“It’s happening every week!!! You know, they put something up from 2019, 2020, something that they knew was already out on social media and people looked at it, and they could just go ahead and say, ‘Here’s a video.’ No, no, show the real video. Show the videos that we know are there and because I’ve seen them. Show the videos that you know are being reported almost on a weekly basis. Report those. If I had the opportunity, right now, if you said, ‘Lue, you have no more nondisclosure agreement to worry about, you can speak your mind,’ people would be blown away.”
Well, Lue, welcome to “Need To Know,” and I wish I could say it was a very positive day that we’ve got this hearing happening before Congress, but frankly, I think it was a big pile of steaming bull dung. What’s your take?
Lue Elizondo (Lue): (laughs) Well, Ross, look, very much like the 180 day report, let me, if I can, be as fair as possible. When the 180 day report first came out last year, it kind of fell with a thud, and people, I think, were underwhelmed, initially, with that report, not realizing there was a greater purpose. I think very much the same case here. Let’s, if we can, dissect this a little bit. And forgive me for getting a little bit into the weeds but it’s important. I think a lot of people feel exactly the way you do. I’ve heard it from my colleagues in Congress. In fact, some of the reps (in Congress) are literally spitting on the floor and throwing chairs, right? They’re very frustrated (This explains the very bold language in the 2023, IAA and NDAA ~Joe) Individuals in the government, individuals that were associated with my former program, are all kind of looking at this and saying, “Wow, that was underwhelming.” But let’s look at this for what it is. First of all, this is the first hearing in over 50 years, half a century, where senior members of our government testified before Congress. So there’s no putting the genie back in the bottle now. Two: Where before, during Blue Book, Operation Blue Book, where you had this, and the program Blue Book, you had senior members of the Air Force testifying. Now you have senior members of the Department of Defense testifying, so another level even higher than that, and the senior most intelligence officials in our national security apparatus, testifying on UFOs. And what did they say? They said it’s real, and they said, it’s a national security issue, and we don’t know what these are. So, that’s what they did say. Now, a lot of times, it’s what people don’t say that matters even more.
I also want to let you know, and your audience know, that I think it’s fair to presume here, that there’s going to be some more hearings. This was just the first hearing. I think it was very pro forma (made or carried out in a perfunctory manner or as a formality). To me, I wasn’t surprised. This was Congress painting a box around the Department of Defense and the intelligence community, saying, “Okay, what is the baseline of truth, what do we know, what don’t we know, and what are you doing about it?” Right? Knowing full well, Congress is very well informed, these guys are no fools. They’ve received the briefings, they know exactly what’s going on. They’ve been talking to their constituents, former military members, current military members. They asked very, very good, very precise questions. Now, the response to those questions, were very underwhelming. And I agree with you, wholeheartedly, there was a lot of bureaucracy and political considerations that were discussed, and frankly, there were a lot of contradictions. I wrote down everything. And what I did is I went ahead and looked at all the things that they said, the things that they didn’t say, and the contradictions.
Look, I think The Department is in a very precarious situation right now because they said a few things for the record that they can’t take back. You know, let’s hit those wave tops for a second, Ross. The Wilson documents – something that I’m not at liberty to discuss – were submitted for the first time as public record. I mean (Ross laughs), I wouldn’t want to be in that hot seat right now! I mean, I know what I know, and, you know, whoo! I wouldn’t want to touch that hot potato with a ten-foot pole, and yet, here we are. It’s part of now, public record. Holy smokes, dude, right?
RC: Now Lue, just for a moment, just for our audience, I’m just going to quickly explain to our audience: The Wilson documents, record an alleged conversation between Dr. Eric Davis and Admiral Tom Wilson, the then, recently-retired director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, where Tom Wilson describes attempts that he purportedly made to discover a secret program inside the U.S. Defense Department, which was hiding Special Access Programs, code-word programs, that were concealing an alleged craft retrieval, back engineering program. Correct?
