Congress Hearing News LIVE | Trump Reveals Big UFO Secret | Shocking Alien Revelation Rocks America

agency debriefed you or any of your shipmates regarding the EOIR and radar confirmed UAP encounter aboard USS Jackson? No one has, Newman. What was that encounter like when you brought that up, if you want to briefly summarize that, when you brought that to their attention and then you were not provided any follow-up? Who was told and how did you feel when there was no contact back to you? As far as the actual incident happening or the reporting level? Yes, Chief. It was within the event happening, my duties are to report to the Tactical Action Officer on watch while we're standing watch, so Tactical Action Officer was there. I made my report. I've not had any discussion outside of that day. There's been no communication to me or requests from me to, you know, within side of the military, but speaking of that actual incident itself, once the report was made to the Tactical Action Officer, that's when I made the decision to ask the individual watchstander that was controlling Sapphire to be able to slew into the location and that's what you see in the video itself is when the watchstander is slewing in and kind of showing us what we're looking at, but outside of that, that's as far as the reporting went that I know of. Thank you, Chief. Just for the sake of time, Mr. Nusatelli, has ARO, the Air Force, or the FBI ever followed up with you personally about the Red Square event? I did have follow-up by ARO. Nothing with the Air Force. The ARO office updated me I think at least two times. They let me know that they were unable to locate any records, that the records had been destroyed by the Air Force. The Air Force is destroying all their police records every three years on a schedule. You were informed that these documents were destroyed? Well, I have a Freedom of Information Act from the Air Force that states clearly that they destroy all police records on a three-year schedule. Okay, so they were sitting on documentation, destroyed it, refused to question any of the lead investigators, anything leading into this investigation? Yeah, basically they destroyed all the police records, so you couldn't even like call the Air Force and ask them if there was a vehicle accident in that time frame. So that's a big problem. We're losing data in real time, so we'll never be able to go back and track. I think our federal government has a history of destroying records. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Nusatelli. Dr. Borland, as a geospatial intelligence officer, have you seen classified data indicating UAPs operate in restricted U.S. airspace, and has that information been withheld from Congress? I have not in U.S. airspace. That is intelligence oversight, so I did not have domestic authorities. After filing your Inspector General complaint over retaliation inside the Pentagon's UAP office, did you receive any kind of protection or just more retaliation? Within the IG or AERO, ma'am? Either. AERO, they went after the staff member and classified everything, shut that down. The IG, to this day, I don't even know if my complaint's active. I know my attorney that represented me was very, very, very concerned, and the best of my understanding, I was determined credible, not urgent. And do you think that that experience would suggest that the internal UAP investigations may be compromised? Possibly. I mean, it's so hard because this goes back to people doing the job they're told to do, and very few people are going to want to give up their careers, 20-, 30-year pension, give up, get rid of their kids' health care, get rid of their house. It's possible, yes. Yes, thank you very much, Dr. Borland. Mr. Spielberger, do national security whistleblowers currently have any external appeals processes to challenge retaliation, or are they just stuck relying on the same agencies that they're accusing? Congresswoman, this is one of the biggest concerns that we at POGO have, basically around the independence of investigations and accountability for retaliation. Basically, yes, national security whistleblowers have to rely on internal administrative processes that go through agency inspector generals. There are some differentiations, but the bottom line is that they are forced to rely on protection from the same agencies and people who they are alleging retaliated against them. Yes, well, I thank you all for your bravery. We are out of time here. Thank you so much for coming forward, and we will do everything that we can to ensure that you are all protected. Thank you for trying to bring truth and transparency to the American people. Madam Chair, I yield. I now recognize Mr. Burleson for about five minutes. Thank you, everyone. It takes such great courage to come forward, and we acknowledge that, and I hope that you see that we are taking that seriously, and so very thankful for what you're doing today. I'm also very thankful for previous witnesses that have come forward. I see Matthew Brown in the audience. He courageously stepped forward and was as a witness. I encourage everybody to look and seek his testimony. I want to thank the people that came in our first hearing, Ryan Graves, David Grush, David Fravor, and in our second hearing, Admiral Gallaudet, Lou