tell it again. Yeah. Right. So I'm just saying, I know because I have been the recipient of photographs of both you and other people where X's were painted on your sidewalk. Correct. And so that seems like a crazy thing to say except for the fact that I happen to multiple whistleblowers that we were preparing, Georgia were preparing to be able to talk in front of Congress. So it's, it's really a fucked up game. I did not know that

he X thing and happened to others. Talk about that later. But yeah, it is a fucked up game. We are Americans doing what is best for our country. And are we? We, yes, you and I are in George. Everyone here is doing what is best for our country. 100%. You know, just to get to the end of it of this very unfortunate man in meeting. Name redacted. He asked me at the end of the meeting, you know, wrapping up here. Is there anything you want to say to Tulsi Gabbard? You know,

is there anything you want to tell her? And I thought about it and I said, you know, yes, there is. And that is that there are traders in your midst. We have been infiltrated and subverted from the inside by treasonous people who do not serve the interests of the United States government. They do not respect the constitutional rule of law and they do not respect human life. They only respect power and gain. I told, told them that a standby today, traders are in our midst.

right now against the interests of this country and it citizens. Name redacted. Counts is one of

“them. So one thing I have to add is that while I can't confirm or share, you know, the means by”

which we identify name redact and verify his information that can share that I personally went and vetted that information with people who would know his position and also people who wouldn't know and the people who wouldn't know confirm that I have no idea who that is. So that's very good for me to know that they're not going to pretend that they know someone just to be a value to me.

And then the people who should have known did admit that they knew who was confirming to me that

they are still trustworthy to me. So I'm very certain name redacted is a nexus point for the dirty tricks department of legacy. Most recently in North of Kremlin and that he is personally responsible for leading the activities against the U.A.P. whistleblowers. A couple of days ago at the time we're recording this President Trump in responding to comments made by the former President Barack Obama did some sort of one upsmanship in which he said, look, I'm going to get the bottom of

this. I want every issues this directive. I want every federal agency to look through their files.

Anything related to UFOs, U.A.P. USOs, aliens, ETs, find those files and come forward with it. Are you encouraged by that at all? Do you think it will result in any kind of meaningful information that comes forward that hasn't been made public before? So I am grateful that people in positions of power or who held positions of power are acknowledging some degree of the reality of this, even if they are using terminology that lets them weasel their way out of being

“a specific. So weasel words as George says, but will this initiative result in disclosure and justice?”

I have very little confidence in that and that is not because of any specific things I've heard about the Trump White House attitude towards disclosure or U.A.P. It is informed directly by their handling of the Epstein file release, the ongoing dog's dinner. They have made of it and the disinformation that they are spreading to obscure the wrongdoings that are contained in there. And let's be very clear. The lawfully demanded files that are supposed to be released are not.

This is a constitutional crisis. The executive is directly contributing the will of the legislative branch. Are we just going to lie down and let this injustice be swept under the rug? Or will we say enough is enough? If we will not say enough is enough to the enslavement and rape of our children, how can we hope to do the same for U.A.P. So far we are not meeting the challenge

“that has been put before our country by the Epstein files. I think that is a bad sign of what”

is to come if disclosure is pursued in this administration. I want to remind you that the Epstein files are not enough. There are some practical considerations here too. I mean, a director, as opposed to an executive or authority, as it is. The records we are talking about what they need to be declassified before they can be made of. It is nonsense. Completely according to President Trump, he can declassify

anything just by thinking about it. There is nothing stopping him from going today on a front of a camera and sharing everything he has been officially informed in his two terms as President of the United States of America. There is no procedure that needs to be followed other than what we decide is appropriate. I got an admission to me. I don't know if we can error this yet, but so why I have a little bit of hope that people are so scared about what Trump might do

that we're moving in a cool direction is I had a scheduled conversation with I'll say

of War, from the Pentagon. That was like for like the day before the presidential address State of the Union and I got to call the day prior to that scheduled meeting and it said emergency and I go, well me and George can't help on the phone so you better face time me right now. Got a face time in my car, like waiting to go into things from my mom's birthday,

and here's what I can say. There was a meeting that occurred at 9 a.m. dc time,

the day before I believe the day before the state of the Union and they wanted to know my and George's opinion from a comms perspective, if there was going to be say about seven different agencies including error, including ODNI, including other alphabet soup agencies and groups, and they wanted to get so let's say somebody wanted to be the most informed person in the room so I was like okay cool here's what George and I would say because weirdly enough I wrote down

these four steps that need to occur for disclosure and I identify what the first step might be and I think George might agree with me. He's probably got a smarter version but this is what I

got but here's the deal you have a problem and they go what's the problem and I go while you're in

that meeting I'm going on international news with someone from Britain, Pierce Morgan and at the end

