Speaker 1: Hey everyone, I'm Matt and welcome to The Good Trouble Show. Yesterday,
journalist Ross Colthard hit another one out of the park
with his News Nation special revealing another UAP whistleblower named
Jake Barber. Today, national security expert Matthew Pines returns to
the show for expert analysis, and we have a statement
from Jake Barber himself a little bit later.
Speaker 2: So glad everyone's here.
Speaker 1: We always say we're not going to do any more
live shows, and then we change our minds. But first
please do us a solid hit the subscribe and thumbs
up buttons on YouTube, leave a comment and let us
know what you think about this episode. You can also
find us on x at a Good Trouble Show, folks.
Our growth on x has actually been fairly slow, so
we would certainly appreciate your follow there, But we're also
on all the other places, all the other social media
platforms at The Good at Trouble Show. You can also
find us wherever you enjoy your podcasts. Search for The
Good at Trouble Show with Matt Ford, and if you
would like to chip in to keep the lights on,
you can become a Patreon member of the Good at
Trouble Show by going to www dot patreon dot com
forward slash the Good Trouble Show sign up to help
us keep bringing you amazing shows like the one we
have today with the Matthew Pines.
Speaker 2: Now, now that that is out of the way.
Speaker 1: I'm pleased to announce that early this week it'll either
be probably Tuesday or Wednesday, we have a very very
special episode. We have lou Elizondo, doctor Gary Nolan, and
former Delta Force commander Lieutenant Colonel John Blitch who you
saw of course on the News Nation interview with Ross Coltheart,
all to discuss the allegations by by whistleblower Jake Barber.
We will announce the air date on our x account
and again on x we are at Good Trouble Shows,
so follow us there for the latest. And I also
want to say too, I want to really give a
shout out to to Ross Coulthart. You know, you look
at you look at you look at journalists or you know,
kind of fake journalists like Julian Barnes, who of the
New York Times, who is essentially a lap dog of
the Pentagon of the Ice carrying the water for them,
and you know really not doing his job as a journalist.
I mean, it's clear when you read Julian Barnes's article
articles on the New York Times, it is it's just
absolute rubbish. And we are lucky to have journalists like
Ross Coulthart of on News Nation, like Matt Laslow Laslow,
like uh, you know, Christopher Sharp of The Liberation Times,
Mark von Rennan Camp. So there are folks that are
doing a good journalism, and of course you know the
og of journalists in this space, George Knapp.
Speaker 2: But I just really wanted.
Speaker 1: To give a shout out to Ross because you know,
this guy has continually put himself out there. The guy's fearless,
and I think all of us will owe him.
Speaker 2: A debt of gratitude. Okay, all right.
Speaker 1: Our guest today is the director of Intelligence at Pinnacle
one Sentinel one Strategic Advisory Group, where he leads analysis
of geopolitics, emerging technology, and cyber threats. He was previously
director of Security Intelligence at Krebs Stamos Group. Returning to
the show to discuss last night's bombshell news, please welcome
Matthew Pines.
Speaker 2: Matthew, how are you today?
Speaker 3: I'm doing well. We're coming from Nicole, so hopefully I'm
I'm almost one hundred percent.
Speaker 1: No, no, no problem at all. Well, yeah, thanks for
joining us again. This is your your returning to the show.
You're officially a friend of the show, which I will
be sending the good Trouble coffee mug right right right
to your home as soon as we have one made.
So so what do I so anyway, but thank you
very much for joining us. So before we like dig
into the details, what did you think about the interview
were in and his revelations, Jake Barber's revelations. Were you
disappointed or did it meet or exceed your expectations?
Speaker 2: And if so, why?
Speaker 1: Well?
Speaker 3: I think it was unique, right. We haven't had someone
coming forward making explicit claims having firsthand experience on a
retrieval operation associated with alleged UAP objects. So that in
of itself is remarkable. Obviously it requires more investigation, more
analysis to understand and paint it in a larger in
a larger context. But I was, you know, floored by
at least the nature of the of the of the
of the claims, and not just on the crash retrieval side,
but getting into the psionics piece. I mean, these were
all pieces of kind of the lore around this topic.
And have someone come out with with apparently legit bona
fides and make such strong claims, I think moves the
conversation in a different direction. Obviously a lot of folks
maybe not prepared to move in that direction. And so
I think there's been a lot of kind of head
snapping to understand just how it is and how serious
this is. And I think we're in that period of
kind of disorientation, discombobulation trying to assess all these different
parts and pieces of the story that were laid out
last night. And I think people are still trying to
fit it together. But I'm taking it very seriously and
certainly want to pursue all of it as as as
rigorously as possible.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Absolutely, And I can tell you absolutely full stop,
this guy is the real deal.
Speaker 2: I would bet my the mortgage on my he is
the real deal.
Speaker 1: But you know, let's stick into his background, you know,
because of course, the most important question with any whistleblower
is you know whether he or you know she is credible.
And I want to, you know, I just want to
kind of talk about his background here so, so he
was a US Air Force airman in the in the
nineteen nineties, worked as an aerospace mechanic recruited into the
Air Force Combat Control Unit. He held a NATO top
secret clearance. He was recognized for heroism during operations in Bosnia. So,
first of all, I want to stop there, what is
a combat controller because to be honest, I don't really know.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so I would say I don't. I haven't looked
into his specific backgrounds taking that information as is, but yees. So,
a combat controller is a certain function within Air Force
Special Operations community, specifically the Special Tactics Squadron STS. And
so there's a number of these sort of special forces
units within the Air Force that kind of correspond They
have kind of their their own counterparts to say, the
Seals or or the Rangers. And there's a particular squadron,
the twenty fourth, which is also known as one hundred
and sixtieth kind of the Nighthawks. They are kind of
the the Air Force equivalent of like Delta Force or
Seal Team six, so like Tier one special mission units,
and their responsibilities are to basically, you know, support deniable
covert operations, clandestine activities, just like Delta Forest and Seal
Team six to two. Sometimes they are sort of seconded
to those teams. Sometimes they conduct their own operations. Obviously
they specialize in in air operations, but in particular sort
of combat controllers are usually embedded with ground teams to
bring in close air support, to control drones, to control
air strikes sort of you know, control overhead surveillance on
behalf of small unit teams conducting operations, you know, usually
in very very sensitive environments. And so they're trained kind
of both with traditional kind of uh sort of special
Forces tactics as well as how to control uh you know,
are are our airborne platforms and bring in you know,
close air support, et cetera. Uh, And so that that
that that combat controllers is a particular function that gets
it's a specialty that gets trained, you know. They there's
I think it was even a recent movie made with them.
Forget his name about it, but uh, there's like a
Hollywood I think it's on Netflix. You can see kind
of what these guys are like and what their specialty is.
Usually embedded with these special mission units, and they're the
guys with like the the iPads and the special radios
and they're trying to, you know, make sure that the
teams are protected and they have overwatch. So yeah, so
that's that's my understanding. What of what the combat controller
uh specialty is and and the STS uh kind of function?
Speaker 1: Do you know if if being a part of what
is it the you know, the twenty third uh you know,
Air Force Special Operations Command, does that automatically make him
a Tier one operator?
Speaker 3: So if you're in the twenty fourth STS, that is
essentially the equivalent of DEV Group or the equivalent of
the Combat Applications Group, right, so Steal Team six or
or Delta Force, so those are considered Tier one Special
Mission units SMUs uh. So that's kind of like the
category in terms of the level of selection, the level
of training, the level of of of of of skills required.
But usually they're but then but then they can be
deployed on a variety of different task force uh you know,
activities blended with other other teams as well. But yes,
if if he was a member of that particular squadron,
then yeah, that would be a Tier one Special mission unit.
And the other gentleman that was in the the the
the program yesterday, bred Baker I believe his name, uh,
you know, it's it's not. I think his record is
pretty public that he was a member of the twenty
fourth STS, and he's also I think shown as part
of the sort of skywatcher initiatives. Now I don't know
if they were together on these particular operations, but that
individual in particular, Fred Baker, I think there's a public
award on the Air Force webs site of him getting
since the Airman of the Year as member of the
of the STS twenty fourth Squadron.
Speaker 1: Now, in terms of you know, he stated that he
has NATO top secret clearance. What does that say about
the kind of work he did as opposed to somebody
that has strictly clearances out of the United States and
have nothing to do with NATO.