Elizondo, and Mr. Gold, and the many others that have come forward. We hear you, and it's time that we, you know, enough is enough. It's time that we take action. Look, I'm not jump to the conclusion that I believe that there are, you know, aliens coming from another planet, but I'm open to that, and I think that it's our responsibility, especially when we're seeing that we have a government that is blocking, actively blocking information from us. Just last night, I tried to get an amendment onto the National Defense Authorization Act that fit in the germaneness of that bill to have UAP disclosure, and conveniently, it was named non-germane, mostly deemed by staff, not even an elected official. This is the kind of stuff that we repeatedly see. Last year, we were blocked by someone in House administration from being able to receive a full briefing from ARO. So, not an elected official, but someone in staff blocked us, and I've had it. Enough is enough. I want to cue up a video that I've been given, and before it starts, I'm going to describe. This was taken October 30th of 2024. This video is of an MQ-9 drone tracking an orb, or this object, off the coast of Yemen. You'll see that another MQ-9 launched a hellfire missile. You cannot see that drone, and I'm not going to explain it to you. You'll see exactly what it does. Became the law of the land, and those documents paint a much different picture than what the public, the press, and Congress have been told over many years. The documents from military and intelligence personnel behind closed doors admit that, quote, these things are real. They're not fictitious. They can fly in formation. They're evasive, and they outperform any aircraft known to exist, including ours. The public, of course, as I said, has been told something much different. You know, back in 1989, I reported about a guy named Bob Lazar, who claimed that he worked at a facility dubbed S-4 out in the Nevada desert, very near to Area 51. He said he was part of a reverse engineering program. He said there are alien craft that will be taken apart to figure out how they operated out there, and that was a pretty tall order. I had clearly taken a dive into the deep end of the pool there, but in the years since then, I've interviewed dozens of other people, and I've detailed what their testimony has been in the written statement. They include Senator Harry Reid, Senator Howard Cannon, also of Nevada, a guy named Al O'Donnell, who was the first general manager of EG&G in Nevada, which managed the Nevada test site, which blew up hundreds of nuclear weapons. There's a guy named Dr. James Lukatsky, who was a career scientist with the Defense Intelligence Agency, who was the guy who initiated a program called OSAP, Advanced Aerospace Weapons Systems Application Program, which is, as far as we know, the largest acknowledged UFO program ever funded by the U.S. government, which put together an amazing pile of information that members of this committee and the world, most of which they have never seen. The DIA still hasn't released 95% of what was prepared by that program at a cost of millions and millions of dollars. The one name I do want to bring up in this session, though, is Robert Bigelow. So, looking into the idea of crash retrievals and reverse engineering, while at OSAP that program was active, the DIA's contractor, Robert Bigelow of Las Vegas, made a bold attempt to acquire physical proof of UFO crashes. It's been widely reported and suspected that Lockheed Martin is one of the contractors, the defense contractors, that has held this stuff, stored it away in secrecy, and tried to figure out how it works. I have confirmed on the record that Robert Bigelow and a trusted colleague from OSAP met with and negotiated with senior executives at Lockheed Martin and hammered out a deal wherein Bigelow's company, Bass, would receive a quantity of unusual material that had been stashed away and protected at a facility in California. That material was not made here. I want to move on now to the Russia files, because that was going to be sort of the central impetus of what I was going to talk to you about today. Back in the early 90s, I got into Russia, met with a number of their defense officials, Ministry of Defense and others, who confirmed for me that Russia had been doing the same thing that the United States had been doing, that is, secretly studying UFOs while publicly saying something completely different. The documents and interviews that I obtained and have now shared with this task force show that the USSR launched what is almost certainly the largest UFO, UAP investigation in the world. The first phase of that was an order was sent out to the entire USSR military empire that every unit, you see anything strange in the sky, a craft, an orb, something unusual, you had to gather all the evidence, collect testimony from the witnesses, look for physical evidence, and all of that information went into one program at the Ministry of Defense. Thousands and thousands of these reports came in. A lot of them were first routed to the KGB, but then back to another program that came after this collection effort called Thread 3. And Thread 3 was an analysis program we provided to the committee, the documents of what they were trying to do, and