Lue: That’s what the document alleges. And, you know, Congress now is looking at that. Now, that goes to a bigger point, Ross. Look, Congress asked them, “What are you doing?” And it was actually Congressman Gallagher – and by the way, I gotta applaud his courage for doing this – asking specifically, “What are you doing to collect past information that the U.S. government has collected,” right? And the answer was, “Nothing.”
— jgabriel (@gravitywalker_) May 18, 2022
Lue: So, they acknowledged AATIP was real, and they acknowledged Blue Book was real, but there’s 45 years in between where they have admitted we’re not doing anything to go back into our records and collect any information on what we’ve already done. In essence, forget about the millions of dollars we spent of your taxpayer money, we’re just going to reinvent the wheel here and pretend like we never did that. So, that is also problematic. I think that is going to be something that the DoD is going to be held accountable to. So that also happened. Then there was the topic of crash retrievals. Now, something I’m not at liberty to discuss.
I've finished digitizing and OCR'ing Stringfield's 380 page fine print tome. His life's work was on Crash Retrievals. I'm likely the only researcher in the world that can hit 1 button and rapidly search this book (and some of his other works) in seconds. #ufotwitter #uaptwitter pic.twitter.com/rOVQ8LY9rL
— Richard Geldreich (@richgel999) July 28, 2022
Lue: But what I can discuss is what was said today. They were very careful how the DoD responded. They said the [UAP] Task Force…the Task Force has no recovered material. How long has the Task Force been around? Exactly one year and nine months. Okay? So, you’re right, the Task Force doesn’t have it. Probably someone else does. And furthermore, when you look at what they said, as far as the Task Force is concerned? Just a few months ago, when they were asked how many people are permanently assigned to the Task Force, they said, “Two.” Now! Now, we have assessments being done, analysis being done, we have collection strategies being done and collection requirements. We have worked with our international partners. We have 400 cases we’re working! And oh, by the way, don’t forget, we’re working with our academic and scientific communities. With two people. You see the problem that?
Bryce Zabel (BZ): (laughs/scoffs) Lue, it was kind of shocking to hear, I think it was Gallagher, who said he wanted to put the Wilson memo in without objection, and nobody objected because I was pretty sure nobody knew what it was.
BZ: I mean, do you think that he made that statement, and offered it into the record without anyone else knowing he was about to do it?
Lue: You know, it was clever if he did, but, you know, I’m not surprised because DoD didn’t know a lot of things. Malstrom, for example, right?
Lue: The response to Malmstrom was, “Well, we don’t look at outside sources. Well, hold on a second. You’re the source!
BZ: You’re the source! (laughs)
Lue: That was a DoD, IIR! You guys wrote it! It got released through FOIA, you have your own commanders coming up and telling you about it. What do you mean you’re not talking to outside sources! You’re the source!!! (all laugh) So, I can’t believe they were saying this for the record!
BZ: How does that happen? How does history get ignored to such a degree that you bring two people in, they know that they’re going to have to testify before Congress, they’re under oath, and they’re not briefed? And they’re not up to date on the biggest cases? And if we’re talking about national security? I think we’ve all agreed, nuclear weapons are a national security issue with UFOs.
Lue: That’s the crown jewels. The crown jewels! The nuclear triad. Absolutely!
BZ: How could they not know? How is it that this happened, on the inside, that such a faux pas could actually occur?
Lue: Well…you know, that’s the bigger question. Are we talking about…it’s one of two things. It’s only one of two things. Either A: They’re lying, or it’s B: Gross negligence. Choose your poison, I don’t really care, but both are not a good situation to be in if you are in the national security apparatus. And by the way, Congress already knows! So, this is becoming a big frustration, as you see, like with Representative Tim Burchett.
