He Is Back Inside... and Cannot Say Why

David Grouch did. I'm not David Grouch. I don't know what he signed. I can tell you what I signed and it says I cannot talk about crash retrievals, which that alone should be very indicative. That is Louis Elizondo in a new interview explaining that he signed a lifelong government agreement that bars him from discussing crash retrievals. He also confirmed he is working for the federal government again and he said he moved back to Washington DC area permanently and he still holds his security clearance and was asked to return to support government efforts. He would not name the agency or the role and this comes about two months after a News Nation segment alleged he was being placed in a White House position to control how disclosure unfolds. At the same time, Avi Loeb, who now leads a science council advising the intelligence community, is pushing for a $10 million reward for anyone who can produce real alien technology. Hey Ufologers, I'm Christina Gomez and this is your UFO News Update. As you just noticed, we have a new addition to the family. His name is Cosmo and he is a cute little boy who loves to be pet and who absolutely loves attention. Also, these last few days, there haven't been any shows because as you can probably hear from my voice, I've been a little sick. But we are back on it so let's get straight into this. Martin Willis from Podcast UFO Live Shows pressed Elizondo on the new job in DC. But, you know, the professional reason is that I am employed with the U.S. government. I work for the U.S. government. It's been no secret that I still maintain my security clearance and there's a reason for that. And I'm supporting government efforts. Can you get into any of the details of that? I probably cannot right now, but I am still very much advocating for the cause, for disclosure, truth and transparency regarding the UAP topic. Elizondo said the work goes beyond UFOs. He cited Iran, Ukraine, inflation and the midterm elections. And he said his background as a former special agent could help in an advisory role. He also says he has been called into what he describes as the principal's office more than once for saying more than officials were ready to hear. The allegation he is responding to aired on Reality Check with Ross Colthart and researcher UAP Gerb claimed Elizondo was being positioned for a role on the National Security Council, the White House group that advises the president on security to run a limited, controlled form of disclosure. Gerb tied that to former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in 2016, and Elizondo answered that particular claim. Yeah, one of the claims that was made by somebody was that Jim Clapper, who was then the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, who then became the Director of National Intelligence under the Obama administration, that he and I had somehow colluded to try to soft-sell disclosure, and that we were in cahoots to try to bring disclosure, but in a very controlled way. That never happened. A conversation like that never occurred. Whatever your opinions are of Clapper, he was a patriot. He did some great things for this country, as did Jim Mattis. Now, that's probably me coming from a military guy. I'm very protective of people who have served their country. Now, that doesn't give you an excuse to do things illegal if illegal things are done. And I'm not saying that's the case here, but I personally won't tolerate it. And that's why I know that Clapper and I weren't colluding. He called Ross a friend and declined to criticize him personally, and he said Ross aired information that was not accurate without calling him first. He believes more than one person manipulated the situation and says he knows who they are, but he wouldn't name them. Elizondo confirmed that two have talked by text since. Then Martin asked whether he ever came across crash retrieval cases while in government. I've made it very clear before that I signed a document with the United States government years ago that forbade me from talking about crash retrievals. People say, oh yeah, but David Grouch did. I'm not David Grouch. I don't know what he signed. I can tell you what I signed, and it says I cannot talk about crash retrievals, which that alone should be very indicative. You don't sign a secrecy oath on something if there's nothing there to protect. And the fact that now members of Congress and others are having this conversation, I think it's great, but I have not been relieved of that. No one came by and say, you know what, Lou, that document you signed, it's no longer valid. The moment they say it's no longer valid, let's do it. Hot damn, let's have a conversation. He added two details. The agreement has no end date and binds him for life. The signed document is kept somewhere in Colorado Springs, though he will not name the official office. And he said that once the government releases him from it, he will talk. He was also asked why the strongest material has never come out, and Elizondo stated it like this. Let me share a quote with you. I'm not going to tell you who told me this, but I was told, Lou, there are some technologies and capabilities we have that we're willing to lose a war for. Now, I