Just days ago, The Black Vault released a story that confirmed the e-mails of Luis Elizondo… have all been destroyed by the Department of Defense. This paper trail that is now gone for good would likely not only consist of e-mails, but all attachments, scheduled tasks, calendars, chat transcripts and other communications that spanned nearly a decade.
After months of seeking the proper authorization for the DoD to do this; there was nothing found. When asked, the Pentagon couldn’t cite authorization either, even after two months of asking. In fact, documented protocol proves that this material should likely have been saved until at least October 4, 2024, if not, possibly even being mandated to be saved indefinitely.
With this crucial evidence seemingly destroyed, stepping into the Vault today, is Luis Elizondo himself. Now hear from him on what truly was lost; how he feels about it; and what the next steps may be.
Stay tuned… you’re about to journey INSIDE THE BLACK VAULT.
- The Pentagon Destroyed E-mails Of Luis Elizondo: Here’s How It Went Down
- Official Tied To UFO Investigation Claims
Live Stream Version
Transcripts published for The Black Vault are approximate, and done by AI, with a quick human pass through. There are often some minor mistakes, or grammatical errors, especially when guests talk about each other. These errors are not intentional.
John Greenewald 0:11
Just days ago, the black vault released a story that confirmed the emails of Luis Elizondo have all been destroyed by the Department of Defense. This paper trail that is now gone for good would likely not only consist of emails, but also all attachments, scheduled tasks, calendars, chat transcripts, and other communications that spanned nearly a decade. After months of seeking the proper authorization for the DOJ to do this, there was nothing found. When asked, the Pentagon couldn’t cite authorization either. Even after nearly two months of asking, in fact, documented protocol proves that this material should likely have been saved until at least October 4 2024, if not, possibly even being mandated to be saved indefinitely. With this crucial evidence seemingly destroyed. Stepping into the vault today is Luis Elizondo himself. Now hear from him on what truly was lost, how he feels about it, and what the next steps may be. Stay tuned, you’re about to journey inside the black vault.
That’s right, everybody. As always, thank you so much for tuning in and making this your podcast or your live stream of choice for those subscribers to this channel. Or if you’re brand new days ago, I posted a video which was connected to a very long article which I worked approximately about three years on, it took two months just to verify the lead of the story, which was simply this the paper trail that will lead into better understanding a tip the Pentagon’s UFO story as it is largely referenced in the media would consist of Luis Elizondo his emails. And finally, after months of pressing, they did confirm the Pentagon and Department of Defense confirmed, it’s all gone. Now, although that may stay at sound like standard procedure, I, for months, tried to verify what, what authorized them to do this, and I was unable to do it. Now, that doesn’t mean much. But I was pressing the Pentagon at the exact same time. And they couldn’t prove it, either. Now, you’ve all heard my reaction to that. But more importantly, here’s the man himself, Luis Elizondo, Louise, thank you so much for again, stepping into the vault and spending some time with me here.
Luis Elizondo 3:17
Yeah, john, my pleasure. Thank you very much. And a big thank you to your audience as well. I know, a lot of folks have been kind of following this, this topic for quite some time. And I look forward to addressing any questions you you or your listeners might have.
John Greenewald 3:33
And I appreciate that. So like I mentioned, my audience has, has heard my reaction, a very quick backstory, so they better understand it was almost two months to the day, when I picked up my cell phone and called you and said, Okay, this is what they’re pulling, I wanted you to be be the first to know, you ended up being essentially the only one to know, you may have shared it with others, but but in the sense I didn’t talk about it at all. I want to start with those emails and and get your reaction to this story. Let me take you back to two months ago. If I can ask you, were you aware of that? Or was that new to you that your emails were destroyed according to the Department of Defense?