essentially they were trying to build their own UFOs. They were using the information from their observations and studies to try to figure out that technology. The guy who was in charge of that program, Colonel Boro Sokolov, told me that their goal was to basically develop technology that would be superior to anything we had based on what they learned from UFOs. Mr. Knapp, just in the name of time, to my understanding, did you have anything you wanted to submit for Congress to see in this committee? I have submitted those documents. Would you like to play any videos? Do you have a video that you would like to play? I don't think it's for me to play. Yeah, Alexander's video. Okay. He can narrate it. Okay, we can, in the name of showing that video to everyone on task force, we'd like to play that video at this time. Sure. That ---- took off earlier. If we can get rid of the audio real quick. Mr. Wiggins and Mr. Knapp, we'll get back to what that video was in a moment, but we just want to make sure that it was entered into the record as well as all the documents. Those will be able to be publicly found for everyone in the country to view. If we could, Mr. Knapp, we'll continue on the line of questioning, but I'm going to move on to Mr. Borland's opening statement. Good morning, members of the task force and the committee. I would like to express my gratitude for being invited to testify to the current task force created under the People's Chamber and the American public. As an American citizen, veteran, and intelligence community professional, it is an honor and a privilege to serve under oath before you on behalf of our country. I speak for myself and no former agency or company I have been previously affiliated with. My name is Dylan Borland, a former one-on-one geospatial intelligence specialist for the United States Air Force in an active duty enlisted capacity from 2010 to 2013. I've also been employed with BAE Systems and Intrepid Solutions as a senior analyst, expert in analyzing video, radar, and advanced electro-optical imagery for official identification of aerial order of battle as well as naval and ground order of battle. I'm a federal whistleblower, having testified to both the ICIG and AERO with direct firsthand knowledge of and experience with craft and technologies that are not ours and are reportedly operating without congressional oversight. Because of my direct knowledge of the reality of certain legacy UAP programs, my professional career was deliberately obstructed and I have endured sustained reprisals from government agencies for over a decade. From 2011 to 2013, I was stationed at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, conducting 24-hour operations via manned and unmanned aerial vehicles for special operations forces in the global war on terror. During the summer of 2012, my team was on standby for weather and I returned to my barracks on base and at approximately 0130, I saw an approximately 100-foot equilateral triangle take off from near the NASA hangar on the base. The craft interfered with my telephone, did not have any sound, and the material it was made of appeared fluid or dynamic. I was under this triangular craft for a few minutes and then it rapidly ascended to commercial jet level in seconds, displaying zero kinetic disturbance, sound, or wind displacement. Some years after that experience, I was further exposed to classified information from the UAP legacy crash retrieval program through a sensitive position I held within a special access program. During this time, intelligence officers approached me in fear for their own careers, citing misconduct within these programs and similar retaliation that I was already enduring at this time. These issues include medical malpractice committed by Veterans Affairs staff, denial of work I performed while enlisted in the United States Air Force, forging manipulated employment documents, workplace harassment, including colleagues being directed to not speak with me, manipulation of my security clearance by certain agencies, blocking, delaying, and ultimately removing my ability to be employed within the IC. The retaliation I faced and the retaliation against individuals I know who worked in these programs is what convinced me in March 2023 to become a whistleblower. I came forward out of concern for people's lives and to ensure I did everything I could to let our elected representatives know the truth about what is really happening in the executive branch. At the end of March 2023, I agreed to meet with AERO following the suggestion of other federal officials believing it was what our nation required of me. I had reservations with AERO due to assessments they were reporting publicly at the time as a misrepresentation of the truth. Because of these concerns, I did not share sources and methods information in order to protect current and formal federal personnel who had firsthand exposure to technologies of unknown origin. I did not want anyone to face further retaliation beyond what they had already endured. And unfortunately, a staff member ended up getting in some trouble because of that. After David Grush testified under oath in the summer of 2023 and provided historic disclosure, I was then asked to go to the ICIG and did so in August 2023. It was very