Speaker 3: That I'm not quite sure. I mean, NATO has its
own kind of compartments, its own access requirements, but a
top secret clearance is something that's adjudicated by the Defense Department,
the intelligence community as this sort of a blanket kind
of ticket to the party. So it might be a
bit of a missing over to say there's like a
special NATO top sier clearance. There's just you know, certain
compartments associated with NATO defense information that you have to
get right into or this specific sort of access is granted.
But yeah, I mean, if you're operating in a NATO theater,
right Bosnias, of course, you know the example from his background,
there are Native specific military operations, NATO specific sort of
battle plans being coordinated with their NATO allies. So if
you're going to deploy as part of a NATO force,
then you would be that would be part of your access.
But I don't think it's anything I don't know, it's
not anything like too exotic, right, Like a lot of
people operate in that environment, would get that understood.
Speaker 1: Now, Following, he says, following nine to eleven, he leaves
the Air Force. He goes, he leaves the Air Force
to go under non official cover to work as a
contractor for the do O, D and I C. So
you know, you hear non official cover thrown around from
from time to time. What is it and why would
he need to exit the Air Force to perform these
duties under this non official cover? How do you explain
non official cover?
Speaker 3: Yeah, that was the most sort of eyebrow raising thing
that I heard in terms of because that's a very
unusual track, right, the NATO stuff not that usual. But
going from a traditional enlisted role right where you're being
trained in a certain specialty in the air force to
being piped into essentially a non official cover program, that
is extremely unusual.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 3: Either, that's not very typical, and non official cover refers
to deniable UH positions where if you're caught, right conducting
clandestine operations in a foreign country, you did, you can't
claim either protections on their Geneva conventions as a military
uh as as a military person, or dip by to
cover if you're you know, just like a normal spy. Right.
So so intelligence services and militaries UH do deploy under
rare circumstances, individuals under non official cover to provide uh,
you know, extreme uh sort of covert uh operational security
right where there's no official connection between them and the
US military of the US government. There are effectively, you know,
for all intents and purposes, a private citizen, you know,
operating in a commercial context, uh, you know, doing normal
business functions, you know, in in the intelligence context.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 3: You know, they call them knocks, and they're they're a
pretty rare subset of kind of the spies that that
the US government employees to collect intelligence to preseas and UH.
For example, I think there's a famous knock that was
that was burned Valerie Plan uh and the Scooter Libby
sort of scandal, where she was essentially operating under nofficial cover.
I believe it was like an energy consultant for a company,
you know, that had business in the in the Middle East,
and so she was traveling and she had a full
time job, you know, as a consultant and was you know,
uh engaged in contracts, but her her real job was
as a as a as a an intelligence officer for
the US government, but that was only known to maybe
one or two people in that company. And so the
US military has adopted a similar similar set of uh
sort of procedures, obviously not for collecting kind of high
level political intelligence, but for emplacing individuals in commercial operations
where they can support deniable activities uh around the world.
And so this is you know, not an unusual thing
from the US government, but it's it's pretty rare to
find someone who is admitting to that as part of
the background, and certainly there their presence in different countries
would be extremely high risk. If you're if you're found out, Uh,
then you are you are You're you're on your own.
And yeah, so that that is certainly something I was
very interested to hear about. And he sort of implied
that that was kind of like where his career kind
of took a certain turn, right, that that was sort
of the like sort of the entry point into a
kind of a series of these activities that led him
to what was these alleged recovery activities.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and and again we have a statement from Jake
a little bit later that I think will clear some
of this up for folks. It was I'm in a
signal group, and you know that a lot of a
lot of folks that that are common friends of ours,
and there are definitely some folks that are skeptical about
some of the claims U So I think this will
this will I think it will help quite a bit,
and I think everyone I don't think folks are going
to be hearing more about his story and his background.
And again, I can one hundred percent tell you this
guy is the real deal. He says he is who
he says he is, and he has done the things
and experience the things that he says he he has
and this is from multiple, multiple sources. So he also
stated during the show, which I thought was really intriguing,
that that after he leaves the Air Force and goes
to work for a contractor on the range retrieving down
conventional aircraft as well as UAP. And the first thing
I thought of was what is this range?
Speaker 3: And and.
Speaker 2: Do you know what this.
Speaker 1: Range is or have any ideas? And then also who
is this contractor? That's what I would really love love
to know who the contractor is, the defense contractor.
Speaker 3: I mean, I've speculating. The only thing that comes to
mind is, uh is White Sands Missile Range wismer as
it's known. In fact, I've been out there, I've conducted,
you know, sort of operational experiments out there, and it
is it is. It is huge, it is uh, it
is mass you know, it's barren.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 3: You can do a lot of stuff out there. At
the US military conducts sort of the activities he was
describing in that in that in that you know, on
that on that on that facility. But that's just speculation,
but it is, you know, it is a range, So
that would that would fit the appellation, and it's where
they did the Trinity Site. You know, that's that's part
of Wismer. In fact, I was able to kind of
get just to the outside of was of of of
the tree, uh of the Trinity test a number of
years ago, just outside the fence line where you can't
go because of radiation. So it is kind of a barren,
kind of a barren, spooky place. So it wouldn't surprise
me if some of this stuff is happening out there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1: I I definitely wouldn't want to be crossing defense into
radiation zone. I get enough pollution out here in Los Angeles.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: Now, Ross had on a show three former Special operators
who vouched for him and his claims. There was Don
Paul Bales, Fred Baker, and Lieutenant Colonel John Blitch, who
again will be on our show either a Tuesday or Wednesday,
along with Louelasondo and doctor Gary Nolan. Did you find
these former Tier one operators? Did you find find them credible?
And how much do you think that their testimony sort
of of, you know, sort of reinforced Jake's story and
his credibility.
Speaker 3: Certainly, I mean these guys are legit, right, these I mean,
you can look them up, right, at least at least
Fred Baker and Blitch, you can find you know, good
good information about their background. You know, Blitch himself right
PhD Delta sniper and a darker program manager kind of
like you know, a renaissance man kind of and and
he just, you know, kind of the very beginning of
the interview is kind of like you don't necessarily process it,
but he just, like rapid fire a sense to all
of Ross's questions about the reality of this, of these
recovery programs, the reality of the of the cover up,
and he just is yeah, like one hundred percent, like yes, yes, yes.
So I'm really looking forward to the interview to see
how he unpacks that, how much of that is based
off of his personal knowledge. I know he's done a
lot of work for NASA as well, He's been a
lot of places in his career, so really fascinated to
learn more about his his perspective on that. And then
Fred Baker, I mean, Fred Baker is also like a
highly decorated, uh you know, Tier one special operator who
has served as country honorably and you know, I think
twelve deployments in combat and you know has has been
through the ringer like a lot of those Tier one
special operators, Right, these guys have suffered quite a bit
and certainly they gained no you know, I think uh
benefit from from this type of attention. Right, These typically
don't like to go public. These guys definitely don't like
to be associated with things that uh, you know, in
their community. It's a quiet kind of warrior ethos, and
I think they only do something like this where it's
they don't have a choice, where they feel it's a
matter of national security and urgency, maybe even no moral
imperative to come out. And it's important to recognize that
they came out kind of as a group, right, And
they seem to imply that that this is kind of
like the feeling of like the frontline workers here, right
if therese like this legacy program hierarchy, like these are
the grunts on the front line doing the dirty work,
you know, and as he mentioned, kind of feeling a
bit like they are expendable. And this was sort of
maybe a signal being sent up up the chain that
that these folks are are now prepared to come out.
So I I saw this as a as a shot
across the bow from from a subset of the community
that has been involved in these activities that they're not.
They're they're not gonna stay quiet any longer.
Speaker 2: Yeah, No, they definitely aren't.
Speaker 1: And and the thing is, it's like the last thing
any former Tier one operator would do is is, you know,
go on the record publicly to support someone if they
if if they didn't, you know, if they couldn't vouch
for him, They're not going to vouch for the guy
if uh, you know, if if they have any doubts
or anything like that. And yeah, I mean I think that,
I think that is really an important element is who
vouched for him? John Blitch I've known for quite some time.
He actually lives not too far away from me. We've
we've had dinner together. You know, a really great guy
and and he takes his service to this country really
really seriously. And and he is he is not he
is absolutely not going to vouch for someone if you know,
if if he has any doubts. But you know, but
one question for you, Matthew, is there anything that you
wish would have been presented that would have further bolsted
Jake's credibility?