The UFO hearing this morning was a total joke. We should have heard from people who could talk about things they'd personally seen, but instead the witnesses were government officials with limited knowledge who couldn't give real answers to serious questions. pic.twitter.com/hddRYupW3u
— Rep. Tim Burchett (@RepTimBurchett) May 17, 2022
.@LelandVittert asked me why Congress held a hearing on UFOs when our country is dealing with so many other crises. It's because this is exactly the sort of thing the House Intelligence Committee is supposed to deal with. Unfortunately, it still didn't give us any answers. pic.twitter.com/wSjK8LzAKV
— Rep. Tim Burchett (@RepTimBurchett) May 19, 2022
— Joy Malbon (@JoyCTV) May 17, 2022
Lue: These guys aren’t stupid! They’ve already…they already know the truth. And so, when DoD comes out, and they kind of do this soft sell, they don’t realize Congress is painting a box around them. Because the next time, and the time after that, and the time after that, there’s more hearings – which, by the way, I think there will be – you’re gonna have more witnesses coming forward. And then, they’re going to contradict what was just said today, and someone’s going to have to be held accountable, or hopefully they have another job by then.
RC: Now Lue, one thing that I want to ask you: When I first interviewed you last year, we talked about the quality of the videos that you’ve seen that you can’t talk about. Now, that video that they showed last night, I know for a fact, I’ve spoken to other people who’ve told me what they’ve seen in the Congress, in the private hearings, they’ve told me they’ve seen far higher resolution videos, better quality videos. Is this bullshit? Did they put up a completely bunkum, bogus, useless video?
Lue: Yeah!!! I mean, it’s happening every week!!! You know, they put something up from 2019, 2020, something that they knew was already out on social media and people looked at it, and they could just go ahead and say, “Here’s a video.” No, no, show the real video. Show the videos that we know are there and because I’ve seen them. Show the videos that you know are being reported almost on a weekly basis. Report those. If I had the opportunity, right now, if you said, “Lue, you have no more nondisclosure agreement to worry about, you can speak your mind,” people would be blown away. And so, this is part of my kind of frustration. It actually makes me sad that the DoD is painting themselves into this corner because it makes them look incompetent. At the end of the day, the truth is coming out, whether an undersecretary wants it or not. Look, undersecretaries, no offense, but you guys come and go. The citizenship doesn’t. Citizens and concerned people don’t. This is what’s important. So, you know, there’s an old Bob Marley adage that goes, “You can fool some people sometimes, but you can’t fool all the people, all the time.” And that’s what’s going on.
Look, Ross, you know what I’ve been through the last four years. When I came out, you know, it’s the typical cycle of going through some sort of traumatic issue. First, you have disbelief and denial, then the reaction when I came out, you know, “We’ll just ignore Lue.” Then it goes to, well, anger and we’re gonna go ahead and discredit the guy.
Today, when asked if Elizondo ran AATIP, a pentagon spokesperson said, “Luis Elizondo had no assigned responsibilities for the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP)while he was assigned to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security
— Gadi Schwartz (@GadiNBC) April 27, 2021
Lue: Thank God I’ve got a letter from Harry Reid stating the record who I am, because, if it was up to the Department of Defense, not only was AATIP not part of…didn’t do anything to do with UFOs, which, by the way, that got cleared up today, finally, you know, but I had nothing to do with it. So, these are the missteps that, from a strategic communication perspective, continue to happen, and it’s breaking my heart. Because I was part of DoD, and that’s not the DoD I remember. The DoD I remember was very methodical, very precise, and now what I see is this…almost mass chaos where the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.
