Speaker 1: Imagine for a second that you are the President of
the United States. Okay, you're sitting in the Oval Office.
It is two in the morning, right. You have the
nuclear codes literally within arms reach. You have these daily
briefings on every single geopolitical shift, every terror threat, every
economic wobble, every covert operation happening in the absolute dark
corners of the globe.
Speaker 2: You are arguably the most informed person on the planet.
Speaker 1: Exactly, you have access to the library of secrets that
literally no one else gets to see.
Speaker 2: It is the ultimate position of knowledge, or at least
we assume it is. We assume that the clearance level
of the commander in chief is absolute, right.
Speaker 1: But there is one one specific question that seems to
loom a lot larger than all the rest, and it
is the question that every single one of us has
asked at some point, usually while you're staring up at
a night sky, during a camping trip or just taking
the dog out for a walk.
Speaker 2: Are we alone?
Speaker 1: Are we alone? It is the ultimate secret.
Speaker 2: And the one that arguably changes every thing about how
we view ourselves, our history, our religions, and obviously our future.
And the common assumption is pretty straightforward. If anyone knows
the answer, the real, actual answer. It has to be
the president.
Speaker 1: We assume they know. We assume there's a book like
in that one movie, or a bunker or a specific
Manila folder with a giant red stamp on.
Speaker 2: It, right, a big top secret stamp.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But what if the answer isn't just a simple
yes or no hidden in a vault somewhere. What if
the relationship between the Oval Office and the unexplained is
actually significantly more personal.
Speaker 2: That is where the data we have today takes a
very strange, very compelling turn, because if you look at
the numbers, and I want us to really dig into
the statistics today, because they are frankly baffling. Being the
president doesn't just give you clearance. It seemingly makes you
a magnet.
Speaker 1: It sounds totally insane. I know, I looked at these
numbers maybe three times before we started recording, just to
be sure.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they jump right off the page.
Speaker 1: They really do. But what if I told you that
being president makes you significantly more likely to see a
UFO than the average everyday citizen. And I am not
talking about a rounding error or a slight statistical bump.
I am talking about a massive, inexplicable anomaly.
Speaker 2: It's a deviation so large it forces us to ask
a totally different kind of question. And we aren't just
talking about modern sightings, you know, radar blips or the
famous tic TAC videos from the Navy pilots that have
been all over the news lately. We were talking about
a thread, a thrilling thread, if you will, that runs
all the way back to the very foundation of the country.
Speaker 1: We are going back to the freezing woods of Valley
Forge in seventeen seventy seven, to a vision that might
have quite literally saved the American Revolution.
Speaker 2: And potentially scripted the entire history of the United States.
Speaker 1: Welcome to thrilling threads. Today we are pulling on perhaps
the most controversial, high stakes, loose end in American history.
We are looking at the interception of the White House
and well, whatever is out there, it is.
Speaker 2: Great to be here, and I think it is really
important to set the stage for you listening right off
the bat. Today isn't about ghost stories. Now, it isn't
about tinfoil hats or conspiracy theories you found on a
message board at three in the morning. We are looking
at official transcripts. We are looking at reports from the
History Channel. We are examining interviews with former Ministry of
Defense officials, political reporters, and actual archival accounts regarding George Washington.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this because usually when we talk about
this stuff, it is very fringe. It's hazy cell phone
videos and anonymous witnesses. But the sources we are looking
at today come from incredibly high level interviews. We are
talking about interactions between major national news anchors and sitting presidents.
Speaker 2: We are analyzing power, secrecy and the potential influence of
non human intelligence on human history. And our mission today
is to analyze these claims exactly as they were reported.
We aren't taking any political sides here, whether the source
leans left or right. We are just presenting the material impartially.
We aren't endorsing them as absolute and disputable fact, but
we arenalyzed the implications if they are true.
Speaker 1: What does it mean if the destiny of the United
States isn't entirely in human hands?
Speaker 2: Exactly?
Speaker 1: That is the question that kept me up last night.
So buckle up. We are going on a journey from
the G twenty summit in Osaka all the way back
to the Revolutionary War. Let's start with the modern day,
or well, twenty nineteen, a simpler time.
Speaker 2: Maybe a very different political landscape certainly, but the questions
were starting to fundamentally change totally.
