Debunkers, Media Narratives & Accountability | Matt Ford (Part 2)

Instagram teen accounts have built-in protections for who can contact teens and what they see. Learn more about teen accounts at Instagram.com slash teen accounts. Running a business is hard enough. Don't make it harder with a dozen apps that don't talk to each other. One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting. That's software overload. Udo is the all-in-one platform that replaces them all. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR. Fully integrated, easy to use, and built to grow with your business. Thousands have already made the switch. Why not you? Try Udo for free at O-D-O-O dot com. That's Udo dot com. Running a business is hard enough. So why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting. Before you know it, you are drowning in software instead of growing your business. This is where Udo comes in. Udo is the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one, fully integrated platform that handles everything. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more. No more app overload. No more juggling logins. Just one seamless system that makes work easier. And the best part? Udo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. It's built to grow with your business. Whether you are just starting out or already scaling up. Plus, it's easy to use, customizable, and designed to streamline every process. So you can focus on what really matters, running your business. Thousands of businesses have made the switch. So why not you? Try Udo for free at Udo dot com. That's O-D-O-O dot com. My new book, Atlas of Unidentified Flying Objects, is now available wherever books are sold, including Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Waterstones. Explore the UFO phenomenon through 34 cases from throughout the world, with accompanying pictures and maps in a beautiful hardback edition or download for your Kindle. Links available in the podcast description below. I'm not, so I'm not aware, I've heard of this, and first of all, George Knapp is a legend. I mean, you know, you talk about someone that really is the grandfather of many ways as far as like where we are journalistically on this particular topic. I am not aware of what he is speaking of, but what I will say, and I've said this really since about, I think I brought this up around the springtime, is a, really, in my, from what I've observed, probably around the very beginning of 2025, right around January, is what I think is a communications, a comms plan, hatched probably, you know, by combination of DOD, IC, and the legacy program, to pour cold water on all of this, in like a one to two year time period. And really, the genesis of it, I think, was right around January of last year, when Joel Schechtman of the Wall Street Journal began reaching out to Christopher Mellon, Lou Elizondo, and others to, you know, just to speak to the Wall Street Journal about this. So that started in January. Then, I think it was right around a few months later, that's when you had Tim Phillips, who got doged and let go of Arrow, at least that's the public-facing story, go on these podcasts and attack David Grush and whistleblowers. And, you know, and that was sort of a continuation of the public messaging that Sean Kirkpatrick had done in the previous year. But you began to see a real uptick in this messaging. And then, of course, the Wall Street Journal article comes out. And I'm looking at all of this, and I'm thinking this, as somebody that has, you know, that has a background in communications and media and messaging and political messaging, I'm looking at this and I'm going, this is all part of a strategic communications slash information operations plan. As I'm looking at this and I'm looking at this and I'm looking at this and I'm looking at how this whole thing is progressing. So then, you know, so then you ask yourself, okay, what are the strategic goals of this plan? And this, again, started forming in my mind probably, I don't know, maybe June or July. And then it really kind of solidified in my head with the Wall Street Journal. So what I believe to be the goals, number one, to message, and all these points that I'm going to lay out are, I think, by and large supported, this hypothesis is supported by the public messaging of these individuals, such as Tim Phillips and some of these debunkers, such as Stephen Greenstreet, the Wall Street Journal, Sean Kirkpatrick, the DOD in general. But the goal is to do a few things. One, message that the Pentagon's Arrow, All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office, is properly funded. It is deploying sensor technology. They're making good use of congressional funding because they want to find out what is going on in the air as much as everyone else. To message that the whistleblowers, that they are not credible. To message that there is nothing to the nuclear angle. And to message that all of this is really, at the end of the day, balloons and circular reporting and all of that sort of thing. So, firstly, to message that arrow, to positively message on arrow. Well, what does that do? Is that tells you that you've got a Pentagon organization that has all the money it needs, it doesn't need any more, it's properly funded, it is a good steward of that funding, and that it is a trusted source for information, and really that there is no need for any other entity to exist. So, if you've got a Pentagon office that's looking into this stuff that has all the tools it needs, it's got all of the access it needs, then there's no reason for congressional hearings. There's no need for an FBI task force. If you can message that UAPs have not been tampering with our strategic nuclear deterrent, then there is no real impetus or really any national security impetus for Congress to dig into this further. So, if you're the DOD IC legacy program, and you can get Congress off your back, if you can get the FBI off your back, if you can discredit all of these whistleblowers such that if you publicly message that all of these whistleblowers have a screw loose or PTSD or they're victims of circular reporting, therefore, if any other future whistleblowers come forward, they're probably going to be in the same bucket, therefore Congress shouldn't listen to those whistleblowers. At the end of the day, it serves to consolidate the information management by the DOD IC and the legacy program, because the minute you can get rid of congressional hearings, you can get Congress to look elsewhere, and most importantly, if in your communications plan, you can, via the Wall