Rep. Eric Burlison on the Dr. Phil Podcast: "A Congressman Was Briefed on a Secret Test to Lure UFOs" (15 October 2026)

0:00 For years, our own military pilots have been seeing things in the sky they can't explain. Not airplanes, not drones, glowing balls of light that stop on a dime and take off faster than anything we've built, and other things that they can't explain. Now understand, they're not claiming what they are. They're just saying, here's what we've seen, investigate these things. The government has a name for them now, UAPs. Now you and I grew up calling them UFOs, and here's the part that will get you. The government finally admits they're real. They just won't tell us what they are. That's the story that I've been working on and trying to crack for a good while now. I sat across from David Grush, a former

1:01 intelligence officer who told Congress under oath that this country has recovered craft that aren't ours and are not from here. I've talked to Navy fighter pilots who watch these things on their own radar and other tracking devices do the impossible, speeds that are impossible, navigation that's impossible, pull G-forces that we couldn't be able to sustain. Credible people, and every single time I walk away believing they saw something, but nobody has been able to put proof in my hands. Well, tonight the story gets even bigger because now the claim isn't just that these things are real. It's that our own government claims to have figured out how to lure them into a certain area, how to attract them into a target-rich

2:01 environment, so to speak, on purpose, and that their efforts to do this have proven, quote, highly successful. Now, my two guests have chased that same question that I've been talking about from opposite directions. My first guest is a sitting United States congressman and one of the very few people in Washington willing to put his own name on this. Eric Burleson, he's a Republican, he represents Missouri's 7th District, he sits on the House Oversight Committee and on the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets. There is no more active voice on this subject than all of Congress. He's the one who brought the whistleblower, David Grush, on as an advisor. He's the one who stood up in a hearing and played the footage. He calls himself a skeptic. He will not say the word aliens without physical evidence in his hand.

3:02 But he says he said in a classified briefing that he's seen video that, in his words, defies physics. Now, he is the man who was in the room. He can tell you that story, and we're going to hear that today. Now, my second guest chased the very same story from the opposite end. Jordan Flowers is not some wild-eyed believer. He's a former McKinsey consultant, a finance man, an analyst who lives in documents, not rumors. He runs the Disclosure Foundation, a nonpartisan nonprofit that pries these files loose through the Freedom of Information Act and lawsuits that get that information released. And he stands up for whistleblowers, and he built his entire case without ever setting foot in a classified room. He did it out of the government's own declassified public files. He's the man with the documents. And he'll tell you exactly what the papers say and exactly where his own reading of it

4:04 begins. So, please welcome Congressman Eric Burleson and Jordan Flowers. Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining me. Thank you. Thanks so much for having us, Dr. Phil. I have taken a position and said that our government has been lying to us for 79 years. And you only have to look at things like the Robertson panel to understand that this was an intentional thing that's been going on all of that time. That's offensive to my sensibilities as an American, as a voter. And so I think it's great now that President Trump has said, all right, we're going to have disclosure. But I think he's being blocked. I think there are bureaucrats down the line that aren't carrying out what the president has said he wants done. Representative Burleson, do you think we really have transparency here? I don't think we do.

5:05 Look, the fact that you have these programs that I think have been restructured as unacknowledged special access programs, just in their very nature, I'm told that they don't even really have to report up the chain, their activity. So I share your concern as an American citizen, as a taxpayer, as a member of Congress, whose job it is to be a steward of the American taxpayers' dollars and to be a steward of our rights and our liberties. It infuriates me the way that this government operates and the fact that they can hold on to these secrets for such a long time. What do you think the motive is that they're hanging on to this instead of sharing it with the American public? I understand there could be security concerns on an international basis, but I think that only goes a little ways. I don't think that at all gives them cover for what they're holding back. Yeah, I think it could be one of two things. It could very well be that they've recognized that there have been these

6:05 objects that we've, well, we know that they've been monitoring and seeing these for decades and decades. And if you don't know what it is and you can't figure it out, then it would be embarrassing to tell the world that you don't know what it is and that we have objects that are able to violate military airspace, violate our national airspace, operate with impunity, and that we can do nothing about it. I think that that would be, in and of itself, an alarming thing to reveal to the American people and to reveal to our adversaries. Now, that being said, I think it also could be that we know much more than that and that we have in our possession, as David Grush has said, these objects, and that we have a program that's buried deep where we are reverse engineering some of this material. And that's where I'm at. I'm now at that place where you're at. We know that these objects have been flying over the United States. We can't explain them.