Luis Elizondo 4:19
Well, I it was a surprise but but not a surprise. You know, obviously john, I’ve had to to the major portfolios I ran the last 10 years or so in the Pentagon was the UFO program. And then one that I haven’t really talked much about, which is Guantanamo Bay. And clearly from a from a perspective of not just posterity, but from a legal legal perspective. Anything that I was engaged in involving the 911 Commission trials is considered discoverable. in a court of law, it’s considered evidentiary. And so that must by law be preserved to for posterity sake and there is no, there’s no destroyed 25 years, it stays around forever. So when you when you had indicated to me that the Pentagon were good be grudgingly admitted that my my correspondence my emails were destroyed. Obviously I was very disappointed in that because frankly, it’s it’s, it’s it’s illegal in some cases, especially as related to some of my work I was doing. But also disappointing and disappointing because there are several categories of information that I was involved with that are specifically exempt from that destroy on, you know, let’s say two or five or 10 years. And, yeah, there you have it. Am I am I surprised? You know, again, not really, I am because it’s it’s such a bold act for them to do I mean, at that point, it’s, you know, they say, Well, yeah, Lou had nothing to do with eight. Okay, well, where it’s just females, we don’t have them. And so, you know, it’s kind of this weird, you know, double negative, right. And one case, you’re saying that a tip wasn’t real, and we never studied UFOs. And I was a part of it. On the second on that second accutron sale? Well, we don’t have any any of those emails. Yeah, you know. So it’s just, it’s kind of kind of bizarre where, where I
John Greenewald 6:19
have stated publicly that this goes to the heart and core and soul of why I do what I do. for 25 years. When I started when I was 15, I realized that there were two main aspects that drove me it was transparency, and preservation. And with this particular case, the Department of Defense showed neither, they obviously did not want to give me these emails, I have at least or had at least eight FOIA requests with various keywords going for this material. But what was amazing to me was that even away from a tip was that that office that you directed, called the National Program, special management staffer, and psms. You had mentioned the gizmo portion of that. Can I ask you away from a tip UFOs, and all of that, with that particular office? Can you mention anything else that that office
Luis Elizondo 7:16
did? I had to be very careful because it was very, very sensitive. It my I think one of my last emails may have been, I don’t know if it was released, or someone had a copy of it. But in there, you can see that it was it was definitely nuanced. It was a program that supported the White House and the National Security Council. So obviously, that information to be just willy nilly destroyed by the D o t, when we’re talking about information that’s beyond just title 10. is frankly, silly. And I’ll tell you something to john, from, from my perspective, look, we haven’t always necessarily agreed on everything. And we can agree to disagree. But let me tell you the one thing that I’ve always respected about you, you are you are one of the most tenacious and probably one of the most global experts on the FOIA process. And what why is that important? Because FOIA isn’t just a privilege. It’s a right. It’s an act. It’s a law that was established by Congress to make sure that there is transparency within the government. Okay. That is, that is a law that was passed by Congress. So basically, it’s not a option. It’s not at Well, you can if you want, you know, you must comply with FOIA. And what I’m seeing here, besides this, this obfuscation and the these these silly games that keep playing, is that they are taking a law. And they’re making a mockery of it. They’re interjecting organizations and people into that calculus that are that are deliberately not supposed to be in there. They are, they are deleting information, which frankly, between you and me, I don’t believe they’ve deleted anything. I think it’s just extremely damning and incriminating. So they don’t want it to come out. And it’s it’s making a mockery of law. So at that point, you have to ask yourself, john, when an organization in the United States who is bound to uphold the law, is now breaking the law. Okay. Is that organization? Are those people that are in those positions? Do they represent the will of the government? Do they represent the will of the people in United States? And if the answer is no on both, then are they even legitimately in charge of anything? much that’s my, that’s my concern here, john, this is what exercises me so much that there are people that are willfully trouncing on on on might as well be the constitution because these are laws of balls of the land. They’re not they’re not flexible. It’s not like a rule that you can bend the rule. Yeah, law you don’t and and You have all people I’m sure probably are frustrated by this. But for me as a as a patriot and somebody who served his country in uniform, you know, I fought against tyranny over in the battlefields of the desert and jungles and what not only to find that same tyranny now within the halls of the Pentagon, that that is problematic that is that is that that is that is a true threat, if there was ever a threat, is, is somebody upstanding with our freedoms, and and and basically tearing up whatever rules or laws have for you that they think, you know, don’t apply to them? These laws apply to everybody. Yeah. And especially if you’re in a position of in the government, you, you know,
John Greenewald 10:49
well, I appreciate those kind words about my work. And when I say that it really does go to the core of of why I do this. It truly, it truly does. And going back to the question I asked you about your office, I know that you get a lot of flack. And I’m happy to say it was never flak for me on this point, that, you know, you do have those security oaths, and NDA is and and and clearances where you can’t talk about it. And that was what was very evident to me about that office, because there was very little to dig up. And trust me, I’ve tried since 2000, whatever it was, that I have no doubt, john. Yeah. But it was those Navy court transcripts that came up and I won’t push you on it, because I know it is sensitive. And I know it’s still ongoing. But for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, to reference your office in October of 2017. It’s clear that whatever you were doing within that office, was in dealing with special access programs, and also giving what appeared from the transcripts, the translator, for Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, access to the information for him to properly translate to the for the defense, and there was a problem with the judge because they had lost their SAP access. So for me to see that again, away from the a tip story that made me realize a couple years ago, okay, this guy was into, you know, some some highly classified material programs, and obviously, the one that was spearheading that effort for others to gain access to those special access probe.