Street Journal, essentially message that members of Congress are wasting taxpayer dollars looking into this stuff, then the IC legacy program, DOD, they know damn well that all of these members of Congress who are, many are afraid of their own shadows, let alone afraid of their constituents, they're going to stop looking into this, because the minute these politicians go, oh man, my constituents think I'm like running some pork barrel project and wasting my constituents' hard-earned tax dollars, they're going to run for the hills. So when you zoom out to the 50,000-foot level and you look at these individual data points of messaging from DOD, from New York Post, Stephen Greenstreet, from Sean Kirkpatrick, from Tim Phillips, from the Wall Street Journal, and especially when you read what the Wall Street Journal is putting out, which is just so, it is so obvious, it is a communications hit piece, then you know the target is Congress. Because, you know, and this is part of why Arrow was formed. So Kathy Hicks, the Deputy Assistant, or Deputy Secretary of Defense, she caught wind that Congress was going to spin up their own UAP investigative arm, and she flipped out. And that's when AOIMSG came about, and then Arrow, because they're like, oh no, you know, they don't want Congress doing this, going on, you know, they don't want Congress going rogue and doing their own thing. They've got to maintain the, you know, communications control over this whole issue. So, at the end of the day, they don't want Congress looking into this, because the more hearings you have, it's been slow, but the public will start to pay attention. So that's why you had the Wall Street Journal, you know, you notice the end of the Wall Street Journal article really focused on the nuclear angle, Bob Salas. After that article came out, I called Bob up and, you know, said, what the hell? And he specifically said, he said, when I spoke to Joel Schechtman, after doing the interview, I knew that the story had already been written. It had already been predetermined. So what George Knapp is saying completely, completely makes sense, and it completely aligns with this sort of communications timeline. You know, the thing everybody has to look at is people like Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick and the former deputy director of Arrow, Tim Phillips, who later became the interim director. You know, these folks are career intelligence officials. They salute smartly and say, yes, ma'am, yes, sir, when they are given an order. That has been their entire career. So when you have a former leadership of a Pentagon program, either exiting the program altogether, in the case of Tim Phillips, or Sean Kirkpatrick, who jumps over to the Department of Energy at Oak Ridge National Laboratories, if you think for a second, Tim Phillips is going to go on a podcast and reveal willy-nilly a highly classified UAP, I'm sorry, a highly classified special access program about airships that he said are the size of Klingon battle cruisers, or you have Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, who at DOE is going to attack Republican Congresswoman Anna Polina Luna by name and other members of Congress, these people, they don't do that without top cover. They don't, you know, these are folks, Tim Phillips is not going to risk going to Leavenworth for revealing classified special access programs. These guys, their whole job has been working in the intelligence community. They are not going to go rogue, so to speak. So Sean Kirkpatrick is not going to hop over to a whole new career and speak out of school about another department being Arrow or these whistleblowers without being given some kind of blessing. If you notice, Dr. John Koslowski of Arrow or Susan Goff, they have not gone after Sean Kirkpatrick and said, hey, he doesn't speak for us, he's speaking out of school, you know, all that kind of stuff. It's been a free reign. So what that tells me is that Kirkpatrick and Phillips were given top cover to go and essentially deliver on an executable. Now, you know, I can tell you, you know, the way the legacy program typically works, it's run like a crime family. It's not according to rank. It's more according to pedigree. And the way these folks are brought up is somebody that's, you know, middle to top at the end of their career, somebody from the legacy program goes to them and says, hey, you know, I want to, you know, how would you like to get in on something, a secret that 99.9% of the people in the government are not going to be let into? And your $200,000 a year retirement could become a $500,000 to a $750,000 a year retirement if you become part of this thing. It's like, okay, well, what is this thing? They get a read on to the UAP legacy program. And what they tell that individual towards the end of their career is all you have to do is keep doing your job. You're the director of Arrow, you're a Pentagon official or whatever. You just keep doing what you've been doing. Do what, you know, don't change a thing. But at some point, we're going to give you a call and we're going to ask you to do something for us. And if you do, and you're going to get two calls, actually. You're going to get a call to do something for us. And then at another point, when you're about to exit, the speech I'm giving you, you're going to find somebody else to give that speech to. And essentially, if that person plays ball and they do what they're asked of by this family or whatever you want to call it, when they exit out of their job, they're either going to be given a suite contractor position, they're going to go to Oak Ridge National Laboratories, or their company that they're going to spin up is going to be given contracts by DOE or someone else. And they're now part of that family. And once you're in that family, you never get out. And, you know, so a lot of these folks, at some point, they get that call and they have to deliver, be it to deliver public disinformation. And it may be something like, look, you're going to say something that's probably going to get your clearance flagged. You may go on a podcast and we want you to say a certain thing and, you know, and you're going to get some heat about it. But don't worry, give it a year. We'll clean up the mess. And it's that level of corruption and this sort of cycle of these folks that are, you know, will go into these, you know, these, you know, FFRDCs and elsewhere that are given this task. And when they exit, if they play ball and they do what the legacy program wants them to do, they're sitting pretty for the rest of their retirement. And these folks, they don't