Speaker 1: So I want to set the scene for you. It
is Osaka, Japan, July twenty nineteen. It is the G
twenty Summit. You have the most powerful people in the
entire world all gathered in one room, high stakes trade wars, diplomacy,
global economy stuff. And amidst all this intense political pressure,
you have Tucker Carlson sitting down with President Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: And context is really key here. Tucker Carlson obviously has
a massive platform, and he is known for asking let's
call them unconventional questions. He doesn't always stick to the standard,
sanitized talking points.
Speaker 1: Right, and in the middle of this interview, Tucker just
goes for it. He asks, point blank are they real?
And he is referring, of course, to UFOs. Now, usually,
historically speaking, this is the moment where a politician.
Speaker 2: Laughs, oh yeah, the giggle factor exactly.
Speaker 1: They chuckle, they make a joke about little green men,
or they smoothly deflect to something about defense spending or
weather balloons.
Speaker 2: For decades. That was the standard defense mechanism. If you
laugh at it, you don't have to give a real answer.
It delegitimizes the question exactly.
Speaker 1: But Trump doesn't laugh. I'm looking at the transcript right here,
and his answer is surprisingly specific. He says, personally, I
tend to doubt it.
Speaker 2: I WoT to pause right there. Personally, I tend to
doubt it. That phrasing is fascinating from a linguistic perspective. Well,
he uses the word personally. He isn't speaking as the
institution of the presidency. He isn't saying the United States
government has determined there is no threat. He isn't saying
our top scientists say it is biologically impossible. He is
giving a personal opinion.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: It creates a deliberate separation between the man himself and
the office.
Speaker 1: He that is a really good catch. It is not
a hard no. It is a yeah. I'm not so sure.
It feels like he is hedging his bets.
Speaker 2: And then he follows it up with a sentence that
really changes the entire game. He says, I've been briefed.
Speaker 1: I've been briefed. That is the key, isn't it.
Speaker 2: It absolutely is Think about what that implies for a
sitting president to go on camera and say I've been briefed.
It confirms that there's a formal governmental mechanism for this information.
It confirms that the topic is considered serious enough, credible enough,
and matters enough to national security to reach the desk
of the.
Speaker 1: President, which is wild in itself. Just imagine that morning briefing.
You are sitting there, maybe having your coffee, and they say,
mister President, here are the unemployment numbers, here is the
troop movement in the Middle East, and oh yeah, here
is the file on the flying discs that our navy
pilots are currently tracking.
Speaker 2: It completely validates the phenomenon, even if he doubts the
alien's part of it. He is confirming that the phenomenon
itself requires a presidential briefing. And Trump continues in the
transcript he admits, we have had people saying that they've
seen things. He specifically validates the pilots and the witnesses, right.
Speaker 1: He doesn't call them crazy. He doesn't dismiss the sightings
as swamp gas or mass hysteria or a trick of
the light. He says, we have people saying they've seen things.
Speaker 2: He is walking a very careful tightrope. He validates the
military personnel because politically you cannot really call your own
talk gun pilots liars or say they are hallucinating. Yeah,
but he distances himself with the extraterrestrial conclusion.
Speaker 1: He says, I don't assume it's correct, but you know,
I have an open mind. That is the catchphrase right there,
an open mind.
Speaker 2: Which is a very safe political stance, but also a
very telling one. It suggests ambiguity. If the answer was clearly, oh,
it is just weather balloons or is just secret Chinese drones,
he would likely just say that. We know. Trump isn't
shy about calling out adversaries. If he thought it was China,
he would probably just say it is China.
Speaker 1: That is true. He's not exactly known for holding back
on that stuff.
Speaker 2: The fact that he keeps the door with I have
an open mind suggests that the briefing he received was
somehow inconclusive or here we go, or that the briefing
contained information that he absolutely cannot share, and personally I
tend to doubt it is the agreed upon cover.
Speaker 1: Story which brings us to a really interesting figure in
our source material, Nick Pope. Yeah, for those listening who
aren't deep in the UFO lore, can you give us
the resume on Nick Pope? Why should we care what
this guy thinks?
Speaker 2: Nick Pope is the real deal. He is a former
civil servant for the British Ministry of Defense in the
early nineties. He literally ran their UFO.
Speaker 1: Desk, an actual UFO desk.
Speaker 2: Yes, his actual job was to investigate these sightings to
see if they posed a legitimate defense threat to the
UK airspace. He knows the bureaucracy of secrecy inside and out.
He knows exactly how governments handle and bury classified information.
Speaker 1: So he is not just some guy on a form.