UPDATE: Former Senator Harry Reid has sent us a letter confirming @LueElizondo’s role at #AATIP. “As one of the original sponsors of AATIP, I can state as a matter of record Lue Elizondo’s involvement and leadership role in this program.” #uapdisclosure https://t.co/VoQ5XU8GmJ pic.twitter.com/L6mQ9GGYCX
— Gadi Schwartz (@GadiNBC) April 27, 2021
Lue: You know, I made a few quotes here. One of the things that was very interesting here…they want to identify known unknowns and avoid technical surprise. Another quote is, “We’re putting all hands on deck on this.” Which, I guess you mean four hands, right? Because you’ve got two people, so, you’re putting exactly four hands on this topic. Great. Thanks. It’s unbelievable. 400 hundred reports, right? So we had 144 during the 180 Day Report. Now you have 400. And oh, by the way, 11 near misses. Now, I think that’s a problem. I also think it’s a problem that we’re not going back in time and looking at all the information the U.S. government has in its possession on this. There are a lot of pockets of expertise. That Wilson memo…let me tell you something: That thing isn’t going to die. That thing is now out for the public and that is going to start a firestorm…one in which I can’t comment on. But, you know, DoD should have saw this coming, and they should have done their best to try to to alleviate the concerns of Congress.
RC: Lue, can I ask you this? I like Tom Wilson, I’ve exchanged communications with him.
12 Admiral Wilson's June 2020 letter 2 @rosscoulthart included this, regarding the W/D memo:
"The entire memo attributed 2 Dr Davis, including his characterization of my attitude, emotions & sentiments about other individuals is pure fiction. Many of the people (Oke Shannon,
— Joe Murgia (@TheUfoJoe) June 3, 2022
RC: [Admiral Tom Wilson is] an honorable man. People speak very, very highly to me of Tom Wilson. My understanding is, though, and tell me if I’m wrong: If you are aware of a Waived Unacknowledged Special Access Program (WUSAP) – something that’s hidden, the darkest secrets of all in the U.S. government – you’re obliged to lie about them.
“You’re going to be lied to because that’s the rule.”
~Dr. Eric W. Davis
There's a reason I started off my W/D megablog with that quote from EWD. Think Admiral Wilson & his repeated denials. Not saying it proves anything but please THINK. #ufo
— Joe Murgia (@TheUfoJoe) June 3, 2022
Lue: It gets even worse, because, let’s say, hypothetically, and I’m just saying hypothetically, here: If that document is legit, the way in which that document found its way to where it did, the FBI would probably launch, immediately, a full-field counterintelligence investigation. Because that’s not necessarily the orthodox way to capture this type of meeting minutes. (According to the memo/notes, Dr. Eric Davis interviewed Admiral Wilson in a car, parked in the EG&G parking lot in Las Vegas, on October 16th, 2002o. ~Joe) And the fact that a conversation like that may have occurred, if it did occur – in a car again…I’m being very careful what I say here – you know, there’s a lot of people that have reason to be concerned. Now, does this happen every day? Yes, absolutely. These senior people that are going to sit there and try to turn the screws, they’re guilty of it, they do it all the time. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in the back seat of a limousine or a car and people are just having classified conversations, senior leadership. So, it’s a little bit disingenuous. But, there’s real reason to be concerned here. And I understand why, if there’s legitimacy to that – and again, I’m being very careful here: If there’s legitimacy to it – why a lot of people would be very concerned right now because it could predicate a very intense, criminal investigation.
BZ: Lue, I think that’s fascinating as a story, no matter how you look at it, but one of the things that I keep thinking when I’m hearing you talk is, the people at the Pentagon, as you just said, ought to have their act together about this. They’ve seen this train coming for a while. They’ve been told that, you know, the report comes out, they get told they’re going to be here for hearings. So the Pentagon strategically decided, these are the two guys that should come out there. They should know X, Y and Z but not A, B and C, or whatever strategy. Why would they pursue a strategy that puts people out there who appear to know nothing about the history of the situation? Why would they do that?
Lue: Because one degree of separation is a good thing, you
have plausible deniability, right? So you have someone testifying under oath who can’t lie. Hey, if they don’t know, they don’t know! So, they’re not lying. When they say, “Look, we don’t know,” they’re being truthful.