want to jeopardize their retirement. They don't want to jeopardize their livelihood for their families. And towards the end of when they're about to exit DOD, IC, or wherever they're at, they identify one or two people that are right behind them to give them that exact speech. And that's how the cycle of corruption keeps going. So what George Knapp is talking about absolutely tracks with what I've been saying since summer of last year. And I think that if you just sit back and you really look at from a high altitude the messaging that you're seeing from people that if they were anybody else would land them in Leavenworth or certainly they would lose their retirement, their pension, their security clearances, I think it's pretty obvious what's going on. And that is at the end of the day, they want Congress to stop looking at this. Oh, and that was the other thing. One of the other goals, in my opinion, was to tank the UAP Disclosure Act. So message Arrow is working fine. Message that Congress is wasting taxpayer money looking into this. Message that Arrow is effective and therefore there is no need for a FBI task force on UAP. Message that there's no UAP nuclear angle. Therefore, there's not motivation for Congress to look at this from a national security threat. It all goes down to information and perception management, which is what this thing is doing. And I believe whatever they're about to do that George Knapp is referring to, I 100% believe that it is going to happen. Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting. Before you know it, you are drowning in software instead of growing your business. This is where Odoo comes in. Odoo is the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one, fully integrated platform that handles everything. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more. No more app overload. No more juggling logins. Just one seamless system that makes work easier. And the best part, Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. It's built to grow with your business, whether you are just starting out or already scaling up. Plus, it's easy to use, customizable, and designed to streamline every process so you can focus on what really matters, running your business. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try Odoo for free. That makes a lot of sense to me and will to other people. What also would make sense to me then is that these people are not reacting to everything and they will be proactive and on the front foot in a lot of this. Now, if they saw there was stuff coming down the pipeline, and even going back to before 2017, we know through WikiLeaks, there was John Podesta, Hillary Clinton, Tom DeLonge, there was almost a team before the team that came out who were looking to get involved again through Tom DeLonge in potential disclosure, whatever that may have been, that plan. That didn't happen. Trump won that election. Clinton didn't get in. The rest is history. And we are living that right now. Would it then make sense that we have people who we would think are good faith actors in the UFO community, big names involved in all different kind of stuff, who are part of that legacy programme and carrying on that message now through different means, then we just don't know it yet. Because for me, it's one thing to rubbish this from the outside, but surely these people with 80 plus years of intelligence and practice at this would be well ahead and be trying to do it from the inside. Is that something you would think is happening? It's happening. How do you disseminate then who's a good faith actor and who's not? Well, I think it was in a weaponised podcast. Oh, I'm blanking on his name. Not Corbello, obviously. Yeah, George Corbello. The guy that ran OSAP. Begalo? No, not Begalo. Yeah, not call him the other guy that was interviewed by him. Oh, Lekatsky, Lekatsky. Lekatsky. You know, Lekatsky, if I remember correctly, said, you know, you're not going to know who these, you're not going to know if that's happening or not. You know, counter, CI or counterintelligence, that is a career. People do that for a living. And so, you know, yes, that's happening. And I know some of the people that are doing it. Do I look upon them negatively? I mean, should I, do I wish they were not doing that? Of course, but that's their job. Just because Sean Kirkpatrick is going out saying all these things doesn't make him a bad person. He has a job to do, theoretically. So, you know, so these people, that is their job. They were given a mission to execute on. And that's what their career was. So, you know, it's, you know, I don't hold anything personally against these folks. You know, they love their country. They're just, they're given a different, a different set of mission directives that maybe we would like. But nonetheless, that's, that's their job. I would say, overall, all of the folks, in my experience, they do want this out. Of course, everybody, it's kind of how they want it out or to what extent. You know, they're, of course, all varying degrees of what that looks to people and maybe what one person wants to disclose is not what I would like to see disclosed. You know, so it's like, you know, anything in society, people have different outlooks and opinions on these different things. But yes, that does go on. And, you know, I hope that at some point all of this will resolve in disclosure to some extent or not. But, you know, people, I always get asked, it's like, oh, are you optimistic about disclosure happening this year or next year or in the next three months or whatever? And I always say, you know, I'm personally not optimistic because there are, you know, this is a power structure that has been around for a very long time. There are a lot of people with serious Fifth Amendment concerns. In other words, they are worried about going to jail. There are oodles of people who are making tons of money that they would not otherwise make. And there are all manner of competing priorities and, you know, and sort of fiefdoms and whatnot. There's so many fingers in this pie that it's really kind of difficult to really know. I mean, almost in a way, you're spinning a roulette wheel as to whether how much all of this is going to come out. There's, you know, like one of the things I've been hearing and I have no idea that it's true is that the tech bros, Elon and who certainly knows about all of this and Peter Thiel and all of this, they are actually anti-disclosure because they want to control all of this stuff. I have no idea if that's real or not, but the point I'm making is that there are so many competing interests. I