“I'm going to verbate him say these four things and then the one thing you should do first and I was”

like so if you use my words, my exact words then you better admit you know George mother fucking nap and me because it's going to look weird when you get out of that meeting. Now we probably can't error this but I just want you to know why I'm optimistic is because they had seven agencies and organizations, older comms people met at 9 AM in DC I believe the day before the state of the Union because they didn't know if I think I'm reading into this but they didn't know

if Trump was going to say the word UFO alien or NHI. Now here he didn't but I've rejected the news for over a week so am I wrong for having I'm gonna ask you am I wrong for having enthusiasm that the fact they're scrambling and coming to you and me for words am I wrong to be enthusiastic? I don't think you're wrong for having at least some optimism about it. Yeah as a news guy

“I think it is a big story just for the president and the former president to be mentioning the”

words UFOs and aliens just saying it gives a certain amount of credibility to people who've brushed this off you know just by itself even if nothing ever comes from Trump's directive I think that was a positive thing. I think it would be overly optimistic to assume that it's going to amount to anything. I think because Trump has issued this directive they're going to have to come up with something. These federal agencies have got to come up with it. It's like more

shredding machines. I'm thinking about some kind of document that has not been made topic before just to say face. Let's do it through all bone to their president because Luna and Birchit and Burlison are saying oh Luna did this gangster tweet I don't know if you guys saw it on X. She's like can't wait to see the videos and all the documents have reviewed them was she present when she said that because maybe promised that maybe she's establishing a baseline

hey we expect to get at least this. I fucking love her. Yeah I know mate I thought the same thing she took up she took advantage of the opportunity of the moment and said hey look forward to seeing this

“meaning you're going to at least give us something which is positive. I think the chances of them”

given really good stuff are it's infinitesimal as you always say that. The same people have held

this stuff up. I've been the keepers of the secrets for all these decades. You think they're going to cough it up. But you always see that and then you test biting Congress and then we've had private meetings and skips and then we're contacted by coms people in agencies and then that footage ends up coming out anyway with or without them. So why are you not optimistic? I'm optimistic that we will continue to come up with information that has not been made public by anybody else.

I am not optimistic that they will suddenly cough it up. We get it because we work at it. They're not offering that stuff to us but we don't need them to offer it. Well you just asking me am I optimistic this leads to something from the government you know from what they're how to respond to us. They have to respond to Matt. They have to respond to Dylan. They have to respond to chief senior wiggits. They have to respond to Commander David Freyberg. That's a

strategic rush. She's in real. She responded to Immaculate Constellation. Yeah we don't see it. We can't find it. It's a bad person guys. I feel so bad whenever I talk shit about her.

just doing your job like that's the excuse everybody they're doing their job. Is she a bad person like

“I think people are just doing their job they're told like okay for example. Jay Stratton told”

her be honest about what Jeremy and George released. He told me that I think I could say that. And she did and she said yes those are military film UAP. And the last had that long. But she did it. Yeah and when Jay was gone she didn't do it again. Right but it's she is that because she's a bad person or is that because she's being told yeah I think she's following orders. Right so that's fine. That's fine or maybe it's not fine. I don't think it is fine. Okay think

being a careerist when it comes to questions of national security is the incorrect mindset. You can resign from any job. You did. Yeah okay I understood. Go back. So on the question of this you a bad person or not or people like her. It may very well be part of their job.

“But if your job is evil then I think you bear the moral weight of participating in an”

evil. Name redacted. Is evil. Yes yes that I know for sure. I know that from the first examed experience. Now I'm sorry bro but on that subject there was one other thing to relay that I also relate to. Name redacted is something I gave to the Sissy and Sask and talked about on weaponized. And that was you know additional information and that additional information was a list of 42 names associated with the legacy program. I provided that to name redacted. You know 42 names

that's a lot of names. You know those those names are individuals. Some of them are companies.

Some include and most of them are companies people have never heard of. There's a lot of

network mapping to do with 42 names. There's a lot of information that has been generated. This doesn't stop. Tell us over and the people have won. We are not waiting for the

“governments to give us documents anymore. What even exactly by the is that a threat? What are you saying?”