Speaker 3: Well, I so many questions right right, like that that
that resulted from that from that interview, right about like
how he first got involved in these in these activities,
if he can say, and then like to walk through,
you know again like more explicit details about his pipeline
from you know, being the mechanic into getting into this
non official cover position, and then how that was the
pipeline into these recovery operations, which apparently you know, we're
just in the US, right, So a lot of the
you know, I'm curious to know, like what happened, if
any overseas, and when did this crew that formed Skywatcher
come together to what extent is the membership of that
crew overlapping with his original team versus additional folks, you know,
folks from the legacy program they have recruited in not
just one set of questions. I have a whole bunch
of questions about those tough books and what was going
on there. And I have a lot of questions on
the nature of these recovery operations, right the eggs that
he saw, the why he called it an eight gone
and an octagon, So like there was a lot of questions, right,
So I definitely felt like my appetite was wetted, but
not fully satisfied. And maybe that's you know, going to
be more coming out and you have to compress things
down and you know, for the for for forty minutes.
But yes, I want to know a lot more about
his experience, his background, his sort of trajectory into these programs,
the work that he did with these other folks. How
did he get to know you know, Blitch in the
first place. I know Bales was on his team allegedly,
how did he get to know Fred Baker? The four
or five other members that were exposed to that a
nominalist health incident, Like who are they? Are they gonna
come uh, you know, to to the to the four. Yeah,
so there's just like probably a lot more if I
were to just riff, but like, yeah, I a lot.
I want to know. I have no reason to doubt
his credibility. I think he is who he says he is,
and I think this story is is is vertical, But
there are so many loose threads that need to be
that need to be chased down.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, for sure.
Speaker 1: So yeah, so we have a statement from Jake Barber
regarding regarding his background. So let's see here, So Jake says,
a combat control was my gateway. I was pre selected
as a teenager and given a ten year contract into CCT.
Speaker 2: Graduated selection, went.
Speaker 1: Through training in the pipeline, and then was re routed
to my cover job as an airplane mechanic, then assigned
to Pope Air Force Base. Again, that's a statement from
Jake Barbara provided to The Good Trouble Show.
Speaker 2: So yeah, so what are your thoughts on that? Your reaction?
Speaker 3: I mean that that would explain it, right in terms
of the sort of the d D two to fourteen
sort of like break, right in terms of his apparent
career versus like how he ended up there. And Pope
Air Force Base I believe is the headquarter of of
of the STS twenty fourth right, that's the Knights Talkers
sort of headquarters, right, So that that would align with
with getting routed into that that organization as a as
a as a Tier one Special Mission Unit operator. So yeah,
I mean seems to be there might be might be
folks that have more detailed questions on how that worked,
but it seems seems fair.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, for sure. Any again, I think I know
Jesse Michael's uh and some others have have spoken with him,
so I think that there will be be some stuff
that will will will certainly come out more more detail now.
Jake states that that he worked for the you know
this contractor on the range recovering downcraft and things that
were exotic in nature, including one demonstrating one of the
five observables which he said would which completely completely shocked me.
I did was not expecting this when he said that
one of the he's seen these things come out of
the ground or come out of a ridge. Were you
as shocked by that revelation as s I was. It
was that really threw me.
Speaker 3: I mean depends on how you interpret it, right, I mean
I can construct two possible explanations, one much more exotic
than the other. Right, The very exotic explanation is it's literally,
you know, somehow able to penetrate solid surfaces. And of
course there's like the famous slide nine that you can
point to, which alleges that some of these anomalous craft
have the ability to sort of penetrate solid surfaces, which
of course is a feat of physics that I don't
know exactly how that could be accomplished. The world contains wonders,
so remains to be remains to be filled in how
that's possible and alterntive explanation is, you know, there are
pretty effective concealment methods right to you know, hide launch
facilities or bases or other hangars right in what would
otherwise be unremarkable, you know, scrub brush or hillsides or
mountain sides, right and we've gotten pretty good at those
sorts of concealment tactics and technologies. And so yeah, for
someone who doesn't know that there's a secret sort of
facility there, all of a sudden, you know, something flies
out of what looks like a solid hillside, could be
quite anomalous when really it's just like a fancy screen
that it's passing through from an otherwise accessible voice. So
who knows. This is just me, you know, trying to
interpret that off of very limited sort of evidence. But
I'd say, you know, until I know exactly how the
penetrating hard services could could work, then you know, I'm
sort of I'm suspending judgment. But you know, it stands
to reason at a facility like say Whismer or other
other facilities where we have very secret operations, you know,
concealing secret bases would be a part for the course.
And so someone who doesn't know the location of all
those facilities, who's just playing around observing activity, might see
things fly out of what otherwise appears to be an
unremarkable hillside, and it actually is the location of a
secret hangar. Right, just has good concealment.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this stuff continues to just just blow my time,
blow my mind time and time again. Now he gave,
as you said before, an example of these two recovered craft.
One was this eight gone craft, which I thought was
really interesting. So let's watch a bit from Ross coultheart's interview.
Speaker 4: There's two objects that I'm here to talk about. One
was the egg. The other is what we called an
eight gone. The eight gone was a essentially a flying
disc with what looked like eight delineated sections when looking down.
And I can tell you what it looked like from
looking down because that's primarily how I saw it, because
I'm a helicopter pilot.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: One of the things that I think you pointed this
out earlier, this this eight gone phraseology. It's like, I
almost wonder if if that wasn't the first time they
picked up vehicles like that, and it's like, hey, that's
what everybody in the office calls that thing, the eight gone.
It's just such a not something that you I think
people would normally use if they saw an octagon shaped
shaped thing.
Speaker 2: Any thoughts on that?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, if I remember, his specific description is
it was like a regular disc, but from an overhead perspective,
it was divided into eight sections. So maybe that's why
they don't use octagon. Octagon implies you know, like you know,
like a polytope that has eight sides. Right, this is
maybe it's actually just like a circle, but it has
eight divisions, so they called it not, you know, an
eight gone. Yeah, I mean, who knows. It definitely seems
like this city's recovered twice, right, I think that was
the case. And that was also when he had that
kind of you know, almost like religious or spiritual connection,
so obviously that would stick in his memory. But yeah,
it seems the phraseology is quite sort of an in
group jargon.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's very very, very very specific. Now, of course,
everybody's a buzz about the second one, which is this
egg shape craft and let's look at the look at
the video here. Everyone has seen this, of course, but
but you know, I had a few questions if if
you know, if you would have any sort of thoughts
on this, because certainly I'm not an image expert, I'm
not a helicopter pilot. I've never done been around anything
like this. But one one person was asking, like, why
is there no apparent rotor wash? Have you know? It's
hard to judge the altitude or actually what the terrain is.
Any any ideas.
Speaker 3: Again, this is me especially, I'm not a helicopter pilet.
But if they have one hundred and fifty feet high, right,
like rotor wash wouldn't actually be all that strong down there.
And if it's like quite dry, you know, scrub or
just desert like hard packed dirt and white sands is
like that, there might not be a lot, right And
if it's traveling over there, most of the water rush
could be sort of dissipated or lagging the path of
the egg. But you know, I'm just I'm just spewing, right.
I mean the thing about the video, though I think
people didn't pick up on it's not again we could
dig into the details of the video and do some
forensics on et cetera. But like the first point I
haven't seen brought up, which is, Okay, let's assume the
video is true. Let's assume this is a video taken
from a helicopter involved in a UAP recovery operation. Why
and it wasn't. It wasn't from Barber, It's from somebody
else that apparently, you know, the News Nation Rosscott got
a hold of. Right, What that would imply to the
Legacy Program is that they have somebody inside who's got
access to such video evidence who is now willing to
share it with a journalist. And that seems to be
almost like the real point of the video, right. The
point of the video wasn't to like prove to the
average watcher that there's like true anomalous egg shaped UAPs,
the true I think the point of the video was
to send a signal to the Legacy Program that you
guys have a problem. We have people on the inside.
They're willing to share videos like this with us. There
might be more videos like this, You have a problem,
and it might trigger a whole bunch of anxiety and
sort of counterintelligence. Like Okay, if it is a true video,
then the people inside the Legacy Program know exactly what
operation that was that was on. They know who was
in the helicopter, they know who was hosting like the
lights down there, So they're going to now hunt who's involved.