mean, just in the legacy program alone, you have factions that do want this out and then you have the factions in the legacy program that want to keep doing the same thing. You've got defense contractors that want IRADs to keep going. It's just, you know, this just fire hose of money that gets sprayed around, that is lining people's pockets. These people that exit the DOD and go into FFRDCs or other ways of making money and the legacy program just keeps all that going. You know, it's, you know, all of these folks, it's run like a crime family and you look at, you know, if you go and you just start looking up former secretaries of defense and watching where they went from point A to point B and then they, a new administration comes back in and they go back to point A as on the board of directors of Northrop Grumman or whatever. It's this whole corrupt circle of money and power that, you know, I hope at some point it all comes out because at the end of the day, it's like a democracy cannot function with all of that going on. You know, I used to, as a Democrat, I used to make fun of Trump and his deep state stuff and lo and behold, it turns out what he was saying is true. This deep state or whatever you want to call it, you know, it does exist. You know, these lifers, these career government officials that are making decisions on behalf of all of us about this topic when we never elected them to make those decisions on our behalf. You know, something's, something's got to break. I know I've probably kind of wandered off there, which I tend to do. It's my ADHD. But, you know, it's, it's, this, this can't keep going on the way it's going to go. But, you know, you have this whole issue of Fifth Amendment concerns by people. You know, I do believe that there's got to be some level of amnesty. people as, as part of their, their jobs, working for the legacy programs, did things that were illegal. They did it because they thought it was the right thing for the country. And in hindsight, I'm sure a lot of these guys look back and go, you know what, what I did was wrong. But I, I was given my marching orders. I had to execute on those. And, and I think a lot of these folks have, that may have done some dirty things, have, have come around and, and realized, you know what, this isn't right. It's got to change. And, and I, I think that, I would say, a lot of these folks have reformed and are doing the best they can within their secrecy framework. that they have agreed to, their non-disclosure agreements. They're doing their best within their framework to try and get this thing out in a constructive way that doesn't harm national security, that hopefully doesn't, you know, land them in jail or, or hurt their families or whatever. It's, it's a, this whole thing is a, is a really difficult issue for a lot of people just professionally, personally, and legally. When you say this can't go on, there's a really famous interview from a football manager here in the UK who was on a really bad run of results and a journalist just asked him years ago, his name's Mick McCarthy, I think there's a movie coming out about him actually, soon, and the whole incident, he was in charge of the Irish national team, but this was an English Premier League side he was in charge of and the journalist just came out and said, you know, this run of the results, it can't keep going on, can it? And he just famously goes, it can. It can. Absolutely. This could just keep going on, and I look at the last three years, four years, and I feel going back four years, there was maybe a harmony, or at least a sense of harmony, maybe it was a false sense of harmony, especially on the whole online community. Before you started your show, Matt, you might even remember, there was a lot of shows and a lot of hopping between people's podcasts and YouTube shows and everyone was pretending they all loved each other and everything like that. I'm Scottish and I don't do that. I'm honest. But there was this, and even it seemed with the higher-ups and the folks who were spearheading the movement, they all referenced each other when they spoke. I feel personally the last couple of years, the last two years particularly, that stopped and even those folks who all seemed on the same page have gone their separate ways and I think that speaks to a little bit what you're saying about different narratives and what people want to come out from this and I think there are good faith actors, person A, person B, person C, who aren't intel community, who aren't in this for nefarious reasons, but they've all got their own things they're working towards and they don't always agree with each other. I look recently as an example to move on slightly as we move towards, you bring them with me a long time, Matt, and I want to get a few listener questions before we finish. What really interested me in the last couple of weeks was David Grush's interview on the Megyn Kelly show and when he said he hadn't seen Age of Disclosure, I know a few folks were like, well, he knows everything that's in that so why would he watch it? And I'm like, no, that doesn't, that to me was a deliberate point he made of I've not watched it. I may be wrong, you've spoken to David Grush, you know the other folks involved in that production, how does that sit with you that David Grush made a point to say I've not watched it, I've seen some clips and then seemed to have a little bit of a dig that Lou Elizondo took offence to online as well. I don't know if you saw Lou's Twitter post after, it looked like, and I don't want to misquote anyone, it looked like Grush alluded to he's come out and spoke and no one else has at his level and Lou kind of retweeted something, it might have been Chris Sharp and Lou kind of made a point of saying like, oh you're the only one and that seems to me like there's a little bit of disharmony even with folks that would all be seeming to be trying to go in the same direction, what's your take there? Okay, firstly, regarding the podcast, I, the more great content there is out there and the more we promote each other, the better it is, there's nothing but a net positive for this issue, you know, which, you know, so I'm, I happily have other podcasters on my show happy, happy to have, you know, to appear on other people's shows, you know, it's like we all lift each other up, people that are like yourself on your show and others that are doing really, really great work, there is room for absolutely everyone, the more great content there is for people that are curious about this topic, it, there, it does nothing but help push the ball forward and there