7:06 We know it's not us. We know it's not them. But the question is, what is it? And now we're trying to go about the job of trying to get our hands on the materials or anything else. Well, Jordan Flowers, this has been like pulling teeth, right? I mean, you've had to run uphill all the way and force release of what you've gotten in most cases. Is that a fair statement? That's completely fair. And we're noticing that even when certain people come in and bring information to the government, let's say they bring it to one committee or one person, that that information actually doesn't travel where it needs to go. When the information is brought, it will often, for whatever reason, sit in that place. And we have to ask the right questions to make sure that information is getting where it needs to go, whether these are potential whistleblowers, whether this is videos that would come out. And Congressman Burleson has been a great partner in trying to push that information

8:06 up the chain and ultimately get these things released as part of this new transparency project, the Pursue project. And I would agree with the congressman that, you know, there's a sense of it doesn't matter what the truth is here in many ways. The truth is sensational. I mean, whether this is breakaway U.S. technology, whether this is a foreign adversary spying on us over the continent of the United States, whether this is an undiscovered natural phenomena, whether it's all a PSYOP or whether this is some form of non-human intelligence, this is sensational. I think it's just the difference between, is this the story of the decade, the century, or all of human history? In case you missed it, something very disturbing happened over the summer. Our national debt topped $40 trillion. And since the debt has already reached $40.2 trillion, to pay that off, each U.S.

9:08 taxpayer would need to pay more than $360 million. Because as long as the government keeps printing more money, the national debt will just keep on rising. I'll tell you what the government can't print, gold. I urge you to get my free wealth protection guide from Preserve Gold. There's no cost and no obligation. It may or may not be right for you, and I am certainly not a financial advisor. But when I look at the national debt, I can think of $40 trillion reasons to get my wealth protection guide. Call 844-718-2642 or text FILL to 50505. Back in 1953, when the panel was convened, they had an objective. And the objective was to debunk and misdirect. And then JNAF 146 came out, which was a rule.

10:11 Then we had 146E, which basically said, you pilots can't talk about this to anybody except us. The Cold War rule that ordered pilots to report unidentified sightings through military channels, not to the public. It covered commercial airline pilots as well as military. And it treat unauthorized disclosure as a national security violation. It actually invoked the Espionage Act. So clearly there's been an effort to keep a lid on this. And through the Freedom of Information Act, you've been able to get some of this stuff released. And now we've got this disclosure going on, which I question the use of disclosure. You used the word PSYOP. I think there is a PSYOP going on here. And I wonder if this is disclosure or desensitization. Cover the American public up with a bunch of meaningless minutiae. So they think, oh, okay, that was much ado

11:13 about nothing. And they move on to something else. But I'm not moving on to something else. And neither are you two. That's for sure. We're going to find out what's going on here. Let me ask you, have either one of you seen any physical evidence? And I'm not talking about videos. I'm not talking about witness testimony. Have either of you seen any physical evidence in terms of a craft that has landed or crashed or pilots that were inside those craft, either as cadavers or living beings from here or anywhere else? Have either one of you seen any physical evidence of what we're talking about? I have not. But that's what I'm pursuing. And I have not. And it turns out that there's lots of things that I haven't seen physical encountered directly or seen in person, firsthand,

12:14 physical proof of that I think are probably a real phenomenon. I think mountain lions are a great example. Mountain lions, people don't tend to see them very often, but I'm pretty confident that they exist. We have pictures of them. And, you know, it's just an example to say that imagine if mountain lions or the existence of mountain lions was classified. Not many people would interact with them and you would have a limited amount of information. So while I have not seen these things directly, I don't think that necessarily seeing these things directly is a step that has to be taken in order to credibly come to the conclusion that there's something real here, neither visionary nor fictitious, as other people in the subject have said, that's worthy of scientific investigation and it's worthy of taking seriously from a national security perspective. I couldn't agree more. I think it's worthy of taking seriously. I think we have to take it seriously, right? If there's nothing there, then this is the

13:16 long con for sure. I mean, this is something that obviously is sensational. People like to, as you use the word, be visionary about it, think about what it could be, let their imaginations run wild. But the fact of the matter is, what we have seen on infrared, you know, forward-looking infrared cameras, what we've seen on radar, and I'm not an expert in those things, but I have been a pilot for over 50 years, 60 years, actually. And I use radar. I use these tracking devices in my aircraft, and I know they're sophisticated, and they can get false reads, but it's very rare. And when you see something that's actually moving with intention, that's not a false reading. You can get an echo, you can get something, ground feedback or whatever on your radar,

14:17 but when something's moving with intention, that's not a false read. That would be a blip that would show up once, but not again, and you wouldn't be able to track it across time. Something is going on, and we're not being told about it. Now, I'm interested in talking about this luring business. Representative, you have been in a room. Tell me about that room. Who was in the room? Who was doing the briefing? What were they telling you about the ability to lure UAPs from whatever origin, whether they're from the seabed, whether they're from outer space, whatever, but the ability to lure these UAPs into a target zone? Who was there? What did you learn? So a couple of things. One, we've learned from the recent release,