Where did this come from? Right, It's going to create
kind of internal kind of intelligence, which creates opportunity.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 3: That's sort of what you do in traditional counter intelligence
where you're trying to like poke the bear or create dissension.
You create noise, you create adjuta, and that sometimes makes
that adversary service make mistakes right and makes them try
to do things, try to cover things up, and maybe
that provides opportunity again. So I think people look at
this as like you know, the meta level, right, they're
they're sort of missing that. It's like this was if
it's true, right, then then this is a huge problem
for the Legacy program, like a a absolute fire, like
they've never had anything like this, right, like come right,
and so this is a true five all on fire
from their perspective, right of uh oh, like we have
a serious leak. Is this is this hit? Right? And
and now you have that combined with the fact you've
got multiple you know, Tier one operators coming forward basically
saying we were part of these programs and we're not
going to take it anymore. And by the way, we
are recruiting from inside your house. We're recruiting people like
us that essentially, you know, nont longer feel threatened or
loyal to you anymore. That seems like a house of
cards type of situation for the Legacy program, Right. So
that's that was the thing that I picked up on
the most about the video itself, right, And then you
can go back into assessing, Okay, okay, what is the
apparent inertia of the egg It does it actually have mass?
It seems like it does because it's sort of lagging
the path of the of the tether. It seems to
roll with a certain amount of momentum. It seems to
be artificial lighting on there. Right, it seems like a
staging area for its for it to be dropped into
its into its pickup zone, and you know, it seems
to be what it is, right. I think people are
missing out on the most important point, which is like
this was a signal sent to a legacy program that
we have people willing to share videos like this. You know,
be careful, it might not be the last one.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I guarantee you two things. One, there are people
in the Legacy program that realize that what is going
on is un American, it's illegal, and there are a
lot of them that are yeah, it's that are going
to start talking and and and second the second thing
I absolutely guarantee you is there are going to be
more Jaysakh Tier one folks that are gonna come out
just like a Jake did and and you know, bring
us stuff out. And I virtually guarantee you as well, Uh,
there's probably.
Speaker 2: Gonna be more footage of things.
Speaker 1: But you know, do you have any idea or thoughts
as far as like, you know, why he didn't mention
the number of UAP crash recovery operations that he participated in,
or you know, or provided more details in terms of like,
you know, was that a landing zone? Like how big
are the crews? That was one thing I wish there
were a little bit more background on on those little
details that I think would have filled the picture in more.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I would have loved to have like a like
let's just zoom in do like show me the TikTok
of like from that, like from the minute you get
that intelligence that you're going to go on this operation, like,
do you know what you're going to pick up? Do
you know in advance? He said, these the communications protocols change,
Like what did that mean? Like why would that be different?
What were those communications protocols? And why would it be
different for this? Like was this like a pattern you
had detected or just something you learned after the fact? Uh?
Was just like an A And I like, I don't
know if we've got to solid answer the question like
how many in total he supported? It seemed you know,
he's here to talk about two objects, right, the egg
and the and the and the eight gone? But it
was it was, it was that it. Yeah, and again,
these are just lots of lots of more questions I'm
very curious to know about. I'm maybe there'll be future
opportunities to kind of unpack that. I think there will be,
But yeah, this is I think just the door opener.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I do know that he went through the
dopts or process, so it's highly likely that that those
were probably the only two things that that he was
cleared to to speak about. But yeah, I would just
I would love to know more more background because I
think it's really really fascinating and speaking of fascinating this
this whole psionic operator thing. That was another thing that
really really took me by surprise, these you know, psionic
operators that Jake spoke about that would summon these craft.
Have you ever heard of any government program, special access
program or controlled access program that actually recruits and trains
these operators.
Speaker 3: I mean, I've only heard I've heard this specific allegation before,
but it's all through you know, a variety of you know,
typical kind of back conversations, right. I never had you know,
firsthand knowledge of anything to substantiate it. But of course
I looked at this as I kept an open mind
on this whole subject for the past several years, as
I've gotten further further into it, and I one of
the things that definitely stood out to me very early
on was just how oddly close the historical UFO programs
of the US government were. Right, two kind of are weird?
Are other weird stuff right, like the MK ultrast stuff
as well as the remote viewing stuff, right, how put off,
et cetera. There seem to be these tight linkages over
time between the US government's exploration into the anomalous phenomena
associated with UAPs and the anomalous sort of mental states
that can be either induced by sort of you know,
novel cocktails or or sort of transcendal meditative practices. And
this was like anne of new thing. It seems like,
you know, part of that kind of behind the behind
the door sort of research by the US government over
over over many decades that had also been subject to
the same sorts of taboo and sort of derision, right
to kind of cover all in a sense of of
wooy nonsense. And I think, you know, it's important to
step back and like to assess this like analytically. You
have to establish like a good prior. And that's really
hard just taking the UAP question right, because to establish
a good prior for the UAP question slash NHI question
means you have to like really get into the detail
and the weeds associated with what you think like a
plausible theory of a panspermia or extraterrestrial intelligence in the universes,
if that's the Canada hypothesis that you want to develop
a prior for, or transdimensional you know, some novel breakthrough,
some novel aspect of physics that we don't understand. That's
the prior that you have to motivate for for that hypothesis.
If it's trans temporal, then you have to again look
at some frontiers of physics and try to motivate you know,
a basic prior that maybe accounts for that hypothesis or
some sort of cryptoterrestrial hypothesis where you have to account
for some really anomalous alternative to the typical story of
civilization on planet Earth. And so those are just all
separate domains of deeply fraught you know, scientific historical sort
of assessment just to motivate a prior to try to evaluate, okay,
what's a plausible baseline right to then, which the like
Nhi hypothesis. Then you have the size stuff, which is
its own whole, separate kind of candidate domain where you
have to do the same thing right, And there it's
even trickier because you know, the consciousness like one of
those your reducible mysteries, right that that philosophy and science
hasn't really come up with a good account for it. Right,
there's still this sort of irreconcilable debates going back two
thousand years about uh, you know, dualism versus physicalism, et cetera. Uh,
and what is the nature of consciousness as a as
a as an aspect of reality is something we're still
really like barely getting our teeth into. And so you
have to like come to some preliminary you know, conclusion
or a preliminary view of the nature of consciousness in
the structure of reality to then even try to you know,
baseline a prior for is something like remote viewing, or
is something like uh, you know, pside phenomenon real And
then you know, to add difficulty to the whole thing,
you have to then take those two separate extremely fraud
analytic domains and push them together, right to have to
connect you know, some candidate theory of NHI to some
candidate theory of consciousness in reality that that accounts for
all these anomalists, you know, stories coming out of apparently
credible individuals like this individual, and of course the long
history of government research and scientific sort of behind the
curtain activity. And so I don't dismiss it at all.
I think it's it's the most it's it's particularly challenging
I think for most people because a lot of people
don't have like a good mental model or even like
a baseline, uh, philosophical or scientific framework that can even
even help try to account for it in a naturalistic way, right,
Like I'm funnily a naturalist. I don't believe as anything
is like just like universe just does things, right that
just you know, random that you can't explain, everything is
ultimately explainable, right, just requires a conceptual framework that maybe
we haven't developed yet. And I think, yeah, these phenomena
are like the most challenging parts of that because they
through you into the domains of our of our knowledge,
where we're the most ignorant, and where the anxiety about
that ignorance is the most acute, and people are sometimes
especially you know, these two things that probably the most
uh sort of anxiety inducing, right, the idea that there's
a higher form of intelligence that we don't understand that
is potentially interacting with us, uh, with motives that we
you know, only can barely discern. And then consciousness, which
is like the very essence of who we are right
as like you know, beings in the world, and the
idea that that is there's there's degrees of freedom asssy
with that could be empowering but also terrifying, depending on
on your on your on your stance, right. Uh, and
it put those two together, right, meaning that there's a
way of using or leveraging or or or adapting your
your certain sort of consciousness, a certain state of consciousness
in a way that connects with or engages with, you know,
an alien craft or some non human intelligence that is
like like that requires a lot of leaps right in
an election, truly psychologically, So I get why people would
would would watch that last night and just be like,
I can't like that's a that's a too big of
a pill for me to swallow at this point. But
I don't know, like reality is under no obligation to
like respect your psychological tolerance, right or discomfort, and uh,
you know, it is just what it is, so you know,
it's important to kind of keep it open mind.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, one thing that that crossed my mind
is you know he was talking about you know, them
calling these craft and you know they're either knocked out
of the sky or or they land, but you know
what's in them? So if you are there pilots, is
there a non human entity in these vehicles that they're
bringing down? Which leads you to wonder, well, you know,
what are done with them, you know, what are done
with these nhai these entities. If if these things are
knocked down and there are pilots in them, what happens
to them? I mean?