should be more, you know, more of that. You know, there are so many great shows such as yours, Jesse Michaels, I know I'm going to leave people out, but, you know, George Knapp and Jeremy and all, people are really doing a lot of great work and they're having really great interviews with really great guests and I think it's incumbent on all of us that are creators or podcasters or whatever you want to refer to us as that we all lift each other up and, you know, my show has its particular angle, yours has yours and Jeremy has his and everyone has kind of their own sort of thing but, you know, when you put it all together, it's all great information for people that don't follow this topic and want to learn about it so I think it's important everybody support each other that is doing good work on this topic and, you know, look, there's a real shortage of podcasts out there so there should be more people getting into it. I'm just joking but, you know, look, it's like anything in life. Everybody, like I'll take a good example would be the UAP Disclosure Act. You had people that were, like obviously the eminent domain thing was an issue but, you know, so you've got certain people that say the eminent domain thing needs to happen, other people that would say no, it's got to come out, then you've got other people that say no, it's got to stay in because if it's not in there it's not going to have any teeth. Like everybody has their own ideas and are all very passionate about how this needs to happen or what the best way is and it doesn't mean that this person is wrong or this person is right. It's, you know, it's much the same way politics in this country. You have Republicans and Democrats just because I don't agree with Anna Polina Luna's political views doesn't mean she doesn't love this country as much as I do. You know, so I, or Republican Eric Burleson who's on the other side of the aisle. You know, I may not agree with his policy but I know he loves this country. I've personally spoken with him. He loves it as much as I do. It's just his ideas are different than mine. It doesn't make him wrong or me right. It's just different points of views. All of us want to get to this disclosure but it's like anything in life people have personalities and some people you know, I know I rub people the wrong way and it doesn't mean that that person there's something wrong with that person because they don't like what I'm doing or vice versa. It's just, you know, people have different perspectives and it doesn't mean that they're wrong and it doesn't mean they're a bad person or that they're up to no good or whatever. It's just you're going to have personalities and you're going to have disagreements or one whistleblower once thinks that another whistleblower should discuss something that they didn't or whatnot. The whole thing is just so complex and at the end of the day we're all people we all have our pluses we all have our minuses we all have our personal pluses we have our personal faults and it just I think it just comes with the territory and I think too because in so many ways this is a very emotional topic and I think it's emotional to people because all of us that know that this is real are very upset about how this topic has been treated and we're very upset about how whistleblowers have been treated and how the governments have treated the public and gaslit all of us so there's a lot of inherent emotion in all of that. And with that inherent emotion you're going to have disagreements and spats and things like that. It's just life. Running a business is hard enough so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other. One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting. Before you know it, you're drowning in software instead of growing your business. This is where Odoo comes in. Odoo is the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that handles everything. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more. No more app overload. No more juggling logins. Just one seamless system that makes work easier. And the best part, Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. It's built to grow with your business, whether you are just starting out or already scaling up. Plus, it's easy to use, customizable, and designed to streamline every process, so you can focus on what really matters, running your business. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try Odoo for free at odoo.com That's odoo.com I think that brings us nicely to the 20th of January, Tuesday 20th of January, there is a hopefully, I say hopefully, historic event at the Press Club in Washington, D.C., where James Fox, director, is bringing multiple witnesses from Brazil and the U.S. to talk about UAP crash retrievals. As of recording, we don't know who the U.S. folks are yet. We could speculate on various people, but I think it's one of those where perhaps it's better leaving the names to come out on the day, because you'll know as well as anyone, Matt, as soon as these things are announced in advance, obstacles are put in place and barriers and flights get cancelled and things happen that come up and people don't get there. So I would just hope those folks are in D.C. already, if not on their way, and they can be there in plenty of time. But that happens on Tuesday. There's going to be a real focus on the overall crash retrieval program from a Brazilian point of view, speaking on Virginia. We've got the witnesses from that. You've got folks from the U.S. David Grush's biologics is under the spotlight again in terms of what did he mean by biologics? Why not just say bodies? Was there something more to it? What are you hopeful comes from this particular event? I mean, really, I'd say in terms of what I'm hopeful is just the truth and more information, more actionable information, more information that hopefully gets mainstream press coverage, and we all know the mainstream media has just been really absent. Ross Coulthard, another great journalist, points this out time and time again. They're just asleep at the wheel. So hopefully it's something that comes out that the mainstream media cannot ignore. And I'm just so excited for this and glad that this is happening. These are the things that we need to keep coming and coming. I know a lot of folks will say, oh, there's no use in having more hearings or whatnot. And I just, the more information, the more public functions that happen that are good and constructive and lend more credibility to this whole topic where the average person who doesn't watch this thing goes and goes, wow, you know, holy, you know what, this thing