Luis Elizondo 12:28
Well, that’s honestly john, what landed me on the naughty boy list with with ISIS and Al Qaeda, that I was informed that I, I was wound up being put on the on the kill list, which was not a very good day in the Elizondo house, or they can make an assure you. But, you know, fortunately, for me, just, I just wanted up on being on some sort of kill list where other people actually, you know, lost their lives. So I’m definitely not saying that, that their line of work was was, you know, anything more dangerous than anybody else. But it did put me in a situation where it, it, it may, it still is technically, I’m still, you know, on that, that naughty list, if
John Greenewald 13:11
you will, which has not been been easy for my family, for sure. Sure. And I totally understand that. And I’m sorry to hear that. Because I know, that’s obviously not easy for you, your family and anyone connected to you. So with that, though, what I wanted my audience to understand is the sensitivity behind this material that stretches well beyond a tip. I know, I keep saying that, but it’s like, this has become such a bigger issue now. And that, that is why I got so attached to this a couple months ago when I realized they were playing that card. And they were saying, hey, look, for three years you fought for these records. And oh, by the way, we don’t have them. Let me let me point out one thing that I’m not sure if I told you this privately, or maybe you read it in the in the email, but I want you to react to the importance of this before they told me that essentially, your your documents were destroyed. And I want to also be clear, and clarify, that’s not just emails, by the records retention schedule, what goes along, missed that with that would be all of the attachments, all of the what they call text communications. And there was kind of a short list of things that are it’s not just email like, Hey, you want to go have lunch today to one of your colleagues. You know, you’re talking about the attachments and everything that goes along with it. When I started getting these no records denials, but never did they mentioned that your stuff was destroyed. I verified triple checked that they searched sipper net nipper net and Jay wicks to ensure that I would get everything they wrote back and said yes, never once indicating that no account existed, or that it was destroyed.
Luis Elizondo 14:57
Kinjo that’s either one or two things, john either a They still had the records back then. And and they were knowing that you were interested them said, Yes, we search through all this stuff. No records of that specific request has popped up in that system. And knowing that they’re going to go ahead and destroy these files, or the other option is they were already gone. And they were just stringing you along. But either way, if Something smells fishy, either, you know, those emails were there. And then once you won your appeal, they came back and said up, nothing to see here. Yeah, or those files already were destroyed, which they shouldn’t have been. And they were just saying, Yeah, yeah, nothing to see here. Just move along. You know, we looked there. We couldn’t find anything knowing full well that they were already destroyed. But either way it’s it’s it’s it’s no bueno. It’s up someone is, is been been manipulating the FOIA process, in my opinion.
