Video wird geladen...
Video konnte nicht geladen werden
🚨WATCH: Hillary Clinton is asked about UFOs by Rep. Eric Burlison during Epstein deposition Burlison: “When your husband was President, Laurence Rockefeller had an effort to try to disclose UFOs, UAPs. When you were running for President, John Podesta publicly stated that you would disclose these files, if given... show more
799,865 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)
0 Kommentare
Keine Kommentare verfügbar
Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt
!["If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world." ~EB Did Burlison See a Craft at the Location He Visited? Umm, No. (Long one here with a transcript and my comments in ( ). Work today so I was a little limited with this stuff. Looking forward to the Davis interview tomorrow!) In 2025, Rep. Eric Burlison spent "almost the entire day" with the White House staff as they negotiated various aspects of the Big Beautiful Bill. While he was there, he requested help with the UFO topic because the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets kept getting blocked and struggled to get access to certain information and locations. So, he asked for a White House-level briefing, "the same briefing the President... If you're taking the request, that's my highest request." (He didn't say if he ever received that briefing.) Burlison: "Furthermore, I would like to be able to have a green light to go visit some of these locations. And the gentleman that I was asking kind of smirked. And I said, 'Is this comical to you? I mean, do you think that I'm not a serious person?'" (I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? 😀 ) Burlison: "He said, 'No.' he goes. 'I just want to go with you.' And so, it turns out he did. He was able to go with me. He had to follow the proper channels as well. And we visited the first of many sites, hopefully. I'm gonna be cautious in talking about that because I don't want to jeopardize the ability to go to the remaining locations, if you will. I truly think that, for them, this was a test of whether or not this would become a circus for them. And so, I think that I'm just treading cautiously before I release too much information about what I've learned and where I went." (I understand not giving out the location to avoid a "circus" of UFO people trying to visit, but I don't see why he can't tell us what he learned right now. Hopefully, when all the visits are done, he can share the details with us.) James Fox: "Congressman, when you say you went to visit the site, are you implying that the alleged site that could, potentially, be housing non-human technology? Is that kind of what one is alleging here?" Burlison: "Yeah. Or, once did house non-human technology, right? Now, from my insights from Grusch and others, they had...it was pretty obvious that that first site that we were going to did not have active material, but, potentially, could have in the past. So what was important was to see the facilities and the structures, and to try to ascertain for A), first and foremost, did those facilities exist? And then were they designed in such a way that would have been, you know, one could easily see that that could have been utilized for reverse engineering." (Saying that a location/facility could have been utilized for reverse engineering craft not made by humans is not enough to make the waves we need to force the tidal wave of Disclosure. We need for Burlison (or someone else) to be able to visit a facility that has a craft there now, and folks working on it who are willing to speak about their experiences there. I don't see that happening any time soon.) Leslie Kean: "May I ask If the people at the site were cooperative and helpful for you?" Burlison: "Yes." Leslie Kean: "Or were they resistant to having you visit?" Burlison: "No, they were very cooperative. What I kind of interpreted from this is that a lot of what's happening today is that you have things that have happened in the past, and the people today, you know, you're talking about personnel that have changed over many times. And so, a lot of times they're not aware of the history of some of the things that you're talking about because that's not something that they're working on, currently. But they certainly were extremely helpful." (They were either not aware of the history or, they were, and lied about it. Can't rule that out. And the fact that they were helpful/cooperative doesn't really mean much. If you want to avoid unwanted attention, you put your best face on. Or, maybe they really were ignorant and wanted to do their best to help Burlison and the other folks? No way to know.) Burlison: "I had specifically wanted to meet with a particular individual that works at that location, and I actually expected them to turn me down, but was surprised that they actually arranged a meeting in a SCIF with the person that I requested. So, I do think that they're being cooperative." (Hopefully, when all of these locations have been visited, we get to learn this person's name. Full transparency, right?) Burlison: "And now that the President has [posted on Truth Social about UFOs], I think it gives everyone all the way down the line an understanding that this is to be taken seriously and to follow through." (We shall see.) Burlison: "On the way back after the visit, the White House staffer and the other person that had made it happen both said to me that they loved doing this. This was one of the funnest things they've ever done in their job, and that these other future site locations are not at all gonna be a burden to them. If anything, they're excited and looking forward to it." (Are we going to learn who those people are? Transparency? If not, why not? We pay their salaries.) James Fox: "I had a really quick follow-up