John Greenewald: Hey everyone, John Greenewald here. So today I
shot an interview with Steven Green Street host of the
basement office made through the New York Post. Just hours ago,
he launched a 10 minute or so video detailing his struggle
with the Pentagon while he's covered UFOs uaps and Luis
Elizondo, he's the man who says he led the entire program with
the Pentagon to investigate unidentified aerial phenomena.
He dropped some great information in the video. And
now he's here to share even more about his experience. So 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. Now I'm excited about today's guest simply because
I've wanted to get him on for a long time. I knew that there was
a story here. I just didn't know exactly what the story was. And
as of today, and kudos to him, he published quite a bit of the
background that he's done investigating the claims about
UFOs a tip Luis Elizondo with the Pentagon. Now a lot of you
guys have heard me banter about that. But it's exciting for me
that I get to pull on a journalist who has been
investigating it himself, and has a much different experience
with different details to tell Steven Green Street from the New
York Post and the basement office, host of the basement
office. Steven, thank you so much for taking the time to come
in and join. Join us and talk about your experience.
Steven Greenstreet: Oh, yeah, man, I wouldn't want to be
anywhere else. Well, I'm excited to have you and, and the reason
is, is because I know that that you have dug in, on this story,
some of what you've published, and I and I just knew from from
kind of seeing how you operate, and how you pursue stories, that
there must be more to it. And I know that for a while now, you
you've been pursuing quite a few different details. Today, you
dropped a video. And before we get into that, I want you to
just tell everybody, because a lot of people know you as the
host of the basement office. But I want to know how you got
there. How did you get involved with investigating UFOs writing
about UFOs and ultimately, the basement office? Sure. So, you
know, I was into UFOs as a kid, sci fi UFOs I've written
Friedman book when I was 13. Like that kind of thing. The
older I got, I kind of left UFOs in my childhood, like that's a
thing that, you know, young people get excited about.
But you know, I had a sighting a weird sighting in 2003, in Utah,
which they talked about in the basement office, and you know,
that was always in the back of my mind. And then when I started
working at the post, every time a UFO story would come up, I, I
would go Oh, and I would kind of Whisper and give them back
stories and stuff. I found myself like, you know, I know
this information. So I'll start you know, helping with these
stories. And then when the the times came out with their 2017
bombshell, I really picked my head up and said, Okay, guys,
maybe I know a lot about this stuff. So maybe I should help
out on the articles. And they came to me and said, Well, why
don't you pitch a video series? Like, what kind of video video
series should we do? And I pitched the basement office. And
that's when I just went off a cliff. Just deep dive into every
thing. And, and really, Let's release today is the book in to
where I started, in many ways, because one of the first things
I did, and back in two years ago was email the Pentagon. You
know, just I didn't know how it works. I wasn't like you. I
wasn't like a lot of you follow just were there. They've already
been in the weeds for years. They know, the back and forth
with offices and, and, and I was just like, Hey, Steve
Greenstreet with the post like tell so a tip right. Cool and
Elizondo. Right. I just didn't know how it works. And when
Sherwin responded that I mean, in your in the first video
because Sherwood responded that Yeah, a tip investigated UAP and
I was kind of like, wow, they just came out and said it and
then you were like, holy crap. They just came right out and
said It now that was like the start of it. And today's report
was like, two years in the making.
John Greenewald: Yeah, that's, that's where obviously you and I
really met and started talking because that statement did come
out of left field because they were seemingly so. so adamant
about saying no that that a tip did not research uaps then you
get this bombshell statement that that really was I think I
said the word shocking in your video, or something to that
effect, because it was and and, and that's what really kind of
surprised me about your original story. But what I also liked
about you and I really want to compliment you about this, you
just didn't do a one and done article. You stuck with it. You
kept pursuing the story, you kept asking questions. What was
that after that article when you got them to admit that they
looked into UFOs and studied UFOs? What were you trying to do
next? What were you pursuing?