Speaker 2: And and then of course.
Speaker 1: The ethical the ethical question, you know, really just you know,
kind of comes to you know, comes to mind. But
but but as far as like the whole scionic thing,
do you think that aspect of the story hurt the
credibility of the story or as you you know, say,
you know you can't pick or choose what the truth is?
Do you think it was Do you think it was
a good call having that part of the you know,
that aspect of the story in there.
Speaker 3: I'm one of these people who's just like, if you
can't take it, that's your problem, right, Like, uh, you know,
there's the reality is what it reality is, If these
are the facts that it has to by this individual.
I think it would be irresponsible to sort of self
censor just because you think a certain set of individuals
aren't going to be psychologically or or or scientifically inclined, right,
I think you just need to lay out, as Dary
Nolan would saying, like lay out the data the first
person experience, right, whether it's whether it's uh, you know,
what's underlying that phenomenon, what ex lanes it is, you know,
several steps of work to even get your arms around.
But I think just to deny or just to ignore
what is apparent, like you know, empirical observations is leaving
stuff off the table. Right It's like, Okay, there are
people out there that are apparently trained by the US
government to do this thing, and there are highly trained
individual's associated with Special four Forces who are conducting these
operations to bring these craft in the possession of the
US government or private era you know, aerospace contractors, And
these are things that have been said to our national
leadership inside you know, skiffs inside DC. That seems like
a thing I want to know. I don't necessarily know
how to make like what to make of it, But
it seems like just because people get uncomfortable with it
is not a reason not to talk about it. And
I don't know, I don't know what PREMU face you
why that is any less you know of an issue
than the idea non human intelligence, right like flying around
our aerospace willy nilly, or that our our garment has
been trying to reverse into your like it's all weird
and bizarre and absurd to a certain extent, and so
it seems a bit arbitrary to draw a particular line
and say no, no, this is too bizarre and too absurd.
I don't know, I'm I uh, maybe I'm just psychologically
I have a pretty broad broad threshold for for for
this sort of stuff, because I try to say together, like,
the world is what it is, right, you want to
understand the world like you got to meet it where
where it is right, and that requires getting outside of
a particular comfort zone and also not imposing any little
of lateent attitudes or preconceptions right on it right, And
that that goes for the you know, the skeptics as
well as the folks that believe this is all true,
because a lot of people that you know fervently have
a view on the reality of all this also have
loaded in a lot of other metaphysical ideas associate with
this phenomenon, and that can also contort their interpretation of
these sorts of phenomenon. And I try to remain as
neutral as possible and just try to like take the
first hand experiences and observations and not try to dismiss anything.
Speaker 1: Yeah, absolutely. I want to move on to the health
effects part of the interview. So Jake described significant health
effects he and his coworkers experienced after transporting a crate
that contained some kind of item.
Speaker 2: They had no idea what was in this mystery crate.
Speaker 1: He stated that they would often transport these crates having
literally no idea what's in them. And doctor Gary Nolan
looked at his medical records and stated that it looked
like they likely had some kind of radiation exposure. I mean,
there is a long history in the literature of people
that are coming in close contact with UAP having similar
sort of health effects, correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And you can go back to the to the
Randalls incident, right they got you know, their I think
their health records were classified and then it took uh
took John McCain to release them and they got their
benefits paid out. And yeah, Gary Nolan of course has
led that study right where they were trying to decipiliguate
the traditional heavness syndrome, you know, uh, you know, adversary
attacks on our intelligence and military personnel from these more
anomalous encounters, uh, where Yeah, there was clear physiological effects.
I think part of the was it the as APP.
I think they'd done some uh some papers on you know,
sort of subcutaneous near field effects of exposure to to
to these types of craft, and I think, yeah, this
is this is you know, an area where there's been
a lot, unfortunately of of of of ANET data associated
with military intelligence personnel encountering an almost craft or or
other phenomenon and developing you know, physiological effects. And think
Glue has talked about this as well. Sure abdict of
a lot of their you know what they were looking
at is you know, under a tip. So yeah, I
mean it stands to reason the right if you're going
to have weird things you don't exactly know how they operate.
You know what we're saying, what propulsion or what energy
source and you don't tell these guys like what's in
the box. It seems a bit irresponsible to me. But
then again, the people running these programs maybe have a
different sense of the calculations on collateral damage and effects
on the personnel.
Speaker 1: You know, which is really really sad, you know. And
he mentioned that his team like if they were say
like transporting a nuclear weapon or biological weapon, you know,
some kind of NBC item that the team would have
been informed of the cargo so that they could you know,
wear appropriate a protective protective gear so you know the
health effects that are experienced by this team. You know
this To me, this syndicates that this defense contra actor. Uh,
it doesn't really like take you know, take it seriously.
So is like, is this an example or or just
one more reason why Congress should hold a church church
committee type uh, you know type hearing to get into
these sorts of things. If if if our men and
women that have you know, worn the uniform serve this
country are being put in harm's way and they don't
seem to care about it, it mean if that doesn't
call for a hearing, I don't know what does.
Speaker 3: Yeah, not just the fact that you have you know,
probably I think documented medical evidence right in their in
their in their records that I think Gary looked at
that these individuals associated with this this operational basically similar
similar effects. But the I want to go back to
the tough books thing because that that's the thing that
I sticks out of my mind, is like the WTF
for that? Because that was happening, that's happening on us
soil right. I think you said the High Sierras in California. Yeah,
these Pansemic tough books, they were being sent out, and
I think that it wasn't in the clip, but it
was in the News Nation article. There's a reference to
the fact that the allegation is that these tough books
were put were basically collecting sensor data illegally by the contractor,
and the contractor was sending his team out to go
basically like retrieve these to kind of cover it up,
like the implication being that there are some you know,
legacy program activity is taking place, and the contractor wanted
to surveptitiously collect their own data on maybe some test
flights of some things, right, and get themselves bargaining power
maybe over another contractor, or over the government sponsor or
whatever like who knows, right, But there was a clear
allegation that these tough books were there collecting data you
know institute, right, because normally you wouldn't do that, right normally,
you know, you're you're up in a remote area. You
want to try to do like a satellite uplink right
to try to you don't have to fly out an
entire helicopter out there, just to get like one hard
drive from a computer, right, not not the most like
efficient way to do a collection operation. Uh So, clearly
this was like you know, put They're putting these things
in place in a very deniable way, in a very
covert way, and they didn't want people to know about them.
And his allegation after feeling very squirrely about the nature
of their intelligence collection that they're their intelligence tasking on
one of these operations, they get there and there's evidence
of shots fired. I'm sorry, but like that's on US soil.
Is like that needs investigation, Like why is there? Why
are there apparent firefights happening on US soil up in
the mountains over these you know, Panasonic tough books with
potentially illegal sensor data being collected on you know, very
sensitive program operations like this. The whole thing is insane
and squirrellly and like ridiculous, and it's like, but it
can't just be dismissed, Like this guy's making a very
serious allegation here, and then the whole thing about they
find them later in the you know, you know, twenty
feet down in a lake.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what's that about?
Speaker 3: So many questions about that, Like one, how do they
how do they find that?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 3: Like what intelligence told them it was dropped in a
lake that have overhead collection? Was there like a little
beacon in it? And then they get there, like it's
not easy to find like a little container of hard
drives like in a lake, right, Like how do they
find that? Like who's diving? Like there's so many questions
I have just about that story, right, Like take away
the OAP thing. If it was just an allegation that
a contractor is conducting essentially these off booked operations on
American soil to collect sensor data on some test or
some other operational activity taking place, and it sends out
its own sort of you know, its own crew to
go recover these things. That crew says that there's been
a firefight. Then they get weird intelligence that they think
they're being set up. Like okay, forget the OAP thing,
that that itself seems highly problematic and requires investigation, like well,
what's who's their contractor? Like who's the per conswer here?