clear early on during my intake interview, which was video recorded under oath, that the objective was to solely assess how much I know and not move forward with an investigation with new information I provided them. The aftermath of that IG complaint still troubles me to this day. Since my ICIG complaint, I've been prevented from assuming prior employment and can confirm I'm still blacklisted from certain agencies within the intelligence community. In addition, multiple agencies attempted phishing attacks to assess what I had divulged to the inspector general, including being asked to disclose details of my ICIG complaint during a CI polygraph for a position unrelated to UFO UAP matters as recently as November 2024. As I sit before you today, I and many other whistleblowers have no job prospects, no foreseeable professional future in a nation every single one of us came forward to defend. Numerous individuals have come forward in various ways to reveal the truth of the UAP reality as patriots and defenders of our nation. Yet many feel discarded, isolated, hopeless, separated from the country they serve. Efforts to rectify this situation for all whistleblowers have been difficult and troubling. And to my fellow whistleblowers and officials who know this information, I offer you my apology, something that I have never gotten and I'm giving it to you. I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, a note that demands truth and transparency for our democratic republic to function. Each day, these truths remain hidden from our citizens. Humanity drifts further from the principles our nation was founded to uphold. Each day, victims of crimes committed by agencies and companies maintaining this secrecy are denied justice is another day our constitution is shredded. In 2023, patriots provided this committee and the executive branch with undeniable proof of the UAP reality. And I commend your continued commitment. The future of humanity is one which we either travel to the stars or regress to the stone age with this technology. My career has been to deliver critical information to decision makers. Your role as elected by your representatives is to act on it. The time to act is now. Thank you. Mr. Borland, thank you for your service to our country and we appreciate you. And we are sorry about how you've been treated and we will make sure that we try to rectify that situation. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Spielberger, please, your opening remarks. Chairwoman Luna, Ranking Member Crockett, and task force members, thank you for the opportunity to testify here today about the importance of strengthening whistleblower protections, especially in the context of national security. I am a senior policy counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan, independent watchdog organization that investigates and exposes waste, corruption, abuse of power, and when the government fails to serve the public or silences those who report wrongdoing. Whistleblowers are the first line of defense to root out waste, fraud, abuse of power, and corruption in our government. Congress relies on whistleblowers so that it can fully exercise its oversight and legislative authorities. It's understandable that former presidents of both parties have often taken a hostile approach toward whistleblowers. Their disclosures can embarrass the president and their political party or even lead to a national scandal. But whistleblowers continue to play a vital role during both Democratic and Republican administrations. They help Congress and the public identify and understand what government corruption looks like. Their disclosures fuel investigations and allow us to address wrongdoing and hold those responsible to account. That's why, historically, there's been a strong bipartisan consensus in Congress to support and protect whistleblowers. Doing so protects the country and ensures our government is more responsive and accountable to the people. National security whistleblowing, in particular, is a tradition going back to the founding of our country. And over time, national security whistleblowers and their disclosures have impacted some of the most fundamental issues and questions about how we wish to be governed and how our government can better serve its people. From the role the U.S. plays around the world to holding powerful actors accountable, government ethics and transparency, human rights and civil liberties, executive branch authority, First Amendment freedoms of speech and dissent, freedom of the press, and the public's interest and right to know. Despite this invaluable public service, blowing the whistle comes at great personal risk. Whistleblowers risk losing their jobs, careers, livelihoods, and reputations. They can face retaliatory investigations, lawsuits, and even serious criminal charges. And they can endure deep mental, emotional, and psychological harm. All of that risk to speak the truth, to ensure that agencies fulfill their core missions, and that they serve the best interests of the people. Those who retaliate against whistleblowers don't just violate their legal rights, they inflict real harm on our government and betray the public's trust. Targeting whistleblowers instead of the corruption they expose wastes agency resources