Steven Greenstreet: Oh, okay. So, you know, it should be
stated that in that same response from Sherwood, where he
said yes, a tip investigated UAP the next his next statement was
but you know, Elizondo had no responsibilities with a tip. And
at this point, at this point, like the History Channel had
been announced, you know, hit the History Channel unidentified
show starring Lou Elizondo is the former head of a tip, The
New York Times, Politico, CNN, all of these big media companies
were reporting, like without doubt that this is the former
head of a tip like that there was no question marks in any of
these articles. And so when I read a New York Times article,
or Politico, or see a CNN report that says, here's the former
director of a tip, I assume that that's cut that has come after a
lot of reporting. And here's the Pentagon saying, nope, he
wasn't. And I'm like, What? And at that point, I was the only
one, apparently, to receive that statement, or, at least it
hadn't been reported yet publicly. And I took that
statement, I was so confused, because I thought it was all set
in stone. And I was like, well, I can't just end here. I have to
obviously follow up on this. Keep digging. Why is Elizondo
saying this but the Pentagon saying something else? There's
that's a story, you know, and so digging with Chris Sherwood, who
I should say, I had a very positive experience with because
he was very cool about, you know, responding to emails, I,
I'd say, Hey, can you jump on the phone? He would jump on the
phone, we would talk back and forth. And you know, obviously,
he can't as a PA Oh, he can't just release statements that
come to his head. No. So he wasn't like giving me full
statements on the phone. He was it talking about the process
that that he was going through in order to get me answers
because I was like, You can't just say that I can you provide
some documentation, essentially. And he and I went back and
forth. He was looking for a loose employment records, like
records that would Pentagon records that would, he would
provide me that would show that, Oh, this is actually what he was
doing. You know, and so I was like, great. Oh, yeah, hell
yeah, offer those. Those are great. If I can get those, then
I'll, you know, boom, that's the story. Pentagon says this,
here's the documentation that never came. It was like a back
and forth and back and forth. And eventually, I remember I
called him. And I was like, Hey, man, I'm asking you Yes. or no
questions. Did he do this? Did he not do this? You're saying no
responsibilities, but you won't answer if he was involved at
all. You know, I asked him, you know, was he at least involved
in a tip? wouldn't answer No. Yes. You know, couldn't even
answer a yes or no question which people who have never done
this contacted the Pentagon. That's how it is. You just can't
call up the Pentagon and say, Hey, was this guy Oh, is under
party a tip? Oh, it was thanks by just never works like that.
They he was so sure what discussed on how he was crafting
a statement with Oh, usdi. So basically, you know, he had
pianos have like a stack of previously approved statements.
Yeah, they look through their stack. They have no comment
that's been crafted. So they got to go out and reach out to the
right people to get the right information to craft a
statement. He was talking to me how he was with communicating
with Oh, USDA, USDA, back and forth, trying to craft something
and I got semi frustrated. And I think he got semi frustrated
because I was just like, come on, man. Like what is going on
over there? Like this should be a slam dunk question. He did. Or
he didn't. Yeah. And he's like, I'll never forget this. He
sighed and said, You know what, I'm not really happy with the
way they're handling this story. And I was like, wow, what is
going on behind the scenes here? Yeah. And so, you know, and sure
would, uh, here I'll just show you like, this is just a
sampling of coms that I thought was just with Sherwood. This is
like this is this is Sherwood in golf, and stuff. And then like,
kind of like my reporter notes, but like, I was going through my
reporter notes. And another thing he's told me was, I wish
the Pentagon could just get a handle on this thing and release
clearer answers. So here's here's the guy that's in charge
of releasing clear answers, essentially saying, I can't
release clear answers.
John Greenewald: I can't I wish they would get a handle on this
so that I could release clear answers. Did you ever get a
consensus of where this confusion was? Other than you
know, clearly, he was frustrated, frustrated. But
where's this confusion coming from? Shouldn't it be
straightforward?
Steven Greenstreet: I the only information that I that I know
about is that he was in communication with Oh usdi
looking for Lou Elizondo his employment records and trying to
provide his what he thought was the most accurate information at
the time that was hidden from him. I want to really give you
the the most accurate information we have. And it was
in that process that he became that he became frustrated with
with the way things were going, I guess.
John Greenewald: So at one point then golf took over Susan golf
who, you know, has become, sadly a meme when it comes to UFO
Twitter and stuff like that. And she's obviously heavily
attacked, but she takes over sure what is no more you were
obviously around for that transition. Did you get any
indication on why? Sherwood's goes away? And golf takes over?
Steven Greenstreet: No, I'm so in looking at my email chains
with Sherwood. He was very responsive. I'd sent him an
email, he replied, send him an email, he'd reply, send him an
email, he'd reply. And then as soon after he started to, I
guess, break Be honest with me on the phone. no reply. no
reply. no reply. no reply. Susan Gough replies so it was like it
was almost like he was just stopped communicating with me.