Excerpt from my June 2020, Wilson/Davis Megablog…
In late 2009, [Leslie]Kean asked [Retired CDR Will] Miller for his overall assessment via email. He wrote, “It’s fact there are folks high in our government who are interested in the subject of UFOs and in many cases, that’s due to them or an immediate family member having a sighting or personal experience with the phenomenon.” He believes many personnel in the highest level of our government, military and intelligence agencies are in the dark when it comes to information about UFOs. Why? Plausible deniability. If they’re asked what they know about the subject, they can say, “Absolutely nothing” and be telling the truth.
RC: But Lue, give me this reassurance, because one of the things I watched this morning was a Fox News interview with Representative Krishnamoorthi and also, representative Gallagher.
Fox News – Your World with Neil Cavuto – UFO hearing a long time coming, House Intelligence Committee members say. Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., and Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., discuss the first House panel hearing on UFOs in decadeshttps://t.co/4PLuO9fBHH
— NonHuman Beings (@NonHuman_Beings) May 18, 2022
RC: And I think they acknowledged in that interview that they’d been snowed, that the committee was basically being treated evasively and there was obfuscation by the two witnesses. They know it, don’t they?
Lue: They do.
RC: But do you think there is the political will in the Congress to make public demands and to push, politically, for the Defense Department and the intelligence community to open up?
Lue: Yeah, I think they, if I could say the vernacular, I think they pissed off Congress. That’s never a good idea. You know, Congress has got a lot of power and normally, they’re busy fighting with each other. But, you know, this is a bipartisan issue, and this isn’t gonna go away. There’s a lot at stake here and there’s a lot of people now in Congress that know exactly what’s going on.
BZ: Well Lue, I have to, you know, on the political part of it, I kept thinking to myself: Gillibrand and Rubio and the gang in the Senate had to be watching these games being played this morning…
Lue: Oh yeah.
BZ: …and having their own opinion. And people do like to say that it’s bipartisan. I mean, certainly you got Rubio/Gillibrand, that’s bipartisan. The guys in the committee even complimented themselves on being bipartisan. But, I don’t know that it necessarily sounded 100% bipartisan. The Republican who lead off, seemed to be saying, “You know, I don’t believe in this UFO crap that much, but China and Russia, I’m very interested in that.”
BZ: They even had one guy, I think it was LaHood, who made it sound like he was going to pick up Coulthart and Zabel and waterboard us if we tried to report anything more on this. And the Democrats didn’t quite seem that way.
Cued up to the LaHood segment…
BZ: So, I’m wondering, are we seeing the beginning of a political difference between the parties on this because we live in such a polarized country? Is ufology and the UAP issue…is it about to be politicized?
Lue: Really thoughtful question. You know what? I don’t think so. I think they’re all doing their due diligence. They’re trying to approach this from a very matter-of-fact, perspective, which is something I’ve always been a proponent of. Just the facts, ma’am, nuts and bolts. I do think that, you know, there are individuals that have served…I think that individual that spoke said he was a former pilot for the military. So, it’s no wonder they’re taking this from that perspective. I don’t think it’s a political thing. I don’t think it’s a partisan thing. I think there are just as many people on the conservative and the liberal sides that agree, both from the profound, existential aspect of this…potential, existential aspect, all the way to the nuts and bolts, national security, is this a threat. So far, I haven’t seen…now where the politics do come in play is when they have to hold feet to the fire to the Department of Defense. Nobody wants to look silly or stupid and that’s why you heard Carson say in the beginning, he says, you know, “These witnesses were formerly treated as kooks, and we need them treated as witnesses.” Carson is absolutely right. That is exactly the way we need to treat this, and that’s starting to happen. Now, I think, frankly, Moultrie and Bray were a little bit, how shall I say, eager to say things that they plan to do that I’m not sure are really going to come to fruition. They said a lot of nice things, but so far, it hasn’t happened. Look, they just now announced, I think, the director, today.
BZ: Who did they announce and who is he, and what do we know about him?