is real. I think that's one of the great things about the age of disclosure. That movie was so well done that so many people that I've spoken with who don't track this topic went and saw it and came back and said, wow, this stuff is really real. We need more of those sorts of public events that people can tune into. Hopefully the mainstream media will cover it in a serious way and give it the amplification that it needs. So, you know, I have no idea what it is that's coming up, but I am just so excited that James Fox is doing this. He's absolutely one of the most prolific filmmakers in this arena. And, yeah, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it's another home run. What's really important for me, not just from this event, but going forward is a word you put there. You said information and then you said actionable information. And I think that's perhaps what I'm falling down now on when it comes to do we need more hearings? Well, of course, I'd like to see more hearings, but we need something we can get off the back of it. If we begin to get testimony after testimony that we go, that's interesting, but you've just said what Dylan Borland said and you've just said what Matthew Brown said and you have just there is a law of diminishing returns. And I know it's difficult to pull. I always use the example of the Brent Spiner character from Independence Day who's been under the desert for 15, 20, 30 years, never been let out. That's a very difficult witness to pull to say, here's the guy who literally is on his lunch break and this morning was working on the craft. That's very unlikely to happen in any kind of public setting, let alone behind closed doors. But I do think we need to get to that place of, okay, what's that next level we can go up? And it might not be too much, but actionable is a great word to use in there. And for me, I'm really hopeful that the event on Tuesday brings that mainstream spotlight because the hearings from 2025 were overshadowed by the Charlie Kirk situation, which happened within, what, 24 hours? We probably won't know what the impact of that could have been because of what happened. It just completely overshadowed everything. Even in the UK, you know, everything was just Charlie Kirk. So, yeah. And I'm not saying, folks, for anyone who's new to this, I'm not saying there is any correlation between those two events. But it just very much, it was like, the UAP hearings happened and before any UK journalist or US journalist, I'm sure, had their articles ready to go or they were ready to follow up, you know, Matt, can we speak to you? Can we get in touch with George Knapp? Can we speak? The next thing was bang, stop all that, scrap all those stories, this has happened and you don't go back to them. The new cycle moves on incredibly quickly as we know. But Matt, let's finish off. I've got three listener questions for you to finish off with. There was a lot more, but folks, we've answered some of them in the body of the interview. I'll get Matt back on again hopefully in the near future because a lot is going to happen I feel in the coming months so it'll be worth discussing. But Matt, first off, a question from The Hive. And you've touched on this in a way, but I'd like to know more. What is your process for vetting sources and how do you decide which information to make public? Well, in terms of what information to make public, I always ask the source. If I'm given something and I want to speak about it, I ask the source, is this okay to speak about? And most of the time, the answer is no. And I remember hearing this from Jeremy Corbell right in the beginning when I got into this whole thing. And he said, in order to be trusted, you have to be trustworthy. And I think that's really, really, really excellent advice. In terms of how I vet, I think it's just kind of like anything. You've developed these relationships relationships with people in and out of the government. And it's a pretty small group. And I'll just say, do you know this individual? Does this track? And that's kind of the vetting process that I'll go through. People whose opinions that I trust that have worked this topic in the government. Yeah, I mean, just for an example on that, I don't have a personal relationship with Lou Elizondo. I've got Lou's number like you will have and many other folks have. I've met Lou once several years ago. But when I found his book online last week, I sent him a message to say, look, first off, congratulations on another book. But this is now in the public arena. Am I okay to put this out there? Purely out of respect for someone and not wanting to cause any shit for them? I didn't have to do that and I'm not saying am I great. But it's more of a do you know what? Are you okay with me doing this? Because I'd like to think I do things in good faith. I was well within my rights just to go out there and go, look what I've found, folks. Breaking news, quick, Andy found us first. But yeah, I just like to do things the right way and I think like you say, there is that element of you could find out a story, Matt, and someone gives you 100% of the story but says you can pass on 70% of it. And you know what? You could go and burn your source and go, I'm just going to share this full thing online but next time you don't get the follow-up and you know what happens next time you don't get the next story and then that information, like you say, early on your relationship with Professor Gary Nolan, he recommends you to other folks and says, yeah, this guy, Matt's a good guy, you can trust him, you can share things with him. That doesn't happen. What happens is the opposite where a Gary Nolan says, yeah, I gave Matt some information and he totally went behind my back on this one. That goes through the grapevine and that can happen in this topic so I think whenever I see folks saying person X has to tell everything they know, it's not always the best way to go about it folks, as fun as it might be for a couple of days. Well, and I would say I'm quite certain that Lou was very appreciative of you taking the time to check with him. You know, if I were in his shoes, I would be very appreciative of that. You know, and the other thing too, it's like, you know, this is their information to share. You're, you know, you're the conduit or I'm the conduit. So, you know, there is a reason that I do not understand why they don't want something shared, but that's not my decision to make to share it. You know, they have their reasons, maybe it's going to burn one of their sources or cause something that I have no visibility into, but it's that's part of building