15:17 particularly this archived audio file from 1952, that UAPs have been, and we've known about the fact that they commonly appear over particular sites. Generally speaking, our advanced military, anything that we're doing that's experimental or anything nuclear related, that we commonly see these objects. And that's been going on for apparently decades. The briefing that I had was in the office of the Director of National Intelligence. I had been in a briefing with them in the fall of 2025, and where they had basically were ending an investigation that was years long, and were really not coming up with a whole lot. They called me back into the same office and gave me an entirely different briefing because they said, sir, things have changed. We really need to bring you in and update you. And at that point, they described what I

16:18 couldn't talk about for a long time until President Trump declassified those files in the first two tranches of the release. And that was the event that happened late in the fall of 2025, where you had members of ODNI, you had members of the CIA, FBI, and the Department of War Intelligence that were all on site at Western military installation. And they saw for themselves these glowing orbs that they moved intelligently. They were interacting with them, and in some places, in some aspects, they would either be sitting hovering, not making a sound, not doing anything, not appearing to be using propellers or other conventional flight technology. And then they would go from zero to instantaneous speed, sometimes they would split apart, so you'd have one orb splitting into two. They were demonstrating all sorts of

17:18 unnatural phenomenon, and that really got my attention. So I'm glad that the president has declassified those so that I can talk about it to a certain extent. And so that really changed my perspective to understand that it's more than just, look, like guys on the ground who encounter something and it could have been anything. This was over one of our military installations, and there was certain activity that was going on. Now, the way that I would caution to say that we have the ability to just flip a switch and they show up, the best way I can describe it, because I'm a sportsman, I'm a hunter, is it's kind of like you know where the deer tend to trail, where they tend to be. You know that if you use certain scents and certain scent lock that you can kind of attract them, but it doesn't guarantee an outcome. It seems that's kind of the best way that I

18:18 could put my interpretation of the way they've described it to me. Well, you said you were told it was, quote, very successful, and I do want to be precise with the audience. Successful at detecting what was seen, successful at luring them, capturing them. What was very successful. Deception, murder, and a husband's shocking confession. This Thursday and Friday on the Dr. Phil podcast, meet a wife choosing to stand by her husband's side despite him killing and dismembering a woman he had kept secret for years. Now, with the husband serving 26 years in a federal prison, find out why she stays committed, even in the face of public scrutiny. Plus, learn why I think her decision to remain married could be a deadly one.

19:21 That's this Thursday and Friday. What was very successful, because this was described as embedded in an exercise or a mission, which is often terms used to describe military activity when they go on to a range and they do an exercise. What was successful when they started, were there no UAP targets there, and when they started emitting signals or whatever it is they're using as deer scent or whatever your analogy would be analogous to that. But when they started doing whatever they do, was there now a concentration of these things that were pulled in? Yeah. So what I can clearly say is that it was a location that's somewhat of a hot spot.

20:23 I mean, historically, these things show up, and then they tend to show up whenever they do certain activity on that military range. And so they had had previous reports, recent reports, and so they decided to send some people out there to observe. And during the timeframe that they were out there, they were able to actually have the interactions that they did, and those are all well-documented, as I mentioned before. And when you say interactions, are you saying that there was actually an exchange with the UAP? I mean, you can read in the report that the way in which the UAP were responding seemed very much clearly an intelligent way of responding. This was not some kind of natural phenomenon that was reacting. It was they were operating in an intelligent way, and they were creating intelligent formations as these intelligence members were in a helicopter, flying towards them

21:25 and getting basically within 10 feet of these orbs. These orbs were responding and operating intelligently. And when I say success, I mean, there were by I don't know if they had the exact number of wars, but there was there was at least three or four or more dozen of them that showed up. Three or four dozen? Yes, or more. You're talking about 50 of these things show up. Yes. Okay. And there was also observed phenomena, Dr. Phil, of, and again, this is from the government's own release, an FBI 302 form, a sworn affidavit, effectively, that these things were seen breaking apart and coming back together, like a single object splitting into two and coming back together, in addition to intelligently maneuvering within 10 feet of a helicopter. So they were able to see them not only on

22:26 radar or infrared, but if they're within 10 feet, that's close. I own a helicopter. I mean, it a lot. 10 feet is like damn near in the cab. I mean, that's right there. 10 feet is within the blades. So they could actually see these things. What did they look like? What do they describe seeing, Jordan, when they say these things are 10 feet away? Sure. Some of them were observed to be kind of a reddish hue. Others were observed to be, to brighten such that they had a sort of an orange glow on the outside with what appeared to be like a white hot center. I believe in that report that they also observed potential, like, pulsating of the light. That particular part is less clear to me. But they appear to be very bright, very observable, not trying to hide themselves,