And then Susan Goff came in I guess in June. So this meet this
back and forth with with Sherwood was in May 2019. And
then yeah, and around June is when golf would be cc on some of
those previous Sherwood emails with me, she BCC and moving
forward. Chris was CCD on a lot of the golf responses, but he
never directly replied to me until months later.
John Greenewald: Did you find it strange that she all of a sudden
popped up on your cc list? Or did you get an introduction? Or
was that strange like that? To me? That's a little strange.
Steven Greenstreet: No, I just I mean, to me at the time, not
being a novice and not knowing how this works. I just assumed,
okay, they're just bringing people into the loop so that
they're all on the same page. I just assumed it didn't seem
weird to me until he went away. And Sue, obviously, is the
complete opposite of Sherwood, not very communicative, won't
hop on the phone with you. Yeah. Is very short and sweet. And to
the point and won't go into further detail. Which if you
think about it is probably a really good PA. Oh, yeah.
John Greenewald: I mean, I hate to say it that way. Sweet. Maybe
debatable, but every other word you just used would definitely
fit. But yeah, you can't corner her so to speak. You can't get
her on the phone. It is only by email, and you got to be lucky
to get a response. I mean, it really comes down to luck, in my
opinion. I mean, there's no art about it to get her to answer
you it. I think it just comes down to if she feels like
responding she will. If not, she doesn't. There's one thing that
I want to ask you about. And I don't know if you can answer it,
and it's okay if you can't, but I know that you've gotten a
little bit crap from some corners of the universe for not
reporting. Let's say the Elizondo part of the statement
and so on and so forth. And I feel that that's incredibly
unfair, and I'm not speaking for you, but where I think that
that's very unfair. Fair as we don't know what was going on
behind the scenes. I want to give you the opportunity to
address that if you want. If not, I can move on. But do you?
Do you want to address the naysayers on? You sat on this,
you ignored it. We don't need to name names, but you know that
you didn't do your job? from hearing your talk. It makes me
feel like you actually were doing your job. But let me pass
it to you. Is there anything you want to address on that? Hold
on, I
Steven Greenstreet: lost everything. I sure know. Okay,
cool. Yeah, sure. I'll address that. So back in May 2019, when
I was this kind of, you know, wet, green novice, UFO reporter.
When I got that statement that within the same email, a tip
investigated UAP. But lazada had responsibilities. I was going to
do a story touching on both. And as we develop the story, and I
wrote the story, it we realize those are two separate stories.
One about the, you know, the Pentagon revealing for the first
time that they investigated uaps that was like a button story.
And then the Pentagon denying Elizondo, and the whole Elizondo
backstory was like its own story, which obviously, it is,
it's like, it's almost two separate things. And so I didn't
want to just release the cookie cutter Pentagon statement,
especially after Chris said he was going to provide
documentation. I was like, Oh, hell yeah, like, that'll be
great for an article. And I almost think like, this is just
me personal. So I have no evidence of this, but just how I
felt was I made the mistake of inferring that I won't run a
story until I get further documentation, if you can
provide it. And they, I think they probably pushed me along
and carried me along on that. Yeah, we're working to get the
documentation. Oh, we're working to get the documentation or
days, days, days, weeks, you know, trying, as this developed.
And by that point, you know, the intercept launched an article on
the Pentagon statement that I had, and then others, you know,
published that statement, you included this this statement.
And at that point, with no documentation that ever came,
Chris Sherwood disappearing, others already scooping me and
reporting essentially the same thing. I moved on. And I mean,
literally 90% of my job is not UFO. Yeah, I am not. I am not a
full time UFO reporter. I do everything. If you go to the
post YouTube page, anything that's been produced documentary
style stuff, I probably did. Or was part of it. 90% or so at
that point, it was just moving on to other assigned
responsibilities. Yeah, I was given up their assigned
responsibilities. And it was just, you know, moving on, but
that didn't stop me from in my spare time. And, you know,
bootstrapping, to steal a phrase continuing the conversation with
golf and and the Pentagon. So that's,
John Greenewald: that's literally what happened. It's
not like salacious and nefarious. It's that's just
literally what happened. Did the documentation because my ears
always perked up whenever I hear the D word. Come up again with
Susan golf. Because if you were going back and forth with
Sherwood for so long, and that documentation was promised, did
that ever get pushed again or talked about?
Steven Greenstreet: Okay, so I actually was looking through my
emails, and I brought it up at least two more times. After
that, where I said, Hey, do you have an update? You promised
this or you were at least Looking for this? Was Did you
ever acquire that? What's the update on that? And as far as I
remember, I mean, I've got a ton of emails as far as I know, it
was never addressed again, never brought up again, never
addressed.