What do you mean? It is a legal threat because legally what recourse to American citizens have to correct the actions of their government when it does no longer responsive to them. Well we have relied on the executive branch to be the truth teller and the arbiter of what is or is not secret for far too long. It is clear that whatever truth comes out of any disclosure process is going to be biased and swayed for advantage. The legislative branch is at an impasse. There's not

enough political capital to move disclosure forward in a legislative way that will result in real world outcomes. So that leaves us one last branch of government that is the judicial branch to pursue. You know people like being in the shadows and we don't need to win every court case to take this apart. And you're going to win so hold on are we in the shadows today or are we in the sunlight today? Right beautiful California sun. George, get a question for you. I'm

sitting in it. Yeah, I'm sorry. I got a question for you. It's sun. Okay, listen, we have a weird soundtrack for weaponized. There's music all around us, but this is real life. So you're experiencing real life. So fuck off. Check this out, George. I got a question. Can you answer me? What if Kong, what if people in Congress through presidential order were given authority to go to specific? Like you sent somebody to Papu's like back in the early 90s to go look at

Papu's like see if Bob is our soundtrack. What if people to day got that authority presidential authority to do it? Would you be optimistic? I'm optimistic that whatever is at those locations will be moved by the time that say Kong, where's when gets there to look around? Okay, but what if you could defend against that by informing, by having many sources of information to defend against that, would you be more optimistic? Yeah, of course. Yeah, it'd be great.

I hope something comes from it. We know what we're talking about here. I just want you to say the year-op optimistic, George. Okay, I'll take that. I'll take that. I know, hopeful is more better word than optimistic. It's hopeful. I'm hopeful that leads to something. I am doubtful that

it does. But I just said that heard the first part of your hopeful, it'll tiny bit of hopefulness.

It'll be like cream in the coffee. You know, you don't use cream, but it's a real great big giant craft of coffee. It's really good, like Michael, like Michael Ozzoski's coffee,

Oh, little spice. Look, Matt, I don't know how to end this, man, because it's not ending.

So I just want to say, thank you. And the fight is not over, but I hope that the public

“not awkwardly gets behind you with whatever you need to continue, because I want you to continue.”

Don't stop. No matter what it takes. Let me ask you this. I know then from private conversation we've had that you've been discussing sort of an initiative that you and maybe a couple of your compatrails are working on. Can you talk about that now? Yeah. So this is going on next week. Based on you know, our experience, Dylan, Borland and I have started a nonprofit to do disclosure by the people for the people. It is, you know, using UAP whistleblowers from a national security enterprise

to pursue disclosure through the justice system. We are creating an organization specifically to wage law fair to light our system law fair to light our system on fire with court cases related to disclosure to make a huge fucking problem. In addition to that, we will be looking after whistleblowers. I had experienced outside of, you know, personal support from friends and family, absolutely no assistance on the outside. There is no organized help for UAP whistleblowers,

whether that be from Congress or from private initiatives. We are quite frankly being picked off to be either exploited for financial or technical gain or to be removed from being agents of influence

“and for the cause of disclosure. So are you doing this for personal gain? Max, that's what everybody”

on the interwebs going to say. Are you doing this for personal gain? Tell me. No, why on? Because this is our home and if we do not defend it, who will? We live here, exactly. Planet Earth or America. America. I'm not sure if it is our home anymore. That's existential. Let's just cheers. I'm fucking more helicopter numbers and more of whatever this is. Yeah, because somebody banging on a pot. Okay, check it out. Mike, look right at me.

I was at the first time ever, a Roger Waters concert. It was called Old Chella. That's what I

called it. And George Napp was there with me. And I saw Roger Waters at the first time. And there

“was a helicopter speakers going around and see played a pink Floyd song. And that's what it's”

felt like today. So to our listening audience, I hope this is in fucking surround sound. What if there's so many of the garbage can't over there going bang, bang, bang, bang, why? Well, before we do hear it, Michael, they were saying, hey, hey, calling out to us. Can we talk to you? You do it? We're in public. And the thing is, it's like, that's the point. Is that no more fucking dancing around a tip-toeing, like little, you know,

ballerina, no more dancing around, like a like a like a like a like a like a million at.

In the sun, full light, we're saying it as it is. And that's the end of it. And if you don't understand, you haven't been listening. Right. Let's fucking go. daylight is the best disinfectant or a political class likes to tell us. We're going to bring a whole bunch of it to this entire rotten structure. Funny story. Bob Lazar knows that's be true because during COVID, he gave me a laser gun and he gave Georgia disinfectant light. I got the cooler gift. I brought the cheers.

Let's cheers with a bad armbrain. Hold on, hold on, hold on. This is this is for Georgia, motherfucking nap. That is his official legal name. I'll say it's a different name. It's middle name. It's not. It's motherfucking. Here we go. Cheers, you guys. Cheers.