Like what was going on? That seems highly irregular? It's
had taken place like in California, Right, this is not
like some you know back you know, backwater in Afghanistan.
This is like right here, so that whole thing. People
will obviously focus on the egg video and everything else,
but like that was bananas from from my perspective. I
have so many questions about that.
Speaker 2: But yeah, no, and what was interesting too.
Speaker 1: I don't remember exactly how he described it, but I
think he said he went back to the Pentagon and
I don't know if it was the program manager he
ran into or you know, he confronted somebody about this
thing and the guy said, you know, it's best we
not talk about it, but do you remember exactly what
it was?
Speaker 2: I'm a little bit fuzzy.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's another thing I want. I want to like
because I think what, like my interpretation again from the
story was that that particular operation cluded him and his
team into something was fundamentally wrong with all of this, right,
and they felt like their lives were in danger, that
they're being set up right, that they're essentially, you know,
the hidden hand that could be cut off, right, they're expendable,
fundamentally right, and that then they decided to figure out, okay,
maybe to get some insurance on themselves. Right, if you
feel like you're expendable and maybe your employer or somebody
else is looking to set you up, Like what do
you do. You try to get insurance, right, you try
to get something that like provides you leverage. And and
then maybe they did that, and then they started doing
their own essentially counterintelligence operation, maybe on their own employer,
and they found themselves in DC apparently connecting surveillance on
who knows who That got them back to the security
officer associated with I believe they're their contractor organization and
a sister organization again not sure who who they're talking
about where they confronted this gentleman and it was kind
of this denial, noncommittal sort of thing. But that again,
like I'm very I'm sort of confused by that whole
sequence of like, well, what was the nature of the threat?
Who are these like, what is this organization? What what
was the like the leverage that you've got right, right?
And maybe obviously you can't make that public, right because
then it goes away and is the threat gone? Right?
I think I've also heard that during the last year
and a half, as Ross's were putting a story that
a number of other you know, special operators came into
kind of at provide protection for for Jake and other people. So,
you know, I step back and I look at this,
and it seems quite shocking, right, like people focused on
this egg thing and kind of making kind of making
light of the situation, which is to me a bit
juvenile when you actually someone who serve their country at
a very high level and backed up by people with
extremely you know, strong professional bona fides as you know,
special operators who are saying like they felt credibly threatened
by their own you know, contract organization, maybe in cahoots
with the US government to like uh, you know, set
them up or even kill them, and that maybe even
colleagues of theirs were killed. Like that's as serious as
as it gets, of course, and who knows. I mean,
you could you could disbelieve any of the UAP technology
on an origin alien stuff or psionic stuff and just
be like, well, you know, these guys are actual you know,
military personnel alleging like major impropriety, maybe even murder on
behalf of a cover up of a secret government pergract.
Like that's that's page one news for me. And if
the alien stuff is there, well then of course then
it makes it even more significant.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's it's truly, it's it's sad, you know.
And the other thing too, is that him speaking about that.
Maybe not those specific details, but that lines up with
what we have been hearing for quite some time that
this sort of this sort of thing, this sort of
thing happens. If you have a few more minutes, I'd
love to throw some adius questions your way. Sure cool, okay, great. Firstly,
Science Bob. We love Science Bob, he says, Welcome to
the mug Brigade. Matthew pist don't forget mine. Yeah, I
do need to make some mugs. Glad you are giving
us your perspective. So I thank you, Science Bob. We're
very happy to have Matthew back. Richard Nelson, what about
the UFO called in that fell out of the sky?
Did they go to the retrieve it? What about the
UFO they called in that fell out of the sky.
Did they go to retrieve it? I think he said
they did. I don't recall.
Speaker 3: Sure. Again, this is another episode. There are so many
from that last forty month. It's like every two minutes
there was another thing that you wanted to like zoom
in and just have like an hour deep dive just
on that. But like at the very end, right they
talk about the Skywatcher operation right now, a private sector
initiative taking individuals associate with these legacy programs and apparently
psionic assets that have this either endogenous and or developed
trained ability to yeah, call down or engage with and
communicate or control who knows, some subset of the alleged
non human intelligence craft that are in our presence and
bring them down, right, But the ledge during that operation
that essentially there was like a rogue UAP that came
in and effectively like shot or somehow knocked the one
that they were engaging with out of the sky, and
that they showed some blurry images of what might be
that object kind of coming down again. Kind of very
inconclusive to whatever I was able to see on the
News Nation program. Maybe they have, you know, a lot
of data that they've backed up on that. I don't
know if they actually want to retrieve it. I don't
actually know where that was, if it was in control
it was, if it was in a controlled space, I
don't know what capabilities Scott Watcher has to like airlift
you know, out there, or do facility protection or do
like perimeter protection actually get a craft like that TBD.
Seems like they have a lot of resources, but I'm
not aware that they actually retrieved that particular object. But yeah,
but that that whole episode, right, it's itself right, like
I want to I want to learn a lot more
about that, and it's very suggestive of something anomalous.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Uh, and again connects into this like, Okay, you can
try to understand how this whole synic thing is happening,
if it's real or not. But conducting real operations, Okay,
it's like, well you could just you know, do it, right, like,
just do it and then see if it happens again.
It's like science is repeatable, and so if this is
a repeatable phenomenon, then it's just amount of executing it
at scale with high quality sensor data, with multiple observations
and prove to the world that it's real. Right, this
should be like like the same thing with the size stuff, right, Like,
because it's been couched in so much stigma, I think
that like all this serious research has been done behind
the curtain, right most you know, only a few like
really heterodox fringe scientists have even tried to touch this
stuff and even then it's kind of ambiguous. Sometimes you
get decent sort of suggestive results some places, but I
think you need like well resourced, serious professional u rigorous
scientific efforts and all these domains, and you can do
it on the private sector, like reality is there, right,
So you don't need to wait for big day government's
permission to tell you all this stuff. If you just
have the resources and the skills and you know the focus,
you can just do it and then prove to the
world whether it's real or not. I think that's like
potentially the prospect that we might be seeing in the
next few months.
Speaker 1: Who knows, Yeah, yeah, nope, nope, for sure. So at
the end of the day, do you think this interview
moved the needle in terms of disclosure, motivating Congress to
act on this more than they have and even better,
hopefully motivate the incoming Trump administration to finally right this wrong.
Speaker 3: I think this I've heard this is just the first
of many things right coming right, and that you know,
whether it's a dam breaking, What this signifies is an
inflection point in the perception by a number of core
individuals that have apparently direct and engagement with these programs
coming out and saying nope, like we're not going to
keep silent anymore, We're not going to tolerate this, and
we're not just going to wait for the government to disclose.
We're going to start doing this ourselves. That is a
quite dramatic change. And if they are it's very serious
about pursuing what amounts to like a private sector disclosure
you know initiative, well that that's potentially you know, a
forcing function for US garment action because if it is
possible that a private sector group could demonstrate it's not
not too distant future, the reality of some of these phenomenon, well,
the government would probably then have to like have its
own plan for the like managing that right, right, And
maybe that's what they prefer. Maybe they would prefer this
to kind of happen a bit, you know, like an
as if way by private sector initiatives sort of guided
by knowledge from the program, right, these people coming out
of these alleged agacy programs to help kind of shape
these private sector initiatives then maybe prepares the ground for
the government to kind of follow on, right, but where
they don't have to be like out in front. Uh,
But I don't know this gets to the more political
decision for the incoming White House. Who's going to be
who's going to own this right? And that hasn't I
don't think that's that's taken shape yet, right if there
is anyone who's willing to kind of take that political responsibility,
at least at the cabinet level, the National Security Council level.
I know a lot of those folks are interested in
the subject. I know, well, obviously you've got Rubio, you've
got Waltz, you've got you know, the President himself on
Rogan saying that many people are interested, the people going
from space like, so clearly they know what's going on
to a certain extent, I think it's wrapped up in
a lot of other political dynamics taking place obviously in
the new administration. So I don't know how they will.
I don't know if there's a master plan, to be
honest about how this because this is you know, that
gets in the whole ball of wax about you know
the implications of official disclosure, geopolitical, sociological, economic, et cetera.