Lue: Well, I don’t want to speak for the government. My understanding, it’s Sean Kirkpatrick.
Lue: But, you know, that’s not formal. That’s not from me, that’s not official. Let me just caveat that.
On the UAP/UFO investigatory office, Undersecretary for Intelligence Ronald Moultrie today told a U.S. House subcommittee, "We have, as of this week, picked a director for that effort– a very established and accomplished individual." My May 12 report:https://t.co/RF8FbN0yqe
— D. Dean Johnson (@ddeanjohnson) May 17, 2022
RC: And is he a good hand? Is he a good hand, Lue?
Lue: Boy, Ross, you’d have to ask me that (This tells me that Lue may have some problems with Kirkpatrick. ~Joe). I believe let’s give everybody a fair shake. How about that? Right? Let’s see what they can do. You know, this is part of my frustration. This is why I do what I do, because I think that people deserve the truth.
BZ: Is it at least good that they finally appointed somebody? Is that progress?
BZ: Yeah, okay.
Update: It’s official...
DoD, July 20, 2022: UnderSec for Intelligence Ronald Moultrie "named Dr. Sean M. Kirkpatrick…as the director of [Pentagon UAP office]."
On May 12, 2022, I was the first to report on Dr. Kirkpatrick's selection to head the UAP office, in this profile:https://t.co/RF8FbN0yqe
— D. Dean Johnson (@ddeanjohnson) July 20, 2022
The DoD announces changing AOIMSG to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO). Dr. Sean M. Kirkpatrick, most recently the chief scientist at the DIA's Missile and Space Intelligence Center, will be the director of AARO.https://t.co/XW26JNfUP8
— Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies (@ExploreSCU) July 20, 2022
Lue: Yeah. Now the problem is, they’re considering this air trash, space junk and debris, quadcopters and drones, when we’re really talking about breakaway technology. This isn’t…we’re not talking about…look, I hate to say this, folks, but at 30,000 feet, doing 2000 miles an hour, that’s not a quadcopter. Okay? It never has been, it never will be. So, if it helps you have the conversation by having these little anecdotes that we have drones and things? Fine, you know, what? If it helps the conversation in the short term? But, as these hearings progress, more and more details are gonna come out, more and more fidelity, where it will become very clear we’re not talking about drones and quadcopters.
Update: New legislation language has directed the new UFO/UAP office to refrain from investigating man-made objects.
This is a watershed moment. The Senate is explicitly stating that, of the three categories: “U.S., foreign, or other”, we have sufficient evidence of non man-made objects to mandate study of them by law. Listening yet? https://t.co/XIp9nfpBbQ
— Ryan Graves (@uncertainvector) July 29, 2022
BZ: Which is a good point. The one thing that was said, over and over in these hearings this morning…it was like ninety minutes and it wasn’t even barely that. It was, as I think Gallagher said, he thought it was surprising and unsatisfying, right? But the thing that occurred to me is I heard them say over and over, “Well, we should take that up in the classified meeting, okay? That was said something like seven or eight times. My question, I guess, is: What do you think, knowing what you know, to the extent that you can tell us, what was discussed in that classified hearing today, given the things that you heard them say: “We’re going to take that offline for now, we’re not going to answer in a public hearing, we’ll answer that later, classified.” What were they talking about?