23:29 observed on multiple sensor systems, optical and FLIR. You know, we have some pictures from the pursuit release of these objects that are at least associated objects as part of the release. The report notes that there's video of these things as well. And I believe the congressman just said that there's that he had seen some video or said publicly. Unfortunately, we haven't seen, we, the public, have not seen that video. I would certainly hope that that gets released as part of these efforts. And, Congressman, I'm not sure if you have any insight onto whether the FLIR videos could be pushed out, but we'd certainly be happy to help however we can there. Yeah, I'll be making, we've been making that request for any kind of, whether it's radar or any kind of video footage of that event and any other events that have happened. I believe that this was not, that was not the last time that something has happened at

24:30 that site. And so we're going to hopefully be receiving more updates and more releases because I don't, because I'm aware that it's, it's happened more than once since that time that happened in, in late last year. The other thing, what the video, the footage that I have seen, which is interesting is that we've seen these same glowing orbs in, operate in, in public space in different parts of the United States. And that footage has been captured by, by officials of the FBI who have simply been on call or been called to, to investigate weird activity. And those agents arrived and were able to actually film it directly with, um, with whatever camera phones or, or ability that they had to, to record those. And that's the footage that we've seen, um, that that's the footage that we saw. And I saw that footage long before I heard about the, the event that happened at our military base. So this is, um, it is in, if anything, it's

25:31 corroborating evidence that this is, this is, isn't just happening in one location. It's happening, um, all over. It's actually happening around the world, not just in the U S from what I understand, but I think the general presumption is that what you're describing here was taking place at, at, at white sands. Now that hasn't been confirmed, but that's the general presumption is, is, is that your presumption? Um, I have, I, I know where it is and I'm, it has not been released. So I won't speak to that. That's what our organization thinks as well. We don't know that to be positive. We've heard chatter about that and we've, there's other analysts that have looked at the descriptions, uh, um, that have think that that's a high probability. Um, so if I were given one guess, I think that would, that would certainly be it, but I don't know that for certain. Um, what's really interesting about this, uh, particular, uh, set of activity is that we've had multiple journalists, about a half dozen journalists, ask, uh, the press office at,

26:34 uh, the Pentagon, the white house, uh, across multiple agencies, ask for comment on whether this, uh, event happened, ask for, uh, if there was a briefing. Um, and not a single one of these journalists has even gotten a response, not even a, thanks for the email. We'll get back to you complete radio silence when asked about this particular, uh, luring operations, uh, this particular luring operation that we're describing. And when they're asked questions about other things, they will get a response within a day. Uh, and this has been effectively months now since journalists have been trying to get more color on this. Um, and we of course are trying to push for transparency there as well with, um, uh, filing FOIA, uh, requests for information about the briefing, just to try and get on the record that this actually happened. And then we have something to talk about.

27:36 Well, let me take that a step further and Jordan, because you've been into the documents so much, uh, on this and, and seen what has been talked about internally. Do you believe that we have physical craft that have actually crashed or been seized or captured? Do you think that, that the United States of America has those craft in their possession? I see this all the time. Good people, great businesses, but they're stuck in the grind, send them my way. I've partnered with high level. They'll get an all in one AI system to run and grow their business. This is a special offer created specifically for Dr. Phil fans. Go to drphil.com/business and help them get their business and their life back on track.

28:40 Do you believe that we have physical craft that have actually crashed or been seized or captured? Do you think that, that the United States of America has those craft in their possession? At this point, I would be surprised if that were not true. I know that's a quite a sensational claim. And again, I don't know a hundred percent with a hundred percent certainty. I don't claim to, I don't have a security clearance, but I've been in enough rooms with people and talked about this subject. People who are very serious, who come out of the military, who come from the intelligence community and people, people that have been under oath in front of Congress, who have testified to the existence of these things. I mean, I take those claims seriously. And I think it's, it's incredibly disappointing and disheartening when, you know, our men and women in uniform are not taken seriously. When their experiences and the way that they've

29:41 put themselves and their lives at risk around these objects, their lives have been threatened and yet their stories are not taken seriously. That's unacceptable to me. And it's yet another reason why I think the American people wants transparency about a lot of things, but especially including this topic. I'm really alarmed at the fact that we have a president who I, and I think that he's done an amazing job and he's put together the pursuits team. And this has been more that the American people have heard and more transparency that we've had for, I think, a hundred years. But sadly, our, our, our government is still blocking this president from getting access to the information when the, and the, the perfect evidence of that is the fact that we can't find the ATIP documents. The fact that, you know, that, that, that was a recent investigation that was done by Jay Stratton and Lou Elizondo. The fact that those documents apparently have all been deleted is, is a, is an absolute mystery to me.

30:41 And that, that was something that's happened since the 19, since the 19 or the 20 teens, right? Like we're not talking old information. We're not talking about 1950s archive videos. We're talking about something from the 20 teens. So we, this is really alarming that that's, that we can't find that. I would, I would say the administration needs to get aggressive and double down their efforts. Otherwise they're probably, these organizations and groups are going to continue to suppress and, and actually maybe not even look for it. Well, I think that would be a terrible disservice. There, there, there, there's a post on the, um, internet, uh, this morning, Tim Burchett. It's quoted as saying, Tim Burchett says, Steven Miller called him from the white house and said, bad people in the deep state are blocking the release of UFO files. And he says, quote, I've talked to Steven Miller about this. He called me at the house, which was unusual.