and further allows that corruption to continue unaddressed. It can instill a chilling effect across an agency, fostering a climate of fear and distrust, quieting dissent and free speech, and deterring potential whistleblowers from coming forward in the future. Whistleblowers are often some of the most dedicated and principled public servants we have because of their willingness to put themselves on the line to do what's right. And Congress has historically supported them, again, on a bipartisan basis. But unfortunately, whistleblowing has increasingly become more politicized, with support for whistleblowers often hinging on which party is in power and which party is politically inconvenienced by the misconduct being exposed. But to be clear, targeting whistleblowers individually risks undermining whistleblowing, period. POGO advises members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to focus on the evidence, not the individual. We will always need whistleblowers to achieve the government that best serves its people because when people of conscience, integrity, and good character refuse to speak up out of fear, complacency, or self-preservation, and leave corruption to fester behind closed doors, that is probably the most dangerous risk of all. If we are serious about increasing government transparency and restoring the public's trust, we need public servants committed to the truth. Whistleblowers need safe and effective channels to make lawful disclosures. They need stronger protections against retaliation. And when they do face retaliation, they need a fair shot to be made whole. Congress has made strides to pass whistleblower legislation and these laws need to be updated and expanded so that whistleblowers truly receive the protections they need, retaliators are held accountable, and we can achieve the type of government the people deserve. We strongly urge Congress to continue its historic tradition of championing the rights and protections of all whistleblowers. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify here this morning. POGO is committed to working with you and the Oversight Committee to address these critical issues. I look forward to any questions. Thank you, sir, very much. Additionally, without objection, the following members are waived onto the task force for the purpose of questioning witnesses at today's hearing. Representative Perry of Pennsylvania and Representative Grothman of Wisconsin. Sorry, what did it? Oh, Representative Biggs from Arizona. I already got you, but yeah, we're good. Without objection, so ordered, I now recognize myself for five minutes of questioning. Also, as my friend, Mr. Moskowitz might have to go, would you like to go now? Okay, all right. Mr. Borland, in your testimony, you described witnessing large triangular craft while stationed at Langley Air Force Base in 2012. Can you explain what you observed in terms of size behavior and why you're confident it was not conventional technology? Great question, ma'am. So on barracks, on the base, I lived in the barracks. There was a little smoke pit outside. I was there. On the telephone and looking across to the flight line and I see a white light pop up and stop about 100 feet in the air. I thought it was a weather balloon. I've seen tests from there before, a weak night, you know, normal thing, not surprising. I actually finished my cigarette and I began walking up towards the flight line. There is a track and because I was on three months of night work, I began, I would walk the track at night when we were weathered down. And as I began walking towards the light, towards the flight line and the track, the light then flies across the base, across the flight line. And as it flies to me, a triangle manifests around the light. I can't tell you if it's active camouflage. I can't tell you if it appeared around the light, but I can tell you that it was a white light and then it was a triangle. It stopped about 100 feet in front of me and approximately 100 feet above me. My telephone got extremely hot, completely froze, dead. I remember how thick it was. It was between one to two stories thick, equilateral triangle. I could never see the top of it and the edges were 90 degrees. There were four lights in total, one light on each corner and a larger light in the center, two to three times the size of the corner lights. But what was really odd was the outside, the best way to describe it is like looking at a James Webb telescope picture where you have the colors and then the black background. So the craft itself was this black metallic flake paint, but on top of the craft was this gold, lava, plasma, some type of fluid going over and around the craft. I'm under this for about two to three minutes and then the center light flashes two to three times, no sound, immediately shoots up to commercial jet level minimum in my opinion. And I immediately feel static electricity all over my body. And then I smell the smell of after a thunderstorm or lightning storm, that really strong summer thunderstorm smell gets up to flight level. I'm trying to get my phone reset and I can only see the center light at this point. If I didn't actually see it take off, I would have thought it was a star. And then it hovers up there and it begins to slowly move due