Lue: Great question, because it’s leading to, probably, the most important aspect of this entire conversation, in my opinion. I think that we’re going to talk about sources and methods. I think they were going to talk about our relationship with other countries. They said some pretty bold statements there. You know, they said things like, “Well, you know, we’re working with some of our closest allies, and we’re doing this.” No, you’re not. Nice try (laughs). Because, I know who is, and it’s not those folks. There are countries that still don’t want to have this conversation publicly and there’s countries that are willing to have this conversation publicly. I think some of that conversation probably occurred, and then probably some things they don’t want to discuss. They were very careful to say there’s people that are agitating this conversation, but they didn’t want to say who or where they were. I suspect in that conversation, they may have said, “Look, we’ve got this monkey on our back, you know, call the dogs off of us, because they’re making our lives miserable.” I suspect that may have been part of it. I also think, when they were talking about specific foreign countries that may be assisting with us, assisting our efforts? Look, working with our foreign allies is now law of the land. Okay? We are breaking the law if we don’t reach out to the five eyes, Australia, Canada, UK, New Zealand, and our closest allies, we’re wrong! We’re wrong. We have to do it. And so, when they say things that are open ended: “Well, we’re talking to some of our allies.” Well, what does that mean? I mean, are you picking up the phone and saying, “Hey, George, how you doing?” Or are you sharing information, intelligence, classified intelligence information, and are they sharing it with you, through the normal foreign disclosure mechanisms, and non-disclosure policy, NDP-1, which is part of how we work with our foreign allies?
I mean, there are very specific guidelines that dictate that relationship [and] right now, I don’t see it being done. Because I get people calling me from these other countries that are in certain positions, saying, “No one from the U.S. has reached out to us.” Canada just came out, very interestingly, and said…it was one of their congressional representatives, who I have to give credit to. Representative Maguire, up in Canada, is now finally coming out and really picking up the torch on this. Look, they’ve had incidents over in northern Manitoba. We know that. They’re concerned [and] they want to know what’s going on. And by the way, what can they do with the United States to tackle this problem? So, there are countries reaching out. Typically, and historically, Australia and the UK have been very loathsome to publicly acknowledge any interest. I get it, I understand it. But, at least in a classified setting, I think they should be more forthcoming and hopefully more enjoined to work with United States.
RC: Lue, I know you can’t talk about any evidence that’s been given in closed hearings…but, have you given evidence in closed hearings, before the Congress? Are you able to tell us that? And more importantly, is there any prospect at all that you would be deposed under oath, in an open, public hearing?
BZ: I’ll second that question.
Lue: The first question is, and I’ve always maintained, whatever relationship I have in Washington, it’s really up for that party to divulge. Just like I’ve been speaking to Mr. Maguire. I never acknowledged it until he came out and acknowledged it. That’s not my place to say. If people want to know what my dealings are with the U.S. government and Congress, they can ask the U.S. government and Congress and I’m going to just restrain myself from having that conversation.
— UAP James (@UAPJames) May 29, 2022
Lue: Now, as far as going up to Congress, if there are more hearings, which I suspect there will be, you better believe it. I will absolutely go and testify, along with several of my colleagues.
BZ: And Lue, I keep thinking…because we’ve seen that you’ve had people personally attacking you on Twitter and things like that. And there’s been the documentary, so-called documentary that came out from Mr. Greenstreet (Lue laughs) over the weekend. And I look at those and I think, “I bet Lue would would love to be testifying under oath, because wouldn’t that allow you (Lue laughs) and force you to sort of prove your case, once and for all?
Lue: Well, but look, if you’re into tabloids then read tabloids. Twitter’s full of it, everybody knows it. There’s a bunch of hate…they’re called trolls for a reason. I don’t really care. You know, my focus is on the 99% of fair-minded, rational people out there that aren’t, you know, conspiracy-minded individuals. You know, I’m not doing this for me. Everything I’ve ever said has always come to fruition and has always checked out, without exception. Like I said, I had this document in my hand for a reason. I guess they’re calling the good senator a liar, too. And, you know, I’ve got lots and lots of documentation and email that will do more than satisfy who I am and what I’ve done. Brother, haters are gonna hate, and that’s because they have agendas and because, for whatever reason, they’ve made a little cottage industry since they were 15 years old on this stuff, and this is all they know. And by the way, if real disclosure happens, they don’t have a job! Because this is all they’ve been doing, their whole job has been disclosure. Well now that disclosure is really upon us, and we have public hearings, it’s, “No no, no! It’s all lies and obfuscation!” Because otherwise, they’re gonna have to get a job at Starbucks and get a real job. So, that’s the unfortunate side of this and I really don’t have time to get into the weeds with these people who cherry-pick information, because at the end of the day, they’re not journalists.