John Greenewald 15:57
Have you had a reaction not only from the social media world because this pop this article did become very popular very quickly within that world. But obviously, you’re dealing with the media, the mainstream media, like on a hourly basis. Every time I turn on the television, and there’s a UFO story, you are right there on camera. You. I hope we’ll have an upcoming vacation soon. And get some sleep because me too. Yeah. Again, there’s there’s not 36 hours in a day, but you seemingly have squeezed that out. What is the reaction if any two people that you’ve been been talking to in the mainstream, and those that have kind of tackled like, for example, Gotti Schwartz, who have a lot of respect for with NBC, he seems to really dig and he brought out that Harry Reid endorsement letter of view. And obviously, Harry Reid has endorsed you since 2019, I think was the first time publicly, but now it’s, you know, Harry Reid’s letterhead, and so on and so forth. And that was Gotti Schwartz, and with his investigative journalism, he just kept pushing, pushing. And I respect that. Is there a reaction that you’ve been getting from? Yeah,
Luis Elizondo 17:08
yeah. You started a firestorm? JOHN, I mean, you’ve had everybody from Politico to CNN, Fox News, NBC, they’re all looking at things right now, based upon upon your your article, you know, you know, that that’s something I could never publish. You know, obviously, one of the things I always want to do is make sure I, I never come across a self serving because I don’t do it for me, I do it for a much more sacred reason. And for me, it’s to to get the truth out to the American people. With that said, You You hit on something that really struck a chord with some people in the mainstream media, and that is okay. Are we dealing yet with another iteration of the pentagon papers? are we dealing it with another issue, like we did with with with Watergate, where all of a sudden elements of the government are running rogue and doing things that they shouldn’t have? And I think that’s given a lot of people some some concern, because it’s gonna lie about they’re gonna lie about this. What else are they going to lie about? Right, you know, and that is, I think that is that has struck a chord in certain elements within the mainstream media as it should. Yeah. Because once again, you know, there is a requirement the Public Affairs Office, is, is enjoying to, to, to dialogue with with the media, okay, there’s that we have open, you know, first amendment right, for freedom of speech. And of course, you have freedom of the press. These are inalienable rights that we hold very dear to us. And when elements in the government that are supposed to be fair and transparent, don’t they don’t behave that way, then you’ve got a problem in the past, there’s been attempts by by these offices to mislead the press. And and it’s never worked out well, for for the government to do that. Ultimately, the government has to be reminded that it serves the will of the people not the other way around.
John Greenewald 19:03
And and why I wanted to ask you that question kind of segues into the other thing that I wanted to catch up with you on was the alleged investigation by the D o t. Now what we know publicly is that they sent out a memo that they are evaluating that they went out of their way to not call it an investigation, but rather an evaluation of how the DOJ has handled the UAP topic. Now, there’s a lot of rumors out there. But why I wanted to ask about the mainstream media about this is because part of those rumors are that and maybe this is more verified fact now, but I kind of felt more as a rumor that this was about how you were being treated, and essentially targeted by some of these pointed statements in the last couple of years.
Luis Elizondo 19:52
Since I have Well, it’s true. It’s true that they weren’t targeting me and still do. Yeah, and unfortunately, they manipulate Good news, good people to do it, which is, which is for me, probably the most disappointing piece of this, you know, people that are truly just trying to find the facts and the truth, we’re being misled willfully by it by a small cadre, if you will, or a group of individuals at the Pentagon. And by the way, that does not represent the whole Pentagon, I just want to make this clear. There are wonderful fine men and women working every day for that organization, and 99% of it is is just an exceptional organization. The problem is, as you know, it takes one bad apple to spoil the rest. And, you know, that that’s that’s what’s happened in the Pentagon’s been put into a position where it’s made public statements based upon the input of a couple individuals. And, and now it’s coming back to bite them. Rather than then, you know, just be forthcoming and truthful from the beginning. They try to be clever, and unfortunately, it’s, but it’s coming out one way or the other. And guys like you who are who are experts, eventually anything that is in the government’s possession regarding that’s unclassified, special like this, I can ID, you know, don’t think that’s not going to be made public. Yeah, it has to be made public at some point. So, so it doesn’t do anybody any good to try to lie right? Now. That’s, that’s the last thing you want to do. And that’s why having this IAG evaluation, I think it’s so important because it’s, it’s, it’s a bit of a release valve. You know, I’m a gearhead, right, so I’m always looking at in terms of cars, well, think of a waste gate on the turbo system, a waste gate is there to, to, to allow to disperse any overpressure in the turbo system, right. So you don’t blow up, blow up the engine. This, I think ag evaluation is very much the same way. It’s a waste gate. It’s a it’s a way to allow some of that pressure to be released in an appropriate way. That that is the purpose of the Inspector General is to conduct reviews, inquiries, investigations, and then provide those recommendations and those findings to the Secretary of Defense. So they can fix it. That’s what the Inspector General does. And hopefully, hopefully, the big evaluation here will will do the same thing. I have full faith and confidence in the ag right now. I’ve had a chance to work with them. The past always found them very professional. These are also trained investigators, and some are auditors. Some are actual law enforcement investigators type in the intelligence community, but they’ve got a tough job, you know, and they’re always they’re supposed to be fair and impartial and objective. And so far I’ve that’s that’s what I’ve seen with my experience with with the DOJ big.