31:41 And, uh, he says, Miller told him there are some people that are blocking this in these departments. And I feel like there are some very bad people, uh, for whatever reason. And he added, you're talking about a deep state, the swamp or whatever, the sewer, as I call it, that's deep state. And they blocked this stuff because they're sitting on a lot more files that they should be releasing. And this is, you know, clearly a, a direct statement from someone who has spoken with a senior white house official about why the, why these files are being held back. And we're not having full transparency comment. I haven't heard Steven say that directly to me or haven't had it, but I wouldn't be surprised. And I, it's from my observation. It is true. I think that the agencies are blocking this administration. I think that, um, you, I think that previous administrations set up deliberately set up

32:41 scenarios where that information was not going to be passed on to the next administration, right? So when, when the Bush Cheney administration left, I don't think that they, they gave the keys to the kingdom over to the Obama administration. I think that the same thing happened when the Obama administration turned over the keys of the kingdom. So I think that what we have, sadly, is, is that there's really no one that's, that's, um, overseeing this, this mass, this, this, uh, incredible amount of intelligence that I think has been pushed down to, uh, the mid-level. So I think that if a lot of it was sent to our federally funded research development centers, who then were sending and like piecemealing parts of investigation work to our federal contractors, whether it was Lockheed or Northrop or you name it. I think that they, I think that they, they would, for example, receive material and not be told what it's from. Well, somebody up the chain of the food

33:42 chain used to know that that, that came from a crashed vehicle, but, but they do not. And the fact that we've had these change over administrations, that's the only explanation. But I do still think that somebody in that middle tier knows, knows something. And that's what we're trying to get to is figure out, uh, or bring them forward, compel them to come forward and testify. You know, I think that Stephen Miller and the white house has a bigger stick than I do, but I'll tell you, I'll do, I'm using every, every tool that I have, including subpoena to try to get some of this information. Well, God bless you both for continuing that. Do either of you or both of you, you can respond, believe that we have cadavers of pilots of these vehicles in our possession? Until I see it, I'm not going to claim definitively that we do, but it would, it would be logical if we did have craft that there were, that there could be very well be pilots or probably would be. And I would simply say that, um, we have

34:43 credible people, credible whistleblowers who have testified under oath that quote biologics have come with some of these crashes. I think, uh, that is, uh, a claim that we should take seriously. Do you think there's a point at which we have ever had a live pilot, um, for any period of time, whether they are still there, still alive or live for a while and pass? Do you think we've ever had, uh, custody of a life pilot? I don't know. You know, there are people that say that we have had, and that there has been a detention center where these pilots that have survived some of these crashes, landings, or however they came down, that there are people that say we have had, uh, those people under our custody and control. I've heard those reports.

35:43 I haven't been given any direct real evidence of it, but I'm, I'm absolutely open and willing to investigate it. Yeah. And that's why this subject cuts to the core of who we are. There are potential answers, uh, at the bottom of this in terms of, uh, who are we as a species? Where did we come from? Where do we stand? Uh, in, in the verse, the classic, are we alone question? Um, and you know, as the Congressman was pointing out, not only that, but with respect to our country, there's incredible, uh, uh, problems here with respect to the constitution. You know, this is in many ways, a constitutional crisis that there is. That certainly of these programs could have escaped congressional oversight and could have run amok. Uh, that's a big problem. We also need to get that back under control. There's legislation that has done this. And there's also legislation that we think, um, uh, that's, that's enacted and when read

36:46 properly indicates that the FFRDCs that the Congress mentioned previously, these federally funded research and development centers, that actually they are now required by law, by statute to provide, uh, any UAP, uh, any information related to, uh, programs that were funded that were related to UAP. Um, and when the word says government funding and they're literally called federally funded research and development centers, we, uh, we think it's a strong argument that, uh, those FFRDCs need to come forward with what they have or else be, um, uh, be at odds with the law. Well, back to this luring, I mean, obviously none of the three of us have seen a craft, a cadaver or a live pilot. Uh, we've heard credible people, as you say, under oath was, it was very serious. Uh, if you lie to Congress, uh, when you're, you're sworn in very serious penalties for

37:46 that. We're talking about credible people, uh, that we rely on for our national security that are reporting some of the things that are being reported. Um, and now we're talking about luring, uh, these UAPs, um, and for anybody that doesn't keep up with, uh, the alphabet soup, uh, those are unidentified anomalous phenomenon. And that's not alien phenomenon. That's anomalous. They're saying we're, we don't know what this is. Um, you know, back to the luring part of this, if, if they're trying to keep that secret, why would they put out a redacted document? And there's, there's kind of one sentence in there that's, that's redacted. In particular, that quote, successful test line is redacted. Office and test, uh, type both blacked out.