He is a guy who had the actual clearance exactly.
Speaker 2: And Poop points out something really interesting about the behavior
of presidents regarding this specific topic. He calls it the
mum phenomenon.
Speaker 1: Mum as in keeping mum staying silent right.
Speaker 2: Pope observes a distinct historical pattern. Presidents often speak quite
freely about UFOs before they take.
Speaker 1: Office, like on the campaign trail.
Speaker 2: Yes, Jimmy Carter actually filed an official UFO report when
he was governor of Georgia. He saw something he couldn't explain.
Ronald reaganhead sightings. Bill Clinton was incredibly curious about it
and famously tried to get answers.
Speaker 1: They are super chatty about it. They promise the voters
they will get to the bottom of it and release
the files.
Speaker 2: But the moment they take the oath of office, the
moment they step into the Oval office, total silence. They
go completely mum, they go dark.
Speaker 1: Why what happens in that room.
Speaker 2: Pope's theory is straightforward and quite chilling. They likely know
something that they've decided to keep from the public.
Speaker 1: That gives me chills just hearing it. It implies there
is a threshold of knowledge. You cross into the Oval office,
someone in a dark suit sits you down, shows you
the good stuff, maybe a high resolution photo, maybe a
piece of physical debris, maybe a clear video, and you
instantly realize, Okay, I cannot tweet about this, I cannot
talk about this at a press conference.
Speaker 2: Pope actually questions the morality of it. In the source.
He says, I don't know what they know, and so
perhaps they have a good reason to lie to the
public about it, But I doubt it.
Speaker 1: I doubt it. He seriously doubts that they have a
good reason to lie. That is a heavy accusation coming
from a former government official.
Speaker 2: It is. But if we connect this to the bigger picture,
we really have to ask what constitutes a good reason
to keep the ultimate secret from humanity?
Speaker 1: Panic? Right, the classic war of the world's mass hysteria argument,
people running in the streets.
Speaker 2: That is the standard Hollywood argument, people can't handle the truth.
But maybe it is more practical than that. Maybe the
truth is so complex, maybe it involves alternate dimensions or
advanced consciousness or physics. We don't even have the map
to understand yet that explaining it in a standard thirty
minute press briefing is literally impossible. How do you explain
to the public that reality fundamentally isn't what they think
it is.
Speaker 1: Or is it something a lot darker, like we know
they are here and there is absolutely nothing we can
do about it.
Speaker 2: Exactly. Nothing scares the government more than admitting a total
lack of control. If the briefing is they are here,
they are a thousand times faster than us, and our
weapons are useless. No president wants to go on national
television and say that.
Speaker 1: That is terrifying my fellow Americans. We are not at
the top of the food chain. Good night and good
luck precisely.
Speaker 2: But the public vibe shifted again recently, didn't it. The
source material highlights a major change around the twenty twenty
election cycle.
Speaker 1: Yeah, let's look at that. There is this report from
Damon Steer of the Conway Daily Sun. He is a
reporter up in New Hampshire. Now, New Hampshire is a
key primary state, first in the nation usually, so every
single candidate who wants to be president essentially asked to
go through Damon Steer at some point.
Speaker 2: And by twenty twenty, asking about UFOs wasn't a joke
question anymore.
Speaker 1: It wasn't the let's have a laugh at the end
of the interview kind of question. It wasn't what's your
favorite color. It was treated as a serious policy.
Speaker 2: Question, and the candidates were responding with serious, grounded answers.
The source quotes them saying things like it's very unlikely
that we're alone.
Speaker 1: And crucially, they started talking about an actual action plan.
The source mentions a shift toward looking at what does
the science say, what does our military say?
Speaker 2: It is no longer science fiction. It is becoming a
vital national security and scientific inquiry. It is like this
stigma just evaporated almost overnight.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't say totally evaporated, but the conversation definitely moved
from the supermarket tabloids directly to the situation room. And
that brings us to the most shocking piece of data
in this entire deep dive. I want to spend some
real time on this because when I read this in
our notes, I actually had to get a calculator and
double check the math.
Speaker 2: It is a statistical anomaly that absolutely demands an explanation.
Speaker 1: Okay, listener, are you ready for this? The source material
states that thirty six percent of all US presidents have
had encounters with unidentified or unexplained UFO phenomena.
Speaker 2: Thirty six percent, more than one in three men who
have held the office.