east out over the Atlantic ocean. I finally got my phone reset. The entire thing was about from the time I saw the light pop up near the hangar until it took off out over the ocean was about 15 minutes. And following up to that question, after you disclosed this information to the intelligence community inspector general, you were subject to phishing attempts and job blacklisting. How widespread do you think this is across the intelligence community for those who raise concerns regarding UAP programs? It's a difficult question to answer. I think prior to David Grush and people beginning this process of bringing people into awareness of the reality of these programs and certain things people have witnessed, probably extremely widespread. I think today there's still an issue, but because people are able to come before you and people are speaking out, I think it has been somewhat less. I would hope though that people would because if this goes back into closed doors, this is going to get really ugly. What type of behavior have you witnessed from former AERO director Sean Kirkpatrick as well as his staff and relate to this information you provided to them? Did they ever try to classify this information as non-human technology? A good question. The problem with this is that I know what I experienced firsthand. I know other things. I think the staff at AERO that I met with in March of 2023, I think they were good people doing the job they were told to do. I did not meet with Kirkpatrick. He was either not present or did not want to meet me that day. However, they did classify information about the reality of this subject and it was very concerning because in my AERO MFR, they had actually referenced a former staff member that was the one who told me to go there and they probably shouldn't have done that. Real quick before my time is up and we might go to second round of questioning just so you're all aware, how important given everything that you've seen and experienced is the UAP Disclosure Act of 2025 and restoring both public accountability and trust? I think very important. I would hope though that the seven-year window could be shrunk, my opinion, but very important. The truth needs to be known. Thank you very much. I now recognize Jared Moskowitz of Florida. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you for allowing me to wave on to the committee. I remember the last committee when we had a bunch of former military personnel folks that either served on bases, were pilots, or were in different programs experiencing knowledge. It made me recognize that the narrative has changed. It's politically convenient for the government if you all weren't military folks in suits. It would be much better if you pulled up in Winnebago's and were wearing hats. The picture of this, because that's important for the American people on how you tell a story, what the message looks like, and who the messenger is. This is now the second or third committee where we have former military folks with impeccable records, with information and knowledge. It's definitely clear on a bipartisan basis that we have to protect our whistleblowers. There's no doubt. And in a day in which it's really hard to tell what's true or not from a political standpoint. And so I don't really know what is true. I don't know on this subject. But I do know when we're being lied to. And we are definitely being lied to. There's just no doubt about that. Mr. Wiggins, I want to talk to you. I find your background testimony compelling. When you first saw what you were looking at, what were your first thoughts? My first thoughts were, I think everything that I was told and taught as a kid and a growing adult no longer was applicable. If I'm able to see something that I thought defies gravity in such a way, then what else could be possible? That was my first thought. Did you think what you were looking at was a weapons program that you were unaware of? Or did you think what you were looking at was obviously some extraterrestrial piece of technology? I didn't. Neither one of those crossed my mind. It was just... How about now? What do you think it is now? I'm not the expert. I think I want to be as skeptical as everyone else and just hope to know the information. Anyone in the U.S. government tell you what you were looking at? To try to dissuade you from what you thought it was? No. So no one was like, oh, there was some anomaly with the technology. No one from the government did that? No one. How do you think you were treated when you reported this information or talked about... The TikTok video is well out there. It's well reported. How were you treated? I've had no pushback at all. I haven't had anyone reach out to me or try to dissuade me in either direction, militarily speaking. So I was treated fair and I appreciate the Navy itself with assisting me with coming here to being able to testify. That's good. So what do you think the American people should take away from watching your video? Because when we watch it, obviously, we've never seen anything like that. It defies what we know to be technologically possible. What are we supposed to think? Someone's lying about something. Someone's hiding something. That's not normal what you looked at. I think what the American people should think when