relationships with people and respecting things that they want to be kept private. And at the end of the day, it just, it serves you well as an individual and I am quite certain Lou was very appreciative of you doing that. Thanks. And do you know what? There's even protecting yourself that you go and share that online and then Lou gets involved and says, this was something that was talked about a one year ago. We never went through with it. It's been on there for 12 months. No one's found that it's not happening and you just look a bit silly. So yeah, there's always a always double checking folks is a good way to go about it. Lil Melly asks, does Matt think that President Trump will actually disclose that UAP are real? Now, isn't that a loaded question? Yeah, I would say at the beginning of his presidency, yes. My personal opinion now is no. And the only reason, and I, let me just say from the outset, I hope to God I'm wrong, but it seems to me that he's got all these other things that are political distractions or imperatives for him, you know, so you've got the Epstein files, you've got, you know, you've got him wanting to, you know, some crazy ass reason wanting to invade Greenland. You've got all of the social unrest happening with ICE going and invading our cities. It's like I, when I step back and I look at it, it's like it feels to me like his plate is so busy and so full. I don't, I don't see a, I just don't see that happening. Now, there's the other part of me that says, you know, what, the best thing to make the Epstein files go away, unfortunately, would be disclosure because if, if disclosure happens, the rest of his presidency is going to be about that. And all those other political problems might go away for him. But I'm, I'm, I'm skeptical. I hope I'm wrong. I will say that I think that as much as I hope that a Democrat wins the White House in the next election, I think that if a Democrat does, it's going to really set back disclosure. You know, I mentioned earlier that this topic seems to only unfortunately resonate with the Republican side. It needs to, it's a bipartisan thing. It needs to resonate on both sides, which is the reason that, that I happily sing the praises of Anna Polina Luna or Eric Burleson or other Republicans that are doing good work on this. But it's, I, it's, I don't know. I, I'm, I really hope I'm wrong. I think out of any presidency, the person that is most likely to do this would be Trump. Uh, I've, I've said, said on my show before that politically for him, he's already got the top cover to do it in that he's got Rubio, uh, uh, he's got, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, um, ODNI director and blanking on her name. Um, you know, he's got the right, he's got the right cabinet in there. And really at the end of the day, you know, I spoke earlier about how I used to think Trump was, you know, full of shit with his deep state stuff, but really there is no one thing that proves his, the proves true what he's been saying all this time about the deep state, then this topic. So politically, if he were to go and dump all this, the main thing he's hinged everything on or a big part of it is this whole deep state thing. He'd, he'd prove that he was right and he is right. Uh, so I, you know, so I've, I've said there's really the, the timing of this is good for him to do this. Um, there's never going to be any great time. Every president's going to have some distraction, but I just, I look at the amount of other things he's trying to do, most of which I completely disagree with. And I'm like, well, you know, where's the room for him to do this? I hope I'm wrong. I hope he does it. Um, you know, the other thing too, you know, Trump, Trump is not a dumb guy. I may not agree with what he's doing, but the guy is smart. He knows media and he would certainly go down as in history as doing history as, as president of doing the one thing that no other president had the guts to do. And he would probably end up on Mount Rushmore, his face for doing this. So I, you know, I hope he does it. Um, but it's, I, I'm just skeptical the way things in the United States are going right now. If indeed at the end of his, uh, his presidency, he leaves and, uh, you've got that kind of period where, you know, who the next guy is or woman coming in. And if indeed it was a Democrat, that could be a hell of a hand grenade to leave them on your way out to be like, Oh, um, you know, it's like having an argument with someone at a party in front of folks and knowing a secret and being like, I should really keep this to myself, but just blurting it out as you just as a way to end the argument, that could big explosive distraction. And you wonder if Trump on the way out would be like here, deal with this. I think that's, I, Andy, I think that's exactly when that would occur. I don't think it will happen. If it, if it were to happen, I don't see it happening in the immediate, in the immediate future. I, I think if it happens, he does it as the very last thing because he, he hands the problem off to somebody else. He doesn't have to deal with that whole hot potato. He ends up on Mount Rushmore. He makes history. He ends up, you know, basically, uh, he can, he can say that all these other presidents, uh, that were read in covered it up, uh, Biden, Obama, Bush, uh, you know, so I, I think that would be exactly when it would happen. And it would literally start a whole new era of human history. You could say I was, I was, I was the president. I was the person who done this and all of human history. I started this and, um, yeah, you could reset the calendars at that point. And, um, finally from Terrence, Terrence asks, what have you heard about what's going to be happening in 2026? I think he's looking for some spoilers and inside information there, Matt, but also what are your thoughts on Steven Spielberg's disclosure day movie coming June, 2026? Uh, I don't have any insight in terms of what is coming out. Uh, certainly, uh, what's, uh, what's coming up with, with this national press club thing, I think will be really, really interesting. Uh, I also want to bring up as well, uh, there is a, an event that I'm involved with, uh, that is the 2026 UAP detection and tracking summit, uh, that will be, uh, February 7th and 8th. And what is, I think really unique about this summit is that it focuses on the, uh, the science and developing technology of detecting this stuff. Because, you know, face it, we're never going to get to see the classified sensor data. That's, that's always going to be, uh, the case. So what you have is you have a, a group of, of, uh, various