Speaker 1: Let's put that in context, because thirty six percent sounds
like a lot. But how does it compare to regular
people like you and me?
Speaker 2: If you pull the general public and there have been
multiple Gallop polls and Pew Research surveys on this exact
topic over the years, usually about ten percent to maybe
fifteen percent of Americans claim to have seen a UFO
at some point in their lives.
Speaker 1: Okay, so the baseline, the average is less, say, fifteen percent,
to be generous, right, But.
Speaker 2: For the incredibly small elite group of men who have
held the highest office in the land, it is thirty
six percent. That is a full twenty points higher than
the average American.
Speaker 1: That is a massive statistical devilation. If this were a
medical trial for a new drug, you would stop the
trial immediately and say, WHOA what is happening with this
specific group exactly?
Speaker 2: It is statistically significant beyond a shadow of a doubt.
You are mathematically far more likely to see a UFO
if you are going to be or currently are the president.
Speaker 1: So here's where it gets really really interesting. Why is
it just a bizarre coincidence?
Speaker 2: Well, listen, pac the why. There are two main hypotheses
we can draw from the sources we're examining.
Speaker 1: Okay, hit me with hypothesis A first, the skeptic view,
the completely rational, mundane explanation.
Speaker 2: The skeptic view is entirely about opportunity and demographics. Who
historically becomes president in the United States Up until very recently,
it has predominantly been military men, generals and pilots right.
Speaker 1: George H. W. Bush was a naval aviator in World
War II. JFK commanded a PT boat in the Navy.
Eisenhower was a five star general. Carter was a submarine
officer in the Navy.
Speaker 2: Ford's served in the Navy as well. If you look
at the twentieth century, the primary path of the White
House went directly through the military.
Speaker 1: So these guys spend a lot of time in the
sky or out on the open ocean on ships, or
just generally around advanced experiments technology.
Speaker 2: Exactly, if you spend thousands of hours staring at the
sky or scanning early radar screens or flying jets at
high altitudes, your baseline probability of seeing something unexplained goes
up naturally. It is a direct function of their career
path before they ever reach the White House.
Speaker 1: That makes a lot of sense. It is basic exposure bias.
If you stand out in the rain long enough, you
get wet. If you fly experimental planes, you see weird
stuff in the sky.
Speaker 2: It is a logical, grounded, perfectly reasonable explanation, but the
source material suggests something else, entirely, something a bit more thrilling.
Speaker 1: Threads hypothesis B. This is the one that really keeps
me up at night. I always wondered if it's like
observing an Anhill.
Speaker 2: Hypothesis B is that the phenomenon is actively attracted to them,
that they are actively being watched. Think about it. We
aren't just talking about modern sightings with radar and jets.
The source is very clear on this. It says we
can date it back to eighteen hundred today six we
can date it earlier than.
Speaker 1: That, president after president after president.
Speaker 2: If you look at it through the lens of a
non human intelligence. Let's use your aunt Hill analogy. If
you are an alien scientist observing an ant colony on Earth,
would you spend all your time meticulously watching the standard
worker ants carry little pieces of leaves, or would you
focus your attention and your surveillance on the queen, on
the leaders?
Speaker 1: You watch the ones who actually make the decisions. You
watch the ones who control the direction of the colony decisely.
Speaker 2: If there is an intelligence monitoring us, whether for scientific research,
for containment, to make sure we don't blow ourselves up,
or for guidance, it makes logical strategic sense that they
would focus their surveillance on the individuals who hold the
most power, the ones of the nuclear codes, the ones
commanding the armies, the primary policy makers.
Speaker 1: The source actually poses a really chilling question here. They
ask could aliens be trying to steer the destiny of
America by influencing its presidents?
Speaker 2: And that specific word steer changes the entire narrative.
Speaker 1: It really does. It shifts the whole thing from passive
observation like a BBC Nature documentary to active interference, like
they're actually reaching down and nudging the steering wheel of
human history.
Speaker 2: And if you want to talk about steering the destiny
of America, you have to go back to the exact
moment the wheel was first grabbed, if you go all
the way back to the beginning.
Speaker 1: This is hands down my favorite part of the research
for this deep dive. We are leaving the modern era behind.
We are leaving the radar screens and the fighter jets
and the stuffy G twenty summits. We are going to
seventeen seventy seven.
Speaker 2: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, the brutal winter of seventeen seventy seven.