38:47 How much can one blacked out sentence really carry? How much do we infer from this document that, that we see? And if, if we have the ability to lure these, uh, UAPs in, how are we going to use that ability to further our understanding? So without saying too much, what I'll say is that it appears like we're being observed by whether it's an adversary or, or other. And it appears like every time we have any kind of advancement or development, or we do anything related to some very advanced material, anything nuclear related, you start, you see, you, you're more likely to see these UAPs. Um, I've requested that the next time that something like this happens, and they think that there's a likelihood that I would like to personally be on site.

39:48 Um, and I've made that request multiple times. Um, and so, uh, I per, I mean, just to do everything that I can to get as close to this and be able to see it firsthand as possible. So, um, I've heard of different, uh, well, there's, it's public knowledge. You had a group called sky watcher. That was, there was a group of, uh, I think, former military and, uh, individuals and intelligence individuals who were using a device that was called the dog whistle that, that, that, uh, that they would use and with some level of success. And that's, there's YouTube videos you can watch about, about their activity. I, I reached out to that organization. They've since kind of folded up, but they, um, but you can, you can see that they were using some kind of device that would have some level of success. Uh, is there something the president needs to say or do to unblock this log jam? Is there something that he can, should say

40:52 or do? I mean, he put out the order, uh, for NDAs. And I think that was well intended, but I think those under the NDAs are not worried about prosecution so much as they are career impact if they start talking about this sort of thing. So I'm not sure that that's all that effective. Is there something the president can and should do that would break this log jam up? Well, I'm happy to go first on that one. I mean, the president is the ultimate declassification authority. Uh, the president could snap his fingers right now and declassify, uh, literally whatever he wants, right? That is the power of the president. So there's declassification authority. There's other practical examples. Like we would love to see, uh, the NDA, uh, removal expanded to, uh, all members of the intelligence community, including defense primes and the FFRDCs.

41:52 We would also like to see a national intelligence estimate, uh, completed on the UAP topic. What's different about a national intelligence estimate? It's that you have to have interagency, uh, organization and collaboration, but you also have to come to an assessment about what this is. And that is what we have not received so far as part of these public releases, which is like, here's some videos with no data or anything we can sort of evaluate scientifically. Uh, but you know, taxpayer do your best to figure it out. Um, I think that having a national intelligence estimate could push things, uh, very far down the field. Um, and finally, I would say establish a whistleblower restitution fund. The people who have information about this, we've sort of spilled a lot of ink proving that there's no taking the legal perspective that these people are not likely to go, uh, to prison. No one's ever been, uh, indicted much less convicted of making a protected disclosure,

42:52 but people still suffer, uh, administrative terrorism, removal of security clearances, which is, uh, for people in this field, just another way of saying, you know, taking their livelihood away. Um, and, and worse, potentially physical threats. Uh, we need a whistleblower restitution fund to protect these people to help ensure that they, uh, have income replacement and that they have security for any, uh, other threats that they may have. So I think that's sort of my, you know, uh, top three lists, Dr. Phil. Well, those are three good ones. I like that a lot, that restitution fund. So these people don't lose a war of attrition, lose their income, lose their standing. And, and the income that goes with it would help a lot, uh, in loosening things up. Congressman Burleson. I would agree with everything Jordan just said. Look, I, I employ David Grush for a short period of time. He'll be leaving the office in the next few months, but, um, he, he does not have his

43:54 clearance cleaned up. And I mean, this is a patriot forward that has provided so much information and yet it's, it's simply an administrative thing to restore his clearances and, and make sure that there's no red flags on his clearances anymore. There was a lot of, of retribution that he had to endure, um, because of that. And so I think that the problem is that other whistleblowers are seeing people like David Grush and Matthew Brown and Dylan Borland and saying, well, if, if they're not going to be made whole, why am I going to risk my career and come forward? It, regardless of whatever, um, you know, the waiver that has been extended or offered at the end of the day, they see the process as being very similar, that they will have to step foot in the arrow. Or into the office of one of the, one of the agencies that pursue and that, that, that information that they reveal will be black boxed. And they, they, they may then suffer, uh, consequences outside of that, that environment. And so we've offered in my office that if

44:55 anybody wants to come forward, we will Sherpa them through the process so that you at least have an elected official that's there providing some level of oversight to make sure that they're not treated that way. Um, and we've gotten some level of response, but at the end of the day, I think that the topic of alien life should not be classified period. Um, and we're going to, and we're going to actually say, I'm going to declassify any knowledge of alien life. Then, then that would go a long ways. I, one would hope. Right. Because for example, you said that there are people that talk about the fact that we held captive alien bodies or, or even live aliens. Well, that is not nothing that this government should be holding tightly to. Uh, I would want us to keep track of and keep tight any kind of, um, technology that we might've gained that gives us an advantage over our adversaries. But look, the fact that if we had made