seeing that video, along with others before me, is that there is something out there and we should know as the people what it is. Right. And so let's eliminate possibilities. So they didn't come to you and say there was a technological error with what you were looking at. So we put that aside, right? They didn't say it was broken. So we look at that and we see something. So it's either a weapons program being reverse engineered by our governments or other governments, or it's nobody's government. And it's not from here. Those are it. You agree with that assessment? I agree. One or the other. Mr. Borland, when you first experienced what you were looking at, what did you do next? What was your next step after it had passed and you were done? I actually kind of laughed at myself and said, okay, so this exists as well. Worked in enough programs, been exposed to enough that I was like, okay, so this is a real thing. I went back, walked the track, talked to a couple of my friends about it. I did talk with some of my co-workers. One in particular, which I thought was a joke and it definitely wasn't, was like, you probably should never say this to anybody. And then what happened to me happened. So. What about you, Mr. How do you pronounce your last name? Nusatelli. And sorry, I know I'm running out of time, Madam Chairman, Chairwoman. So obviously your incident happened well before we could record things on cell phones and things of that nature, right? What did you do when you first experienced? Because what you saw, right, you saw it happen like right out of your base. Right. So tell me what you did after you saw that. What was like your next move? And I want to hear how, what your experience was. My next move, I went into my house after it left. I made sure no one had been abducted and I picked up the landline. I called the Security Forces Command Center. I reported it. I requested that they give me a call back and make notifications up the chain of command. I got a call back in about 15 minutes. They reported that the weather station reported no balloons or aircraft, nothing on radar, no aircraft inbound or outbound. So I got that notification. And then within the following day or two, me and the other witnesses wrote statements. We prepared a report and then we filed all that information. Madam Chairman, thank you for your indulgence in my questioning and thank you for continuing to lead on this subject. What do you and your friends think about it today? You all have talked about it. I mean, so what do you think about your experience as a collective group? That'll be my last question, Madam Chairman. I mean, we've been talking about this for 20 years. We don't know what we saw. What we saw changed our lives and the way we think about everything. It was incredibly profound. The object I saw, I don't even know if it was an object. It was a light. It was an orb. It didn't look like a craft, but it did look solid. And that's what we talk about. We noticed the object and this was a pattern across all the encounters. Someone would see a light. They would pay attention to the light. And then the object responds. It performs for you. And then they come down and they investigate you. So it's almost like they're curious. So that's the thing we primarily talk about. Why did it come after we noticed it? Maybe it noticed us after we noticed it. You're welcome. I now recognize Representative Mace for five minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today. Mr. Borland, I'd like to start with you and ask a few questions. Were there any other witnesses when you saw the equilateral triangle? Were there other witnesses that saw the same thing? Not to my knowledge, ma'am. At that point, the only people that would be awake is those of us that were doing operations for the GWAT and then security forces. So not to my knowledge. And do you think that, in your opinion, that the equilateral triangle was the U.S. government's technology? I did once upon a time. But knowing what I know now, I'll have to answer that question in a skit probably. I was getting one of my last questions. You teased us. So knowing what you know now means what? I know enough to know that if you want an answer to that question, go to AERO. They have the answer. Do you think it was a foreign government? I do not. No. And AERO is supposed to be disclosing. The last time I was in a skit with AERO, they said they were going to be doing disclosures. Had they been doing much of that? I don't have an answer to you, for you. I don't know. I know what AERO reports publicly and I know what I've been through. Yeah. And some of this stuff can be, I think, debunked, right? There are sometimes there are weather balloons that look kind of a little funky or drones or whatever, depending on the angle, direction, speed, et cetera. Are you scared for your safety? That's a complicated question. So being here today, if I say the wrong word, technically, I can be charged with espionage. Espionage is a death penalty. Whistleblowers have faced it. John Kiriakou, for example. I am not scared for my physical safety in the sense of an agency or company coming to kill me. But I have no job. My career has been tarnished. I'm unemployed, living off of unemployment for the next three, four weeks until that's gone.