Speaker 1: The situation is incredibly desperate. I mean, we all learn
about Valley Forge in middle school, history class. But the
source really paints a grim, harrowing picture. It wasn't just cold,
it was catastrophic.
Speaker 2: It was arguably the absolute lowest point of the entire revolution.
The Continental Army had just been driven out of Philadelphia,
which is the acting capital. They were beaten, They were
completely starving.
Speaker 1: The source mentions the disease too.
Speaker 2: Epidemic disease was ram in the camp typhus typhoid dysentery.
Men were dying by the dozens every single day just
from the conditions and the lack.
Speaker 1: Of basic supplies, food shortages, clothing shortages. The source describes
men literally leaving bloody footprints in the snow because they
didn't even have shoes to wear.
Speaker 2: Imagine the psychological weight resting on George Washington's shoulders in
that moment. He is the commander. These are his men
freezing and dying in the snow. Optimism was, as the
source puts it, dim and bleak. The American Revolution was
on the verge of total collapse.
Speaker 1: If Washington fails here, if he gives up the United States,
American never happens. We remain a British colony. The entire
trajectory of global history is rewritten.
Speaker 2: So picture George Washington. He is at his absolute lowest point.
He is desperate for an answer. And what does he do.
Speaker 1: He seeks solitude. He leaves the camp and goes deep
into the freezing woods alone to pray.
Speaker 2: He is looking for guidance, He's looking for any shred
of hope.
Speaker 1: And this is exactly where the encounter happened.
Speaker 2: According to the archival accounts mentioned in our source material,
Washington is entirely alone in the woods. When he sees something.
Speaker 1: The source describes it as an image of the spirit
garbed in white.
Speaker 2: Now, language is incredibly crucial here. We have to be
very careful not to view history only through our modern
twenty first century lens, but also understand the limitations of
their lens at the time.
Speaker 1: Right in seventeen seventy seven, they don't have the word ufo,
they don't say alien, they don't have the concept of
extraterrestrial biological entities.
Speaker 2: If you see a luminous, glowing being appearing out of
thin air in the woods, how do you describe it
to your contemporaries. You use the vocabulary you had available.
You say angel, you say spirit. You frame it entirely
through a religious or mystical lens.
Speaker 1: Because that is literally the only frame of reference that
makes any sense to a man living in the eighteenth
century exactly.
Speaker 2: But if we temporarily strip away the religious interpretation and
just look at the phenomenology of the event, a glowing
non human figure appearing from nowhere to a key military
leader in a moment of extreme crisis, it lines up
incredibly comfortably with what modern eufologists might call a contact
event or a close encounter of the third kind.
Speaker 1: And this spirit doesn't just stand there glowing silently. It
delivers a message, an entire informational download.
Speaker 2: Two very distinct things happen. According to the account, First
is a direct assurance. It tells him you will win.
Speaker 1: This war, which, given the pathetic state of his army,
bleeding in the snow, dying of Typhus running out of ammunition,
was a totally insane thing to hear, it was statistically impossible.
Speaker 2: But secondly, and perhaps much more importantly, the spirit laid
out for Washington the history of what would be the
United States of America.
Speaker 1: Oh, let's really pause on that specific phrase. It laid
out the history, that.
Speaker 2: Is the claim in the archives the implication is that
Washington was somehow shown the future. He was shown the
long term trajectory of the nation. He was currently fighting
and bleeding to build.
Speaker 1: So he goes into the woods, depressed, beaten, ready to surrender.
Speaker 2: He comes out, how the sources, he returned invigorated and inspired.
He came back to the camp with a total, unshakable
conviction that it was divine fate for the United States
to exist.
Speaker 1: And the rest, as they always say, is history. He
miraculously defeated the British. The prophecy or the prediction or
the roadmap came entirely true.
Speaker 2: But this brings us to the synthesis of this whole discussion,
the really difficult philosophical question.
Speaker 1: What is fascinating here is how we interpret the concept
of divine fate today versus back then.
Speaker 2: Right to George Washington, this is God. It was Providence
acting on his behalf. It was a clear sign that
his cause was righteous and blessed.
Speaker 1: But the ancient aliens theory or the modern ufl hypothesis
completely recontextualizes this event. If that spirit in the woods
was actually a non human intelligence, maybe a time traveler
or an extraterrestrial observer, Then what does divine fate actually mean?
In that context?
Speaker 2: It implies that the United States isn't just a random
political accident or the result of human determination, and it
implies it is a specific project, a.