And maybe you know they're happy to kind of let
let these special ops guys and some private sector initiatives
go forward and and you know kind of move the
needle right on its own, and the government can kind
of play a bit play a bit dumb right in
the meantime, but meanwhile kind of like behind the scenes
like wink and nod at it or support it. I
don't know that seems like a plausible path. We could
we could be you know, on the next few months,
who knows. But all it takes though, is like more
people like him, right or other people, more senior people
coming out and and these tend to have like a
it's kind of be like a nonlinear thing. Like we
had like kind of a dead zone quiet period right
after Rush, and if you actually go back, it was
like that's when this guy basically kind of decided to
you know, start engaging. Right, There's a year and a
half was when it took for kind of this story
to build up. So that and like a lot potentially
you know on like like on that sort of timescale,
kind of just stating for a year or year and
a half and maybe they're already now. And the you know,
inflection point of a new administration is a natural point
for for for things to come out, and once somebody
does it, and it sets a permission structure for other
people to do it, and it sort of broadens the conversation.
And yeah, this whole psionic thing is probably not going
to be the think the government. I think, will you know,
take the first crack at addressing. But it sort of
it moves the Overton window, like so far that like
just acknowledging the non the reality of you know, of
of non human objects that are not of our apparent creation.
You know, at least it always makes that sound a
little bit easier than like we have to acknowledge all
this other stuff. But I know that was a rambling
answer to the question. I don't really know what administration
is going to do. I don't know if they even
know what they're going to do. I think it's going
to be dictated more by external events. Ideally, you would
have like a plan, you'd have a person in charge.
You'd have you know, somebody laying out like the Carl Nell,
the kind of thing. You'd have the kind of the
the guy kind of setting out the the contours of
of a of a of a process. But in the
absence of that, you're going to get individuals taking the
initiative and the conversation will just be driven by journalists
and and folks like you and Ross who are just
you know, taking pieces of you know, touching parts of
the elephant and saying like, hey, like there's an elephant here. Uh,
and yeah, that's people are looking for, like the grand
the grand revelation, Right, I know that it's going to happen.
It's like, uh, we're going to find more and more
weird things, uh being uh kind of drawn out as
individuals like Jake come out and it's not it's not
the story everyone thought it was. Right, Like that almost
makes it seem more likely to be true. Right if
it was if it was if it was just this,
if it was this big syop, right, I don't think
they would throw the psionic thing in there, right, that
that would be a really bad syop. Right. If you're
trying to get people to to believe this thing, they're
not they're not really doing their their their job right
to make this kind of a palatable siop. Like there's
stuff in the Christmas turkey with with a lot of
things that are not easy to digest and make people
just kind of throw their hands up and be like
this is too much.
Speaker 1: Yeah, absolutely so, Matthew. How can folks find you on
social media? Follow your follow your I mean you have
really great posts on X. I love reading your stuff.
Speaker 3: I mean I just spew you on on on X.
Yeah at Matthew Underscore Pines. You know, that's where I
riff on this stuff, and that's basically it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, awesome, Great well, Matthew, thank you very much for
joining us and your your coffee mug, your Good Trouble
coffee mug is on its way a priority overnight, and
hopefully next time we have you on the show, we'll
see you drinking out of it.
Speaker 2: I'll be drinking out of my ns A mug.
Speaker 3: I'm looking forward to it.
Speaker 1: All right, great, all right, Matthew Pines, Ladies and gentlemen, folks. Yeah,
that was uh, that was just we love. Matthew always
has just such a a in depth analysis of all
of all of this related to you know, national security.
I mean, the guy, he can talk for days about bitcoin,
just about just about anything. Just a fan, fantastic, fantastic guest.
And I want to I want to really kind of
touch on one of the points that he made, which
I think is really really important. I think everyone including myself,
initially focused on the on the video on this egg,
and of course you you saw posts or gifts of
you know, Morgan Mindy and Robin Williams coming out of
the egg and all of that. Some people were impressed
by the footage, some people, uh were not. It was,
you know, a bit bit of a mixed bag. But
a few things here. I can absolutely guarantee you this
guy is the real deal, period the end, full stop.
He is the real deal. I don't know how else
to say it. I think some other things that will
will come out in the near future will will reinforce it.
But there is zero doubt about this guy. I can
tell you for a fact. And the other thing that
I can tell you for a fact is these guys
that put themselves out there, like like Jake Barber, like
David Grush and others, when you know when they say
that they're they're putting their lives at risk. This this
isn't hyperbole, This is fact. I can't even begin to
tell you how many things have been related to me
in confidence over Some of the things that the CIA,
the Office of Global Access has been involved with are
flat out criminal. When you have a department of Defense.
When you have an intelligence community, and especially especially when
you have one particular, very very large defense contractor, and
I mean very large defense contractor that isn't engaged in
kinetic retaliation against whistleblowers, against former special forces, against former
Joint Special Operations Command people.
Speaker 2: When you have.
Speaker 1: A defense contractor that we literally give trillions of dollars
to or billions engaged in that, in that kind of criminality,
it is literally like you have gangster mentality going on
in the Pentagon, in the IC, in the Office of
Global Access running under the CIA, DS and T, people
like former DS and T direct head of DS and T,
Glenn Gaffney, who I submitted a letter to Congress that
is now part of the Congressional record.
Speaker 2: Glenn Gaffney was brought.
Speaker 1: On by doctor Sean Kirkpatrick, the director of the Pentagon's
All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office.
Speaker 2: Glenn Gaffany was brought.
Speaker 1: On by doctor Sean Kirkpatrick to sit on this secret
technical Advisory Board for ARROW. I was the first on
here on the Good Trouble Show to reveal the existence
of this committee. Members of Congress hearing this, we know
folks on Congress and their staffers watched this show, went
to Kirkpatrick when he was still running ARROW and asked,
who is on this committee that you put together? And
guess what Sean Kirkpatrick did. He refused to tell members
of Congress who he put on that committee. And in
my letter to Congress that is now part of the
official Congressional record, I named Glenn Gaffney as being one
of those people. So I want you to think about this.
The CIA, under the Office of Global Access, super secret
Office of Global Access.
Speaker 2: They have been involved.
Speaker 1: They are so involved in the whole legacy cr program
it's not even funny. We detailed this, Chris Sharp, Josh
Boswell and I detailed this in a article that we
wrote for The Daily Mail back in twenty.
Speaker 2: Twenty twenty four. I'm sorry, twenty twenty three. So you
have the CIA, the.
Speaker 1: CIA DS and T, Office Global Access, who would be
well aware of the head of DS and T, Director
of Science and Technology for the CIA, would be well
aware of kinetic retaliation and by that I mean physical
violence against our men and women that have worn the uniform.
That person would have had visibility into that. So here
you have the Pentagon's UFO program, UAP program.
Speaker 2: Arrow the director.
Speaker 1: The director of that ARROW is supposed to be the
authorized recipient for whistleblowers such as Jake Barber to go
and testify to to give a protected disclosure that would
not be in violation of their National Security Non Disclosure Act.
So he goes in there, tells Arrow, tells Sean Kirkpatrick
about what has occurred, what he knows, what he has
been involved with in terms of the Deep Legacy program,
tells Kirkpatrick this, it's supposed to be a protected disclosure.
It's supposed to be confidential. And guess who Sean Kirkpatrick
has on that advisory board. The very guy that is
one of the main gatekeepers, was one of the main gatekeepers.
I have no idea if he's there now, Glenn Gaffney, he's.
Speaker 2: Got that guy sitting on the board.
Speaker 1: So here you have a whistleblower who is putting his
right life at risk going into Dodero making a protected
disclosure to the guy who all very well is likely
telling this guy that runs DS and T, who is
the gatekeeper of the Deep legacy, one of the gatekeepers
of the Deep Legacy program. I mean not convinced me
that that info is not getting back channeled in the
CIA to the CIA. How disgusting is that it's unpatriotic.
It blows my mind how our government has uh just
kind of morphed into.
Speaker 2: A sh shell of.
Speaker 1: Its of its previous self as a as a democracy.
When when you have the United States government, when you
have big, big defense contractors knocking people out and Congress
isn't doing anything about it. I mean, it's it's it's
it is. It is wrong on so many levels, not
to mention just inhumane, but just as as an as
an American. It makes me ashamed about my country that
this is the kind of stuff that has gone on.
The fact that, uh, that the the anomalous health injuries,
that Havanah syndrome. I think you're going to find out
that there were certain people in the Biden administration that
directed the CIA to continue to cover that up. I
think that there are going to be some heads that
are going to roll. They are already in there, in there.