45:55 contact with an alien, that is something that we should not be holding any, any level of classification whatsoever. Yeah. And in so doing, we have to be careful about the word games that are played inside of the government. So they're, they respond immediately that, uh, oh, we have no proof of, uh, extraterrestrial life. So they hide behind this word extraterrestrial. I don't know that it's extraterrestrial. I don't think they know if it's extraterrestrial. How would you even prove that it's extraterrestrial? You would need to physically get your hands on it. Look at isotopic ratios. We need definitions legislatively that makes sense here. Um, maybe alien or extraterrestrial is not the right word. Maybe we should be using, uh, the term non-human intelligence to make sure that we're, we're capturing this because we are up against, uh, a very sophisticated set of folks that will play lawyerly legal word games, uh, ad infinitum if we don't get this right. Well, I think it's like trying to sack fog.

46:55 I mean, the closer you get to it, they do start playing word games and they can label it something else. And I agree with both of you. If there is reverse engineering going on that has to do with, uh, national security or not being disadvantaged with our adversaries, uh, we don't need to know the inner workings of that. But that can be encapsulated, but it doesn't keep them from acknowledging or offering proof up of the existence of the whole rest of this topic, the whole rest of this reality. And I think it's an insult to the American people to say, you're not smart enough or strong enough or sophisticated enough to accommodate to this. Look, Betty in Idaho is not interested in reverse engineering propulsion systems. Uh, that's not what she's interested in.

47:57 That's not what, uh, you know, Bob in Oregon is interested in. What they do want to know is what does this mean to me? What does this mean to my family? What does this mean to human exceptionalism? Are we in fact children of God? Is there another species that figures in here somewhere, wherever it's from? Maybe it's here and has been here for a thousand years before we got here. Who knows? The whole idea is we, I think the American people are entitled to this. And I think that to be responsible, there is a portion of the population that can find this very unsettling. Coming from the psychological world, I think we need to be prepared to support that part of the population that finds this unsettling. You know, whether it's people that are emotionally unstable or would find this

48:58 creating great existential anxiety and they need help in dealing with that or would feel threatened by it. So whatever the reaction might be, we need to be prepared systematically, not just anecdotally, but systematically to handle that. If it's 5% of the population, that's millions of people. And our resources are already stretched thin in the fact that our young people, we have a generation of young people that are experiencing the highest levels of anxiety, depression, and loneliness since we've been keeping records. So we're fully engaged in trying to support a population that has mental and emotional needs right now. So we need to be planning for this. And the American Psychological Association, Psychiatric Association, Medical Association, and the United States government, we need to be making preparations for this. So there needs to be a task force to handle

49:58 it. There needs to be a task force to handle it if there are those that have an ab reaction to this and need help and support. We need to be prepared to give it to them. And we would be naive to think that there are people that are just going to shrug this off. 70 plus percent of the people believe that there are alien life forms. But saying that theoretically and knowing that it is a fact and that we're not alone in the universe are two very different things. The gravity of it becoming a reality are two very different things. And we need to be prepared for that. It's interesting that our organization, the Disclosure Foundation, conducted some polling prior to our June 25th event in Capitol Hill. And it was about right what you said. Seventy percent of people believe that this is real. But I think what is also interesting is that 84% or I think it's 89% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats want transparency with

51:01 respect to this topic, independent of belief. They acknowledge that they don't know if it's real, not real or other. They simply want to be told the truth. And there is substantial and growing political capital in this country for leaders who will tell the truth. I particularly believe that you could be a single platform candidate in this country running on transparency for basically all of it, not just this subject. And get elected based on a commitment to being truthful with the American people. Well, I think it would be very refreshing. And I think Representative Burleson is proving that by fighting for all of the disclosure that he's fighting for and demanding answers and refusing to speculate short of those answers, but demanding those answers. And Congressman Burleson, I think people admire you for doing that. Thank you. I mean, I've taken a risk.

52:03 It doesn't. My campaign manager hates that I'm investigating this topic. It doesn't do me any good to climb any kind of ladder politically, but it drives me crazy that we would have a situation where the government thinks that the people belong to the government. I think that the government belongs to the people. And so, look, in my own journey, I'm a Christian. I'm a Christian. I'm a born-again Christian. I read the Bible. And I was probably closed off to this as a concept. And I'm still skeptical, but I didn't want to think about aliens. But at the end of the day, it's caused me to read the Bible in a different perspective and come to the conclusion that my religion and actually most world religions have been describing, you know, interactions with non-terrestrial, non-human intelligence for thousands of years. And so we should probably, it really shouldn't