John Greenewald 22:42
So when I reached out to them, I was trying to fish around as I usually do. See what kind of fish I could catch. But I had asked them, you know, is is the is part of the angle is the angle, what is it with this evaluation? Would that be you and I got glow marred and for those who don’t know, what glomar is they? They said we can neither confirm nor deny any involvement with Mr. Luis Elizondo. So where I say the rumor is I read Brian benders piece about this made reference to your ID complaint that you had submitted. I was surprised to see all that come out. But not surprised. I was happy, because as you noted, a lot of stuff will come out with that. So then, can I ask you outright as the evaluation that was that was announced? Is that based on your complaint? Or is that separate from this eval?
Luis Elizondo 23:35
I cannot speak on behalf of the government. I think there’s two things going on. I think there’s an honest attempt in evaluation to to determine what if anything went wrong over the last three years in the Pentagon’s communication. Now that you’ve got this report due to Congress, there’s a lot of pressure and at some point, people are going to start asking some very difficult questions, right. Doesn’t matter what the report says. At some point, they’re going to come back and say hey, Pentagon out that you said there was nothing to see here or Hey, Pentagon, I think you said there was something that’s either way there they’re in a corner. And and big is a good way for for somebody who’s in a position of leadership, like the Secretary to say, look, I realized there was some consistencies and we we deliberately did this IAG evaluation to see where things went wrong. Okay, that’s that’s a prudent thing to do that, that that’s something honestly, if I was in charge, I would do that as well. I would do a self initiated ag evaluation now. Are there elements of an ag? complaint? We’ll call that a complaint that has been received by the DI G. Yes, that is also true. I’m not going to go into any specifics. Because I want the government the ability for the government to do its job without outside interference. You know, I don’t want to I don’t want to put I don’t want to backup the government anymore into a corner than they’re already in? Yeah, you know, I’m trying to offer on their own. And I’m trying to help them with a way out, right. I’ve been for the last three years seeing guys, come on. You don’t you don’t have to be this way. I’m not I’m not I’m not trying to hurt you. I’m trying to help you. Yeah, I’m the one guy that your friend in this. But I mean, it is true that that I spoke with with the do di g again, I’ve been asked Let me tell you what they do di g told me. Please do not elaborate on any of the questions that that we discussed or the dialogue. So that is that is what they asked. And I’m going to respect their their request on that. Until at some point, you know, I given the ability to speak more freely about it.
John Greenewald 25:49
When they sent the memo out it I read it anyway. But maybe it was incorrectly read that they were going to like kind of have this wrapped up by June, that it was a evaluation that they were doing in May. Do you have any indication when that eval would be over?
Luis Elizondo 26:07
Brother? I can’t imagine any ag evaluation that’s done in 30 days for maybe 30 months. But I don’t know, unless they already have a preconceived conclusion of what they want to say. I don’t see how that’s possible. I guess that to me is that would almost be a worse indictment on the government, right? Because you can’t do a first of all COVID has just now allowed some of these people to go back to their office. Right. So they haven’t even been allowed in their offices until recently. So I’m not sure. You know, you’re going to do an ag evaluation and 30. I mean, maybe maybe they drop everything that they’re doing their job, which is I don’t think the case. I know, that’s not the case. But you know,
John Greenewald 26:50
yeah, it just the way that it the way that it read, it seemed like they were going to do this evaluation, and then again, partly an assumption on my part. But now we’re in June when this report was going to come along. So I was thinking, you know, okay, what are they trying to? Do you feel that this is potentially going to be a delay for this UAP report? Or do you believe that those are maybe two separate issues?