BZ: Nor should you, but I just wanted to share something with you because I think the personal…people feel like they know you now. I do. This the first time we’ve met on air or anything, except I’ve spent more time talking about you in a public forum than the President. So, you know?
Lue: Oh, no (laughs).
BZ: So here’s the thing that makes me wonder. I got a friend today who texted me and he said, this was the question he posed to me. He said, “Do you believe in Lue Elizondo?” He didn’t say, “Do you believe Lue Elizondo?” which would mean, do you believe what he’s saying is true? He said, “Do you believe in Lue Elizondo?” as if you’re Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, or something. You’ve been mythologized by this process and what do you think about that on a personal basis?
Lue: This is why I’m getting out of social media, because the problem is that the messenger has been confused with the message, something that I’ve always worried about. I knew from day one stepping out on that stage, at some point, I may have to back off and continue working behind the shadows because I’d become a cult of personality. And that’s not what I want. I’m not one of those guys that just wants to sell you a subscription to one of my videos, or I need, “Hey, Like this.” I’ve never done that, ever. I don’t self promote. I live in the middle of nowhere, Wyoming. And the problem is that this topic is too important. Too many people have squandered the opportunity. They start with good intentions, they become cults of personality and now all of a sudden they’re starting to make money off it. It becomes a cottage industry, and it’s, “Don’t listen to anybody else. I have all the answers.” I’m not going to do it here but there’s a long laundry list of these hucksters and fraudsters out there and I will not be part of it. I’m not going to lower myself to that. That is the bottom of the barrel. Nobody cares in real life. Only people that are trolls and that are into that type of thing,
BZ: I would then have to argue, getting out of it is the last thing that you should possibly do. If in fact, those are your feelings, and you want to bring order to the town streets, then you can’t really back out. You’ve sort of made your case, and you have to stay and continue to make it, I think.
Lue: The problem with that is like being on a playground with a bunch of four year olds that hurl insults at you in mud. What are you going to do? You’re going to beat up a four year old? No, it’s a waste of time and energy, and frankly, they don’t know better. So, what I do is I focus my efforts on things like we have now with hearings, and mainstream media outlets where we can carry the message across millions, instead of, you know, a couple of dozen that are stuck in their own narrative.
RC: Now, one of the things that Representative LaHood gave the witnesses a free kick to was the UAP research community. And basically, the response that he got from Scott Bray was that these were spurious chases and hunts by the UFO community, by the UAP community. Can I ask you this? Do you think they are spurious chases and hunts? Do you think this is all just spurious chases and hunts?
Lue: No, absolutely not. No, there’s some very legitimate information out there. I think that’s a minimization. I mean, look, FBI has a hotline for a reason, to report crime. And we have, you know, crime busters, and we offer rewards because we need help from the public. It’s absolutely absurd and ridiculous to say that people into UFOs are, you know, providing wacky information. That’s not indicative of the entire UFO community, that there’s a couple of folks that are truly unhinged and need probably some psychological help, but there’s a lot of folks out there that mean well and have a lot of expertise. Whether as an investigator or with media, and cameras, and I think it’s irresponsible for us to simply say, “Meh, we don’t need a public cell.” I mean, look, you go to an airport or a metro right now, and what does the government say? “We need your help, see something, say something, report it.” And yet with this topic it’s, “Well, you know what? Don’t call us, we’ll call you.” So that shows the, again, the schizophrenic nature in which we are dealing with this.
You got it. Take care of gentlemen, thank you for what you’re doing. It’s really it’s making a difference. Thank you so much. All the best. Take care
© Joe Murgia and www.ufojoe.net, 2018-2023. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Joe Murgia and www.ufojoe.net with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.