disagree with that. I completely and vehemently disagree with that perspective. But I understand if that is the perspective of certain people. Something that is so advanced that have gotten to the hands of an adversary could be very bad for all of us. The concern, he said, is that technology this advanced could fall into an adversary's hands. He also rejected the idea that these objects are secret human aircraft. He pointed to cases from the late 1940s to the 1960s when objects were tracked at more than 10,000 miles per hour with no sonic boom. If any country had built that and flown it over the U.S. for decades without anyone noticing, he said, it would be the biggest intelligence failure in American history. So if Elizondo is back inside the government and cannot say what he's doing, does that make you more hopeful about disclosure or more cautious? Well, you tell me. Elizondo said gatekeepers do exist, but he described the holdup as coordination. But before anything is announced, the CIA, the FBI, and the Department of Energy, and even the White House all have to agree. If you enjoy these latest updates, subscribe so you do not miss tomorrow's report. On NASA, Elizondo called the Apollo 12 and the Apollo 17 images in May's pursuit release a major step after decades of denial. The files list those images as unresolved, and he said other agencies are watching how the public reacts before they release any more. He was then asked about the 23-minute UAP video that he has mentioned for years, and here's how he addressed it. And I've heard you say it more than once, that there was this 23-minute video. And what's the story with that? I was hoping that we'd see that, like, a couple of years ago, and it never came. I think you will, but that's not the most compelling one. It's a very compelling one, but there's others where these things come, you know, 15 feet from the cockpit. But you've already heard, you know, Ryan Graves talk about how these things are so close, they'd split the combat formation right down the middle. He didn't say when the footage might be released or who holds it. He pointed to former Navy pilot Ryan Graves, who has described an object passing between two jets flying in formation. Elizondo also said Chris Mellon, the former deputy assistant secretary of defense for intelligence and friend, is active behind the scenes, and that the two coordinate closely. The scientist who will review data like this has a different approach. Avi Loeb chairs the new UAP Science Advisory Council, created this summer after President Trump's February transparency directive, and the council supports a UAP governance board overseen by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, or ODNI, which first met in mid-June. In a new Fox News interview, Loeb describes his assignment. The Trump administration has an opportunity to make history by unraveling alien technology, but we need to look at the evidence. We need clear evidence beyond any reasonable doubt. And I was tasked by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to assist the Trump administration, the White House, the intelligence community, the FBI, and the Pentagon in analyzing existing data that they have, but also trying to get new data because if the data is not good enough, we can actually figure out what the nature of these unidentified anomalous phenomena is like in a detective story. Loeb's test is overall pretty simple. If an object comes from an adversary's secret program, analysts should be able to trace how it was developed because human technology improves step by step. If it is far beyond anything we have with no development history, it may come from a civilization that had thousands or millions of years longer to work on it. Either way, he says, it is a national security issue because these objects are seen hovering over military sites. Loeb said he recently traveled to Los Angeles and encountered the creation of a $10 million prize for anyone who can produce material that is clearly alien technology. He also wants the money to fund researchers who monitor the sky and collect their own data. Loeb has also bet skeptic Michael Shermer a $1,000 bet that alien technology will be confirmed by the end of 2030. Sean Kirkpatrick, the former head of the Pentagon's All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or ARO, has said Loeb lacks national security experience. Elizondo and Loeb are now both part of the same official process, and they describe the problem in very different ways. Elizondo says officials are protecting technology they would risk a war over, and he is barred for life from discussing crash retrievals. Loeb says the case closes as someone produces physical proof, and he wants $10 million offered to find it. Which do you think would get results first, an insider working quietly inside government or a scientist offering a reward for physical proof? If you want the full background, you have to go back to the allegations that put Elizondo in the spotlight again. It is the claim that he is being placed in the White House to control how disclosure unfolds, along with what he said what happened when it first came out. To see where that fight started, watch this video next. Be safe, and remember, keep your eyes on the skies.