Speaker 1: Project like a massive geopolitical lab experiment.
Speaker 2: If a non human intelligence laid out the history to Washington,
does that fundamentally mean American history is a pre written script?
Are we just blindly following a roadmap that was laid
out by something else centuries ago?
Speaker 1: That connects right back to the steering comment we talked
about earlier. If thirty six percent of presidents are seeing
these things, are they just being checked on? Are the
cosmic project managers periodically dropping by the Oval office to
make sure the construction is going according to the blueprints?
Speaker 2: It is a disturbing but undeniably contelling thought. Is the
silence that mum factor Nick Pope talked about, simply because
the presidents eventually realize they aren't actually fully in charge.
Speaker 1: Imagine getting elected. You run this massive campaign, you win,
you think you are the most powerful person in the
entire world. You walk into that secure briefing room and
some general tells you, sir, you are just the middle manager. Here,
the regional supervisor is coming from Alphae Centaury to visit
next week.
Speaker 2: That would certainly explain the open mind Trump spoke of,
and it perfectly explains the divine fate Washington felt so strongly.
Both reactions suggest a deep, sudden awareness of something vastly
larger than themselves.
Speaker 1: It really reframes the whole idea of American exceptionalism, doesn't it.
Maybe we aren't exceptional just because we are so smart
or hard working or brave. Maybe we are exceptional because
we were deliberately.
Speaker 2: Selected or manufactured.
Speaker 1: Oof manufactured, that is a really heavy word.
Speaker 2: But look at the historical trajectory from an outside perspective.
A ragtag group of starving rebels miraculously defeats the world's
greatest military empire against all conceivable odds. Then, in a
mere blink of cosmic timeless than two hundred years, this
newborn nation becomes a global technological superpower, splits the atom
and physically goes to the moon.
Speaker 1: It is an incredibly fast ascent when you look at
the timeline of human civilization.
Speaker 2: Was that purely human ingenuity or is that the script
laid out in the freezing woods of the Valley Forge.
Was Washington quite literally given the cheat codes to build
a superpower?
Speaker 1: That is the big question.
Speaker 2: You know, we started this deep dive talking about Tucker
Carlson and Donald Trump a very modern media heavy, brightly
lit moment, and we ended up in the dark snow
with George Washington in a glowing spirit.
Speaker 1: And the primary thread connecting them is this undeniable mathematical
statistical anomaly. The president see things. The presidents know things
that we don't.
Speaker 2: The government publicly claims to know very little. They play coy,
they say, personally, I tend to doubt it, But the
hard statistics and the persistent historical anecdotes screamed the exact opposite.
They suggested deep, highly classified, centuries long relationship between the
presidency and the unexplained.
Speaker 1: It leaves us with the final, incredibly provocative thought for you,
tomul Over. The source suggests the Spirit told Washington the
future history of.
Speaker 2: The US right the whole roadmap.
Speaker 1: If that is actually true, did Washington know oh about
the Civil War? Did he know the country would carry
itself apart? Did he know about the World Wars? Did
he know about the moon landing?
Speaker 2: Did he know about the invention of the Internet about
us having this conversation right now.
Speaker 1: It is completely mind blowing to think about what he
might have been shown.
Speaker 2: And this raises a crucial final question. If the timeline
was laid out in seventeen seventy seven, are we still
faithfully following that script today or have we somehow deviated
from the plan?
Speaker 1: And if we have deviated, is that why the modern
sightings seem to be increasing? Are they coming back more
often to nudge us and put us back on track.
Speaker 2: Or worse, to cancel the project entirely?
Speaker 1: Okay, on that incredibly ominous note, I need to hear
from you, the listener. What is your stand on all
of this information.
Speaker 2: Do you think the phenomenally high percentage of presidential sightings
is just a simple coincidence of military service, or is.
Speaker 1: There an active, ongoing attempt by something else to guide
the leadership of this country. Was Washington's vision a divine
miracle or was it a calculated cosmic intervention?
Speaker 2: It is ultimately a question of whether we are the
true authors of our own history or merely the actors
performing on a stage that someone else built for us.
Speaker 1: Leave a common below. Let us know your theory. We
read all of them, and honestly, sometimes your theories are
way scarier than the actual research we dig up.
Speaker 2: Indeed they are.
Speaker 1: Thanks for joining us on thrilling threads. Keep pulling those
loose ends. You never know what you might unravel next.
Speaker 2: Until next time,