53:07 rock your worldview to come to that conclusion that there is non-terrestrial, non-human intelligence. Well, I think it's a mistake to look at religious belief as a hurdle to be overcome in accommodating to this. Yes. I have the honor of serving on the Presidential Commission for Religious Liberty. And it's a very diverse group. And we've talked about this some. And I think that the churches, synagogues, mosques, all across America can be a great conduit of this information and how to accommodate to it for people in America. I think they need to be brought into the fold and given the information. And some say they have been to a degree. Others say they've not heard the first thing about it. But I think there needs to be a plan for

54:08 that. And I think your campaign manager is sensitive to the fact that there's, I think, been a psyop going on. I've said that, you know, for the longest time, there was a weekly tabloid and all these stories where the only time you ever saw anybody talking about this, it was somebody too drunk to fish that was saying they were abducted and anally probed. I think those people may have been planted to discredit and make anybody credible that saw something say, I don't want to be painted with that brush, so I'll stay away from it. And I think it's led to the point that the average American citizen doesn't have anywhere to go to report things that they see. I think people aren't drawing conclusions. They're just saying, hey, there's something I saw and everybody in the world has a video camera in their hand now. And they need to have a place to go to turn that information over to somebody that can

55:11 investigate it, can look at the big picture and say, you know, wow, what you saw we had in 10 different locations in the United States that night. And so there's a big pattern here. We need to look at that. Even pilots, less than 5% of pilots, the estimate is less than 5% of military and commercial pilots report what they see, because they're like, hey, I don't want to go down that road. And that's why we have these civilian places where they can report it anonymously. And the stigma is really holding back information that investigators need to have, and we need to take that stigma away. I think these kinds of conversations help to do that. I really think they do. And this luring phenomenon, if you can concentrate UAPs into an area that makes it a target-rich environment for study,

56:12 potential communication and interaction, that would be great. Whatever the dog whistle is, whether it's psionics or whatever it is, if that is a possibility, it could be a real step forward. If it's not, then we need to move on to something else. But I'm going to be real interested in trying to become part of that process and observe it with my own two eyes so I can see what's going on. And I guarantee you what I find out, I'm going to report to the American people and let them draw their own conclusions about it. So, gentlemen, I hope we can talk again. I want to be respectful of your time. I've already pressed past what you agreed generously to share with me. So, Congressman Burleson, Jordan, thank you both. You've given people an awful lot to chew on here, and I hope we can stay in touch and talk again. I've got an awful lot of hooks in the water, and I will share everything that comes my way with both of you.

57:12 And I hope that can be a two-way street, and we can hopefully get to the bottom of this. I talk to the president on a regular basis, as I'm sure you do, Representative, and I think we can encourage him to continue the pressure for transparency here because I think it's what he really is committed to. He's a hero, really, for transparency and declassification. And you are too, Dr. Phil. Look, you talked about the stigma that's been going on for decades, but your efforts in this is doing a fantastic job of de-stigmatizing this, and I can't thank you enough. Well, it's my honor to do it, and I'm going to continue to do it. I always say I don't know the whole truth yet. And if I'm given the privilege of going to see a crash craft or a cadaver, I'm not sure that I have the expertise to determine. I don't have the metallurgical background or whatever. I think neuroanatomy-wise I can tell what I'm

58:13 looking at or not, but I want to go to the next level and see what there is to see. And I'm going to report it back, and I'm going to do it with critical thinking, a healthy skepticism, and a calmness. If it is true, if there are non-human intelligent beings from wherever, I find it a great opportunity to advance our knowledge and understanding. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, and they certainly haven't pulled out their ray guns and melted anybody that we know of. So I don't think we can jump to the catastrophic presumption. I think we can assume that there maybe is room here for integration and cooperation. So I look at it very positively, and I hope others do too. But I hope we can have a two-way street here and sharing information.

59:13 No, I'd be delighted to. And thank you again for that. I know you had had guests on previously, like Dr. Denise Villhauer, who's also on the UAP Scientific Advisory Council to talk about psychological impacts. And I've been speaking with Janice, she's on our advisory board about, you know, how can we if this, you know, preparedness plan doesn't exist or isn't public, then I think we would like to leverage the intellectual capital in our organization to build such a plan. Right. I'm hoping to do that with her. That's another way, Dr. Phil, that in addition to all the amazing work you've been doing in this and sharing this with your audience and raising awareness. You know, that could be a particular path where I'd love to stack hands. Well, I'm looking forward to doing that. And, you know, I have been talking about this and millions and millions and millions of people are following the conversations that I'm having. And so I know the message is getting out there.

1:00:13 And that's why I want to be a very good steward of that and having on people that I trust and have credibility, such as you, you gentlemen. You're both still asking questions. You're both still pushing for answers. And we'll we'll stay the course and make sure that we are a place people can go for answers. Listen, thank both of you for being with me today. I'll get my contact information to you right away and we'll talk again soon. So thank you both very much. And I appreciate it. Thank you. I appreciate it. So long. If you like what you hear here, watch me every day on my new network, Envoy TV. Check out the links in the description for more ways to enjoy Envoy TV.