question, Congressman. If you did find what you're looking for, is there a particular protocol, or what's the directive if you find what you're looking for?" Burlison: "If I find what I'm looking for, I'm gonna be very careful to protect any kind of national-security interest. But at the same time, I've been very clear that it is not the right of this country to withhold basic, fundamental evidence that we may or may not be alone. And so, if we have any kind of evidence of that, we should be telling the world and not holding back. And give as many details as possible, and release...be as transparent as possible without jeopardizing our secrets and national security. Or secrets that pertain...that our national security is dependent upon." (For now, keep the method of propulsion (energy source) secret and away from our adversaries and tell us everything else!) Burlison: "Well, I'm just gonna speculate, okay? If we have a type of technology that we have reverse engineered, that gives us a strategic advantage that our adversaries have not? I think that, for example, letting the world know that we have this craft, here it is, here's a photo of it, but you don't have to tell the world how exactly the...what you've reverse engineered, or how that operates." (Photos aren't going to cut it. If they exist, we need to see these craft (and bodies?) in person, with our own eyes. Put them in the Smithsonian and let us see all of it. And allow independent scientists to do their own analysis so we can verify that it's non-human or anomalous.) Burlison: "In the same way that when the nuclear bomb first was invented and utilized, the world knew, we revealed to the world that we have this capability, but we certainly are not gonna tell people how to make one and the specifics behind that. So, I think that for me, that's how I would answer that question. If you were asking me, 'What would you be willing to protect as far as national security?' That would be the nature of it. "Now, I think if the technology that's derived has nothing to do with changing our threat dynamic with an adversary, and it might benefit society and the world, by all means, let's release it. Let's let the world scientific minds utilize anything that we might have discovered. And so, that's where I personally stand." (But we all that it's not going to be that simple. Most likely (if this is all legit), we'll have craft and bodies, and the tech from the craft can give us an advantage over our adversaries, while at the same time, potentially, be used to change and improve the world and human condition. So what do we do? Keep it secret? Tell the world and take our chances?) Burlison: "I don't know, I couldn't tell you what Hillary meant by that." (EB was referring to the recent interview/deposition about Epstein where Hillary Clinton said that she would release UFO files but they would be "subject to any national security implications" and it should be done so that "no national security information is disclosed." She didn't get specific.) Burlison: "If we have evidence or if we have bodies, we should release that to the world. If we, you know, if what Eric Davis said to me - and now that was not in a hearing in which he had been sworn in, and I'm not saying that he was telling me a falsehood - when he said that there are four alien species - and that kind of went viral - I mean, if we, if we do have evidence of that, I want the world to know. I don't see why that would be of national security interest to withhold that from the world." (Unless, the people who have seen the bodies say something like, "Their skin is something that can be used as armor and we can't allow our adversaries to learn about that. Just trying to think of reasons why the gatekeepers will tell us that information needs to be kept secret.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2030480027666747596/amplify_video_thumb/2030373285926694913/img/_-25iW0LmiKeRcjI.jpg)
![🔥 Burlison: UFOs Have Moved from Priority 598 of 600, up to the Top Ten - We Have Requested UFO-Related Files in a Letter to Gabbard, Rubio and Hegseth 🔥 Rep. Eric Burlison: "This is what I was told last week. They (people in the Trump administration who have investigated UAP) said, 'Congressman, prior to last week, and the President's [Truth Social post on UFOs], this was probably,' and I think this was just a random number, but they said, 'number 598 out of the 600 priorities that we had. But now it's in the top 10. "So...it's clear to me, and having met the new staff that have been sourced to this, to dedicate to this topic, and these are serious scientists and investigators, I think that that we're gonna see a lot of movement." (I'd love to know who these scientists and investigators are, and I hope they are not connected to the UFO subject. We need fresh voices.) Leslie Kean: "What are the next steps that need to happen? So [Trump] has put this message out, but does he have to issue an Executive Order (EO)? What kind of steps need to be made to formalize it more and to actually make it start, and what would be the process by which the information would be disclosed?" Burlison: "Yeah, it's my hope that he does an Executive Order, and then, in addition, I think that we should make it permanent through the UAP Disclosure Act, because I don't think that the investigation will...this topic is not gonna stop when Trump leaves the White House. This is going to be a continuing topic. Hopefully, we get all of the information up to date that we can out to the American people, to the world, but again, this is going to be, I certainly wanna put something in statute or in federal law so that it outlasts President Trump. So I think that that's important." (Remember how many people said the EO was already issued, based on Hegseth mentioning it in an interview? Myself, and