Luis Elizondo 27:16
I think they’re two separate issues. I hope that that the the, I hope that the UAP report is is too late, I don’t think it will be. And from my understanding, it’s going to be rather underwhelming, which is really a shame. My hope is that there’ll be a follow on report, you know, this, honestly, 16 pages 17 pages isn’t really enough to to have a comprehensive report of the last, you know, 70 8090 years worth of military sightings and documentation that exists. But, you know, I’m not in DC right now.
John Greenewald 27:54
So, not up to me, now you have said that you were and helped me with the correct word, but either consulting or working with or communicating with those that are creating this report or the task force, or both,
Luis Elizondo 28:08
I am doing my best to facilitate that process in whatever capacity that I am useful. without imposing my my own will, you know, I have been been quietly doing my best to, to facilitate it’s in everybody’s interest to have have a fair and comprehensive import, because not only does Congress expect it, but that’s what they deserve, and ultimately serve the American people. So, you know, Don’t you’ve already had seven years to screw this up. Don’t screw it up anymore. Yeah, you know, I mean, for the love of God, at this point, here’s your chance to get this monkey off your back now 800 pound gorilla that’s been sitting on your back. Yeah, you know, you really want to carry that around for another decade or two. Don’t do it. This is this is the time to, to do it. Right. And, and, you know, everybody at this point are we’re all adults, we can we can handle the truth.
John Greenewald 29:04
My biggest fear, not trying to be a skeptic, but rather looking back at history and the Condon report. And, you know, I did this this article about essentially comparing how this is unfolding right now, and how it has unfolded the last few years and then how it unfolded in the 1960s. I eagerly await this report, but I fear that we are at what I call a Condon report 2.0 meaning, you know, this, this, this material that leaked out, which I want to ask you as one of my last questions here as we wrap up, but this material that leaked out, I fear that they put that in there essentially as fodder for saying, Oh, well, we know what these things are. We never, we never said that they were an identified which is true. And I fear that that is playing a role in this but we haven’t seen that chapter written yet. Do you believe that’s a possibility?
Luis Elizondo 29:57
Well, I’ll tell you a look and I’m not Let me preface this one way, john because what I’m about to say some people are gonna look at, they’re gonna say, you know, Who the hell are you to say that. But with all due respect the Condon report didn’t have it didn’t have Christopher Mellon, it didn’t have Alex Dietrich, it didn’t have Dave Craver didn’t have gym slate, it didn’t have Ryan graves, it didn’t have me. This is, you know, if they try to pull something like that this is I’ve said this before, then they’re gonna have a real issue on their hands, because that’s gonna force guys like me who don’t want to do it. But I will run for Congress. And I will make sure that if I get in this seat there, I will make sure total transparency on everything, not just uaps all the other crap that I know that goes on behind these closed doors, I will make sure that that that people come to heal on that. And that that the will of the American people will be represented period, I can assure you that there are elements in the Pentagon right now, that does not want to cat like me sitting in Congress, I promise you and sure that sun will rise tomorrow. Because I’m not a politician. I never happened. I don’t give a damn about politics. I care about serving the will of the American people. And you damn well better believe I will do it, I will go in there and I will, I will do what is necessary to make sure we are never in this situation again, I will hold every single person accountable. Who’s behind this kind of crap.