John Greenewald: And they just never they just ignored your
request, even after promises.
Steven Greenstreet: Oh, yeah. And then after, I guess, was it
Roger glass cell? And you I forget who first but December
2019. When they when su golf released the a tip had nothing
to do with Yeah, with UAP. I was furious. I was so I was so
frustrated. Yeah. And I sent off an email where I went back
through all of my Sherwood golf emails and I said, you guys said
this on this date. You're now saying this, you said that you
provided me with the most accurate information. And now
you're saying this and I had this bullet pointed email. Now,
that mostly went unanswered, I think they said, I think golf
replied with one or two sentences. But all of my point
by points were never addressed.
John Greenewald: I, Roger may have got it. I've shouted him
out many times on this program. He does great work and pursues
the story. I will say I did I think that I was the first
simply because I remember the situation. And it was odd. I was
not pushing the Hey, you said, a tip studied you a piece now? Or
do you want to change your mind? Do you want to go back on that,
like I was I was accused of that. But I wasn't, I was going
after something else. And in this in the course of of going
back and forth with emails, she had essentially brought it up
and said that I'm paraphrasing, but essentially, that they
needed to correct the record on a tip, that sure what had
obviously released that statement, but she had taken
aback, and I immediately reached out to you and went Oh, great.
You know, that's all I need is for Greenstreet to think I'm
attacking him. But rather the story was the flip flop. Not
necessarily that I believed this side or that side, but rather
that the flip flop. And and I don't blame you for being
frustrated, because I mean, I've had it happen to me as well,
where they'll say one thing, and then take it back. And then the
name example is a prime thing that I still get attacked for
but I don't regret pushing the issue, but the name of a tip and
what the acronym stood for. And there was documentation to say
that, you know, it was aviation versus aerospace. Then there
were statements that said it was aviation, and it was this big
mess. But I know that frustration when they say
something to you, and then later take it back working for a big
outfit. Like I'm sorry, go ahead.
Steven Greenstreet: Yeah, and but it wasn't just the
statement, it was the fact that I felt I had done due diligence,
back in May 2019. After they gave me that statement. Where I
didn't just take it and run with it. I was back and forth, back
and forth. Where he saying I'm I'm back and forth with a usdi
I'm quote, trying to find the most accurate information
regarding all of this, where he was, it was days of him
supposedly researching this finding the most accurate answer
and then providing that answer. In the end, the most accurate
answers where Lou Elizondo had no responsibilities. But yes, a
tip researched UAP. You know, it's like, how could you get it
wrong? What's essentially my attitude? How did you get that
so wrong? After supposedly spending days and days and days
digging with, you know, oh, usdi, it's basic. It's basically
like, how can you get a yes or no question. So wrong. When you
have spent days and days and days, back and forth,
researching, digging up the facts to give me the most
accurate information? How can you get that wrong? You know,
like, it's not like, I could understand one statement after
one day, but the amount of time Chris, supposedly put into that
statement, I just don't buy it. Something's going on at the
Pentagon,
John Greenewald: you obviously work for a mainstream outlet.
Why do you think that there's no repercussions for the Pentagon?
Giving a statement and having a big outlet report something as
true, just to retract the whole thing, and literally do a 180
within six months?
Unknown: How
John Greenewald: do you feel that there should be
repercussions for that? I mean, is there a consensus? Not that
you speak for the New York Post? And I don't? I'm not asking you
to, but working for a big outlet? What is the consensus
when that happens? Because the essentially journalism itself is
attacked.
Steven Greenstreet: Yeah, I mean, I can, I can speak for me,
which is two things. One, that's outrageous. I mean, but you
don't want to just put a period on that you want to like I did
reach out and find out what the hell happened. You know why? And
I, the answer that I got from God, literally, was, well, that
was the information Chris had at the time, I have now acquired
new information, better information and more accurate
information than what Chris had at the time. And that new
information says a tip was not about UAP. So that's, I
John Greenewald: wish I could be a fly on the wall to figure out
the conversations on the inside when Susan golf gets involved
and says, Well, you just didn't have the right information even
though you put the weight of the Pentagon behind your statement
and go ahead and change it because my information And is
better? Who the heck did he talked to that she, you know,
either got somebody higher or whatever. To me. It's just
utterly confusing, but be that as it may, in the remaining time
that I have left with you, because I know I pulled you away
from quite a few different responsibilities assigned
responsibilities today. One thing I do want to ask you about
is the fact that you've talked to Elizondo interviewed
Elizondo, you've got videos with him as well. I urge everybody to
watch those as well. They're, they're great. And you've
brought this up to him. Can I ask Stephen Green Street? Not
the journalist, not the New York Post. But Steven, how do you
feel about the story when it comes to Lewis Elizondo, and the
statements that the Pentagon has said against him? challenging
his integrity? Do you have thoughts on what's going on
here? And who is telling the truth?