groups of, of scientists and organizations that are developing sensor tech, uh, and sensor fusion tech that would be deployable to everybody so they can go see what is in our skies. And, you know, you know, we, the NRO has had, uh, this stuff for a very long time. They are able to detect, detect in real time worldwide, uh, what is in the skies cloaked and uncloaked. And I think that there is, um, uh, you're going to begin to hear about some of that tech, but I just, I would like to take a moment to bring up some of the presenters. So, uh, you have Congressman Eric, uh, Eric Burleson, Richard Dolan, uh, Monica Alniz and Nicholas and Keith Taylor, Homeland and security, uh, first responders. Uh, you have the Tedesco brothers. You have Gary Nolan to speak about the, um, about the skywatcher network. You've got, uh, Matthew Sudeikis, uh, BHS Viorreal. Uh, I mean, it's Mitch Randall, who's been working on a, a passive radar system, uh, for detecting UAP. Uh, so this is a two day virtual, uh, conference online. Uh, unfortunately I do not have the website handy. I should, uh, but I, I think that's going to be really, really well done. I'm moderating a couple of panels, one with, with Congressman Eric Burleson, who is a, a, a fine, uh, fine patriot. My, my brother from another mother on the other side of the aisle, uh, but I love this guy. Uh, and, um, I think that's, I think that's going to be really, really, really, really something else. Uh, when people are able to see what is up in the sky all the time, I think that is where the real disclosure is going to be. You also have science, uh, Bob, um, Bob McQuire. Um, so I would really, uh, I would really keep an eye on that. Um, and, uh, yeah, so, uh, and unfortunately whatever George Knapp is talking about coming up as far as, uh, this, uh, information, uh, operation to, uh, to try and derail the UAP caucus. Uh, but that's, that's, to be honest, really kind of all, all I have. I don't have any secret goodies or anything. Hopefully, hopefully I'll have some. Hopefully you will as well. Uh, but at the moment I do not. It's at uapsummit.org for that event. I had Reed Summers on the podcast a couple of weeks ago and we discussed the early days. He's awesome. Yeah. So, um, really enjoyed speaking with Reed and yeah. So uapsummit.org folks, if you want to check that out, the link will be in the description. And finally, Matt, how can people find you and your content if they want to check it out? Uh, so we are on YouTube. Uh, the show handle is at the good trouble show on X. We are good trouble show. And on all the other social media platforms, we are, uh, at the good, uh, trouble show or the good, the good trouble show. And of course we're on all the, all the different podcasts. Uh, but Andy, thank you so much for having me. This has truly been an honor. You, you do, uh, you're, you're one of the, the podcasts that I recommend people go listen to. I listened to it to, to get a lot of my information. I mean, you, you just, you do such a fantastic job and, uh, I, I hope you just keep on doing what you're doing because you're really, um, you know, you're one of the people that is moving the ball forward. Very much appreciate that, Matt. Thank you. Uh, and folks, if you haven't already checked out Matt's show, so many of you do already on YouTube, please go and do so again, all those links are in the description. Um, and Matt, what's your next show? You've got someone coming on who's talking. It's not psionics, is it? Um, telepathy. You've got one lined up. Yeah, I've got, I've got, I'm actually way, way behind on, uh, on bookings of the holidays and then, uh, work, uh, work cranked up. So, uh, yeah, so we've, uh, we've, uh, we're kind of stepping out of the box a little bit. Uh, we have a lady that I met at the Soul Foundation by the name of Elizabeth Ray, who's a, a medium. Yeah. Yeah. You know, so, uh, uh, you were talking earlier about some of the things that I was most surprised about with the UAP thing. And it's, it's this whole kind of, uh, kind of high, high strangeness, uh, thing that, um, that we have, uh, we have Robert Hastings, uh, who will be coming on in, in February, uh, and, uh, Dr. Julia Mossbridge and, uh, hopefully, uh, some others that I can't really speak about at the moment. But I think, uh, I think I, I would say it would be a safe bet to say all of us, including yourself, have some really great guests that are going to be coming up. And then everybody that is interested in this topic, tune in, listen to these guests, listen to these different shows and walk away, uh, you know, more educated about this topic. Awesome. Matt, thank you so much for your time. And I'll speak to you soon. All right. Cheers. Thank you. That's all for this episode of That UFO Podcast. Thank you so much for listening and watching. If you enjoyed the show, please follow, subscribe, and leave a rating or review wherever you get your podcasts. It really helps others find the show. If you're watching on YouTube, hit like, subscribe, and turn on notifications so you don't miss future episodes. You can also support the show directly and get early access, add free episodes, and bonus content on Patreon, or by subscribing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube memberships. All the links are over at thatufopodcast.com or in the show description below, along with merchandise and more. Don't forget, you can also pick up a copy of my book, Atlas of Unidentified Flying Objects, available now in all good bookstores and through online retailers, including Amazon. Big thank you again to all of you for listening and tuning in. Until next time, keep looking up. You never know what you might see. Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't talk to each other? One for sales, another for inventory, a separate one for accounting. Before you know it, you're drowning in software instead of growing your business. This is where Odoo comes in. Odoo is the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one, fully integrated platform that handles everything. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more. No more app overload. No more juggling logins. Just one seamless system that makes work easier. And the best part? Odoo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. It's built to grow with your business, whether you are just starting out or already scaling up. Plus, it's easy to use, customizable, and designed to streamline every process, so you can focus on what really matters, running your business. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try Odoo for free at odoo.com. That's O-D-O-O dot com.