John Greenewald 31:26
You bring up an excellent point. Condon didn’t have individuals such as yourself, but in fairness, they had others I feel Condon was essentially an effort to ignore those important voices then, and again, just kind of throw throw the question at you in a different way. I believe their intent was to dismiss all of that to create a narrative that they wanted. So the Dietrich’s, the flavors, and all of that be darned, they had an objective and that objective was Let’s wipe ourselves clean of this. And the chairman and the Condon committee, despite the voices they had had back then even a guy on the inside Dr. J. Allen Hynek, who saw firsthand and went from a skeptic believer essentially, that that those voices were just completely ignored. And they said not no scientific merit to continue this, we’re done. JOHN,
Luis Elizondo 32:19
the only way this is gonna stop it. Like I said, Before someone puts a bullet in my head. If If, if I even suspect that the government is not being when I say government elements and the government are not being forthcoming with the American people, I will continue to pursue this doggedly and vocally, until the cows come home, I’m telling you, I feel the same. Chris is the same way. We’re not giving up. We I know what I’ve seen. And same with those people that that, that I served, I took an oath, you know, to represent the will of the American people to defend this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Now, that oath has never changed. And I’ll be damned if I’m going to sit back and let a bunch of bureaucrats, you know, abscond with with that responsibility to be fair and transparent with it with the American people. This is what I’ve said before the American government. We do not work for the American government, the American government works for us. And we must be prepared to tell the government what we expect of it. Don’t sit back and wait around and let them tell us, oh, here’s what you can have. Bullshit, man. That’s not the way this works. who represent us Don’t ever forget that. Because the day you no longer represent us, you’re gone, you’re out. Because you’re no longer legitimate. Your authority is no longer legitimate. So so it is important that we, we we we gently remind our friends in the government, those elements that that forget their oath to the American people and remind them of their responsibilities, and make sure they don’t confuse that responsibility with privilege, right? Sometimes we get when we get senior enough we start getting complaints that we start thinking we deserve it. No, you don’t deserve it. No, you’re there to serve us the people. And you know, this is why I said if I got to it, you know, I get pissed off enough man. Last thing I want to do is is get back into the fray of things. I need that like a hole in the head. I just want to be left alone and retire. There’s a reason why I live in the middle of nowhere Wyoming. But, you know, hell, man, if I got to put my boots back on you know, I will I’ll be willing to do that. So we can we can get we can finally get the answers that the American people deserve. And I’m not talking about you know, relinquishing classified information. I’m not asking I’m not saying that. What I’m saying is just be open and honest with the American people and don’t deceive them. Whatever you do. The last thing you don’t want to talk about a fine say No comment. But for the love of God, don’t go up start wanting to the American people. Because that’s the kind of thing that that, you know, that’s not just gonna make me angry. That’s gonna make a whole lot of people. Yeah. The last question I have for you before we Wrap up here is something that has fascinated me in the last month or so which is these leaked the leaked material that’s coming out we’ve got various either videos. Let me say something I forgot here, by the way in case anybody Miss understands anything I’m saying here at no time do I ever advocate violence? Okay, that is that is not what I’m saying here. So I don’t want people to say yeah, Lou’s gonna go in and you know, I many cases of speaking proverbially when I say I’m going to go in and clean house that is that is using the instruments and the policies that are already available to people who are in a position of power. Okay, I don’t ever ever I don’t want anybody to misconstrue, what I’m saying is that I am trying to advocate for any type of violent act, because I am not, that is not at all the purpose of this a true democracy is one that is one through words, and not violence. So just want to preface that real quick, just so no, anybody has any in the back of their mind, you know, that, um, when I say I’m going to put my boots on, I don’t mean I’m going to put, you know, put my boots on and carry machine know what I mean, to put my boots on and carry, you know, a billfold and a pen. Yeah, that’s what I mean,
John Greenewald 36:10
I didn’t take it that way. But I appreciate your your clarification. I think the restraint you’ve had in the last couple of years kind of speaks for itself. But I appreciate the clarification. But so the last question here, and then I’m gonna I know I have to let you go. But the leaked material, the videos, some briefing slides, and the swiftness that the Pentagon is confirming the authenticity taken by US Navy, utilized by ua PTF, but will not comment on the designation. What are your thoughts about this material leaking out? And what are we looking at?