I think it was a last week Biden administration finally
came out and said, uh, oh, well you know what, Uh,
maybe that CIA report saying that a lot of anomalist
health injuries or Havannah syndrome is all fake. Oh, actually,
we do think, uh, there may have been something to that.
You know, the reason they're doing that is they're trying
to cover their assets.
Speaker 2: That's exactly why.
Speaker 1: So here you have a an intelligence community, the UH
Office of Director of National Intelligence, Avril Haynes, whom I
think I predict we will be hearing hearing more about
that name in the year ahead. In this year, you've
got this, this whole intelligence apparatus covering up the fact
that men and women in various three letter agencies on
assignment overseas and even in the even here in the US,
are being attacked by some kind of electronic weapon, and
they're covering it up.
Speaker 2: They are lying to Congress.
Speaker 1: You have seen this time and time again with the
former director of ERROLD, doctor Sean Kirkpatrick, flat out lying
to Congress. I certainly hope that people like doctor Sean Kirkpatrick,
the former director UH, former head of the CIA Directorate
of Science and Technology, Glenn Gaffney, UH, the former head
of the Office of a Global Act Doug Wolf, those
folks need to be put on on the stand under oath.
They need to be asked, what did you know were
you aware that whistleblowers were being targeted in ways that
would land anyone else in federal prison for life. Ask
those folks under oath, ask ask the current director of
ARROW if Glenn Gaffney is still sitting on that technical
advisory board for ARROW. I almost guarant damn tee you
it is or he is. And for those of you
watching in Congress or staffers, the other question you should
demand is to know exactly who is sitting on this
classed technical advisory group on AEROW, because I guarantee you
it's not just Glenn Gaffney that you will be surprised
are sitting on that committee right now. It is literally
like the fox watching watching the you know, the the
hen House. People like patriots, like Jake Barber, David Grush.
These folks are putting country before self. They realized while
they were there that something was going on that was
a cancer on this democracy, a cancer that must be excised,
a malignant tumor that has run rampant in the intelligence
community and the Pentagon. These folks, this is the real story.
These folks are true American patriots. These are folks that
could have taken the easy way out, taken some cushy,
cushy job by Sean Kirkpatrick taking his cushy job at
Betel Memorial Institute over at Oakridge National Laboratories, which, by
the way, the folks that are the that have been
on the Deep Legacy program. That's one of the mechanisms
that these folks use to keep these people in line
is they are financially set. They know that if they
play ball, if they keep their mouths shut, they've got
easy You know, they're going to be living on Easy
Street for the rest of their career and after retirement.
As long as you stay with the program and do
what the Legacy Deep Legacy Program tells you to do,
you're going to be laughing all the way to the bank.
Speaker 2: It's greed. It's absolute greed.
Speaker 1: That what you know, the story that that Jake Barbara
was talking about with with this apparent firefight between defense
contractors fighting over tough books. You know, Eisenhower said to
wear the military industrial complex. But unfortunately, I think he
was the guy that set all that up. You created
this just literal Frankenstein monster that has has just.
Speaker 2: Literally run amock. The fact that you have.
Speaker 1: American veterans that have to worry about their personal safety
because they whistle blue about something that they knew was illegal,
that they knew were felonies, that they have to sit
and worry about that, worry about being uh being taken out,
worried about being assassinated, worried that, you know, there is
a rogue group of Jaysok operators running around doing this stuff.
Having to worry about defense contractors doing this. I guarantee
it anybody that is working for if you're a C
suite person in these two major defense contractors and you
know exactly who you are, stuff is going to come out.
And it's not one person holding the information. It's many
people are going to come out. They are going to
out you guys. And it doesn't matter if you were
doing this at the direction of the American government as
part of some waived special access program controlled access program.
You are criminally liable your corporation with this. When the
C suite knows about that kind of criminality taking place.
I don't think you're I don't think the American government
is going to put you out of business because you're
too important for for our national defense. But I guarant
Dan Tea just about everyone in that c suite in
these defense contractors that have engaged in this level of
illegality are going to find themselves in federal prison, and
they deserve it. It's just absolutely disgusting that people like
Jake Barber, like David Grush, lou Elizondo and others have
to worry about their personal safety even while they're at home. Congress,
you must hold a church level, a church type committee
in the Senate where people are under oath, where the
CIA is not trying to dilute the witnesses like what
happened CIA did on the Church Committee Georgia. Former President
George Bush went in there and cut a kind of
like backroom deal to make sure that the journalists that
were on the CIA payroll we're not outed.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's the that's the.
Speaker 1: Kind of corruption that that has been that has infected
this government for literal, literal decades. I would you know,
and I would say say this to uh, hopefully Don Junior,
Donald Trump Junior, if you're watching this or uh President Trump.
I can't imagine you're watching this show, but if you are,
this would be my message to you to your administration.
Back in your previous presidency, when I would hear you
talk about the deep state. I thought it was a
big joke. I thought you were being paranoid.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: I just thought it was a bunch of bologney. And
how wrong I was since becoming involved in this topic.
Uh Uh. My work at UAP Disclosure Fund and the
relationships that I have with the current former members in
the intelligence community, in the Department of Defense, and there
are good people that are trying to right this wrong.
They know that there are things going on in the
leadership of their three letter agencies that is unconstitutional and criminal.
There are folks out there trying to do the right thing.
But my message to this incoming administration, to Don Junior
and President Trump, there is no better illustration of this
deep state than what has been going on with this,
with the UAP issue, with the AHI anomaloust health injuries.
There is no better illustration. The same people that block
stuff from you in your previous administration, that gatekeep things,
gate keep certain things from President Trump and others, these
are the same exact same people that are gatekeeping the
deep Legacy program, deep legacy UAP program.
Speaker 2: They are these same individuals.
Speaker 1: So my message to this incoming administration is if if
you want to get rid of this swamp, if you
want to get rid of try to root out this
this deep state stuff that's been going on.
Speaker 2: And I'm a Democrat. You're hearing this from a Democrat
because this is this is a by part, is an issue.
Speaker 1: Both both sides of the aisle need to get get
in line with this, because when when you have a
malignant tumor on the on the on the very constitution
of the United States, Democrats and Republicans should be equally
enraged and equally dedicated to do something about this. And
I certainly would encourage this incoming administration to do the
right thing. It's time to rip off the band aid.
It's time to expose what has been going on in
our intelligence community and the Department of Defense and the
Department of Energy and the National Security Administration. Americans deserve
to know, and Americans moreover deserve to know that they
have a functioning democracy, because I can tell you right
now it is not the case. If half of America
had any idea of what has been going on, I
swear to God, I think there would be riots in
the street. People have no idea how much this whole
cancer has metastasized, and that you have our American veterans,
men and women that have worn the uniform, men and
women that have served our country and with dignity and
honor given. Some that have given all the country, like
Jake Barber, like David Grush, which, oh, by the way,
whatever happened, uh with with the with the investigation in
the intelligence community with David Grush? Why wasn't something done
with that? I think you need the folks in this
current administration need to ask certain national security officials what
exactly they were up to.
Speaker 2: They need to ask.
Speaker 1: National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan under oath exactly what he
knew and what decisions he made regarding these these particular things.
Speaker 2: They need to put up on under oath.
Speaker 1: This administration needs to have the the Director of the
Office Director of National Intelligence, Averrol Haines, under oath need
to be asking these folks questions under oath and find
out exactly what occurred under this administration. And you know,
and I'm not bagging on the Biden administration a writ large.
This kind of stuff has been going on through multiple administrations,
Republican and Democrat.
Speaker 2: But enough is enough.
Speaker 1: People, you either have a democracy or you don't, and
right now we do not. And my hope is that
this administration will finally rip off the band aid and
hold people accountable. Folks, thanks for thanks for tuning in,
really appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Again.
Speaker 1: This coming a week, we have a special episode with
Lou Alizondo and Lieutenant Colonel John Blytch, a former Delta
Force operator, and of course doctor Gary Nolan. We are
huge fans of all of these folks. These again are
our examples of of you know, real American patriots are
doing the right thing for our country. We should be
grateful for the sacrifices they've made. We will announce when
this show will air. It'll be probably early to midnext week.
Watch on our Twitter account. I'm sorry x at Good
Trouble Show. Anyway, Thanks, thanks everyone for tuning in, and
we will see you in just a few days