a few others, told you that that was NOT the case. A post on Truth Social, while helpful, is NOT an EO. We need the latter.) Burlison: "So I'm trying to lead the effort to try to encourage the White House to do an Executive Order, because I think it will have teeth in it. But even just as a statement on Truth Social, that was a green light for a lot of these agencies who have wanted to investigate this topic and dedicate resources to it. It, basically, was giving them permission to do what they've been wanting to do. And so, that in and of itself is a big win." (Let's hope these agencies play ball. I'll believe it when I see it.) Burlison: "And the other thing that it's giving is, me and our team, you know, that's being led by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, a little bit more, you know, authority, if you will. And I'm announcing this with you right now, is that we put out a letter that was sent yesterday to Marco Rubio, to Pete Hegseth, to Tulsi Gabbard and to Chris Wright in the DOE. That is a letter from myself, that's signed by Nancy Mace, Eli Crane, Scott Perry, Anna Paulina Luna, Tim Burchett, [Suhas] Subramanyam - a Democrat member, and Andre Carson, who's a Democrat member. "So, of note is the two individuals on this list (Perry and Carson are on the HPSCI) that signed this letter are on the Intelligence Committee. So you have the Task Force and members of intelligence committee asking for, basically, following up on the President's [Truth Social post], and then furthermore, specifically, giving a list of items: file names that and the dates of these files, the metadata on these files that we are we're aware of, but we do not have the files themselves. And so this letter is requesting that Congress get...that we're able to see these files, specifically." (Fingers crossed this bears fruit and we get some of these files made public. I won't be holding my breath. Also, I like how Burlison included "the world" when he said this: "Hopefully, we get all of the information up to date that we can out to the American people, to the world." This is not an American issue.)](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2030357848820265222/amplify_video_thumb/2030355270967382016/img/H6HXEYP0rI04EXHQ.jpg)
![House Oversight Committee asks Bill Clinton about Mark Middleton—special assistant to Clinton who "killed himself" via hanging AND a shotgun wound to the chest—and Middleton's letting Jeffrey Epstein into the White House: Clinton: "There was a period of time when he was in a position to wave people into the White House, because that was one of his jobs." HOC: "He has been identified by multiple resources to be the individual that most of the time was... signing in Jeffrey Epstein into the White House." Clinton: "He was working on logistical things in the White House...[but] I don't know if Mark had the authority—" HOC: "Do you have any knowledge of the content of their meetings or the topics of the meetings that Mr. Epstein would be coming for?" Clinton: "No......" HOC: "Do you have any information that... he did something other than commit suicide?" Clinton: "No." HOC: "Do you have any concerns that this was in relation to... his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein... have you ever had any conversations with people about whether there's any relationship between the two?" Clinton: "No. No one's ever suggested it to me."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2028632544997155253/amplify_video_thumb/2028630285122965504/img/kDZTrWATexOCnwh8.jpg)
![Jesse Watters: “When did you know you were in love [with Charlie Kirk]?” Erika Kirk: “He knew immediately, and I knew that there was something there. But I, prior to that, was praying that if it was — if he was to be my future husband — that the Lord would make it so clear that I would have such a peace about it... He was just amazing!”](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1986239789280956889/amplify_video_thumb/1986239657714020352/img/vdpolfu2m5KIC6lK.jpg)
![WATCH: Secretary of State Rubio smacks down reporter for LYING about his statements from yesterday, falsely claiming he said Israel dragged the U.S. into war with Iran.... Reporter: “Yesterday, you told us that Israel was going to strike Iran and that that's why we needed to get involved. Today, the President said that —” Rubio: “No.” Reporter: “— Iran was going to get strike [sic].” Rubio: “Yeah, your statement is false. So, that's not what — I was asked very specifically. Were you there yesterday?” Reporter: “Yes, I asked a question.” Rubio: “Okay. No. Were you the one that — because somebody asked me a question yesterday, did we go in because of Israel? And I said..., no, I told you this had to happen. Anyway, the President made a decision, and the decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ballistic missile program, that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ability to conduct these attacks. That decision had been made. The President systematically made a decision to systematically destroy this terrorist capability that they had, and we carried that out. I was very clear on that answer. This was a question of timing, of why this had to happen as a joint operation, not the question of the intent. Once the President made a decision that negotiations were not going to work, that they were playing us on the negotiations, and that this was a threat that was untenable, the decision was made to strike them. That's what I said yesterday. And you guys need to play it. If you're going to play these statements, you need to play the whole statement, not clip it to reach a narrative that you want to do, all right?”](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2028932282845737135/amplify_video_thumb/2028932235072593920/img/8Pqa6iQ-9VR5xNeO.jpg)