Luis Elizondo 36:48
I think we’ve got a sincerely we have a very much of a schizophrenic approach right now by by elements within within the Pentagon, I think they’ve been beat up so bad, on their contradictory statements that now they’re almost over eager to answer whatever they can, what’s considered an easy pitch by the media. If there’s a video that comes out rather than delay, delay, delay and look foolish. Yeah, that was one of ours. Yep. We’re not going to talk about it. But that was one of ours. It’s almost reflexive, you know, imagine sitting there at a at a batting cage, right? And you’re in the 100 miles an hour pitch, batting cage. But instead of one ball, you’ve got about 10 of these machines, watching balls at you constantly. And I think that’s what’s happening now that the media has has snow proverbial blood and realizes the inconsistent nature of some of the Pentagon’s responses. You know, they’re they’re not, they’re not letting up. And I mean, your proof proof in the pudding man, you I mean, every time someone utters anything in the Pentagon, you’re you’re proof, you’re falling voice, man, you want everything you know, and I’m sure that scares the hell out of them. And I know that that last thing you want to do is is be caught flat footed again. So I think they’re probably just swinging the bat at anything that comes to them right at this point is probably almost reflexive, just just hit it. Hopefully you hit it. Who cares if it’s a first base, second base, home run, or a fall ball just just hit the ball?
John Greenewald 38:18
Yeah. And just a quick follow up to that. We know the FLIR gimbaled and go fast videos when they came out. It took a little bit of time, but they eventually had given the designation of unidentified or UAP. We know then by that that designation is not in and of itself a classified designation, but they won’t do it with these. Do you feel? And then I promise, I’ll let you go. Do you feel that these this leaked material is truly, in your opinion, a designated UAP? And if so, why won’t the government say it?
Luis Elizondo 38:53
I have to be careful because the I’ve been privy to information. It’s my security clearance. And so I don’t want to compromise. Anything that could be considered sensitive. So I’m not going to comment on on the specific videos that you’re referring to the recent ones that came out. I know that the government has already stated their position that they are real. And I can tell you that they’re real. I can tell you that now because government has said that. But I really can’t go into any more context. Now, is it possible that there is somebody trying to throw a bunch of we call it cat litter, you know, if you have a cat, you have a pet cat that your cat will sometimes get a little boisterous in their sandbox and start throwing cat litter all over the place? I have. So you know, it’s just an attempt for the Pentagon to throw little cat litter and, you know, try to throw people off off the scent so to speak. It’s possible I don’t think so. I don’t think they’re quite Forgive me for saying this. I don’t think they’re that sophisticated. I think they’re too much in react mode right now. And I think what you’re seeing is a disjointed approach to this topic. There are some people saying, Yeah, we need to be forthcoming. There’s other people saying no, don’t be forthcoming or be forthcoming about that, but not about this. I suspect that maybe maybe what what’s going on again, I don’t want to comment specifically on the last video simply because I, you know, I’m not at liberty to discuss discusses. Once the government has acknowledged further, more details, then I will be able to as well. But until that happens, I simply can’t do that.
John Greenewald 40:36
Sure, fair enough. And I know that you probably have a light scheduled day of 8700 interviews ahead of you. So I, I’m at the end of my slot, but listen, I mean, it thank you for your reaction to the email story. I’m eager to see how this plays out. Because I think of anything and everything that I’ve written about a tip UFOs yourself, I’ll be at some not so popular. But this I believe, is the most important and I truly, truly, truly feel that there is much more to this story to come. And I have this gut feeling that you and I will probably have some more things to talk about. Hopefully, you’ll give me some more time when it allows. But thank you
Luis Elizondo 41:18
so much. I’m going to share something with you short, quick observation which this is coming from some some colleagues and friends of mine in the Pentagon. You are one of the few people that is truly feared within within public affairs office. I’m not kidding. I’ve had people call me say you’re not going to believe what just came across my desk. I am not getting so it’s you’re making a difference. It’s it’s resonating. You are every bit as as part of this equation for disclosure as anybody else. And then you kind of make a distinction distinction between mainstream media and you but I’m not sure I think that line is blurred a lot. I think a lot of their stories and what they have is based upon your work. And all I can say is, you know, keep it up, man. It’s it’s making a difference. I’m hearing, I’m hearing a lot of good things in the Pentagon because of the pressure you’re putting on people. Well,
John Greenewald 42:11
that’s awesome and motivating. So thanks for letting me know that and, and again, thanks for your time. We’ll definitely talk soon. So you take care of yourself, you family as well be safe out there. And have a great time with those 8700 interviews today. You’ve got to john, thank you so much. Thank you and thank you all for listening and watching. This is John Greenewald Jr signing off. And we’ll see you next time.