Steven Greenstreet: Sure, if I've learned one thing about
government pa O is every single word matters. So I think a lot
of people read a statement as a statement, go back and read that
statement as a series of words and every word matters. And
you'll notice in their first statement said he had no
responsibilities. Their second statement, he said, they said he
has no assigned responsibilities. Why? They
didn't just throw that word in there. That word was crafted
that word was decided by committee. Let's add a sign.
What does that mean? They're playing a game. They're playing
a game and hoping not too many people notice, in my opinion. So
what does it tell me? They're there. They might be technically
truth, the truth, while at the same time getting their way on
this guy that they perhaps don't like that much. So we had no
assigned responsibility. So did he have any responsibilities?
They wouldn't answer that question. When I asked. Did he
have any involvement? They wouldn't answer that question.
When I asked. They would only answer whether he was director
or not. Of the, you know, and here, let me just tell you this
because not many people know this, but Dana White. Um, you
know, in Politico in the December 2017 Politico article,
Brian bender mentions he spoke with Dana White, who, you know,
at the time was, I believe at the time was the Pentagon. She
was the main spokesperson. Yeah. And yeah, and she confirmed
Elizondo was the director per the article of a tip, and that a
tip was about uaps, etc, etc. It wasn't it wasn't a release
statement, meaning it wasn't a quote, it was like a paraphrase
of something she had said. And there's been a lot of debate
about that. Dana White, a quote. And, you know, I spoke to Dana
White. I spoke to her on the phone. And, in fact, I shared
this on Twitter was I was shooting a Katy Perry interview.
I was shooting a Katy Perry interview, and I was about to
roll with Katy Perry when Dana White called me and I like
absconded to like a dark hallway. And Dana White told me
Yes, Lou Elizondo ran a tip. And then she said, but running
things means many different things in government to run
something can mean many different things she didn't
expand on, on what that meant. And so it just to add to the
confusion of what that is how I feel, personally, is I feel Lou
Elizondo was involved with a tip. I don't think there's any
doubt. Yeah, about Lou's involvement with the study of
UAP intelligence well, within the Pentagon. But I think this
is a big story. I really do. I think it's one of the biggest
stories that's right under the surface that not a lot of people
are paying attention to. And it's bubbling up. It's bubbling
up, I mean, Lou's filing complaints with the Pentagon.
It's just back and forth. It's bubbling, it's leading
somewhere, you know, and I'm trying to tell people like, this
is a story that could potentially just boom,
John Greenewald: it amazes me, because generally, if somebody
is coming out and lying, and they're making up a story, when
they're called out, especially when the weight of the Pentagon
starts essentially attacking them in statements, I would
think they'd go away. And rather, Lou is actually
escalating everything by filing that complaint pushing for the
DOJ big to get involved. Now, the DOJ big is involved. And we
don't know exactly how that's gonna turn out. But you know,
I'm popping popcorn at this point, because I'm really
curious to see how all that comes out. In the last couple of
minutes. I want to ask you one other thing on on Dana White
when she said that leading things means different things.
Was there anything else in that conversation that I can poke
yond to see that came out. I mean, did you ask her? Hey, what
does that mean? Did she say? Yes, he ran it hang up. Did she
have any thoughts about the Pentagon's change of stance?
Steven Greenstreet: She actually would not speak to that. And I
think, you know, that was just like, um, she there was it, she
didn't seem to, she didn't have any grudges or anything. She was
very professional. And I don't think she wanted to speak to her
former office, you know, like, she wanted to just provide me
what she knew personally, and then didn't want to speak about
what was going on rolled office, currently, which I can respect,
you know, on a national level. And honestly, at the time, this
was two years ago, I was rushed to interview a pop star. And so
I didn't have much time to ask her follow up questions. And the
only pertinent information that I got from her was, you know, a
second confirmation from Dana White, that Lou quote, ran a
tip. But what was interesting to me is running things in
government can mean many different things. So that was
like the main takeaway for me from Dana White.
John Greenewald: Yeah. And that's you answered my my next
one of what that main takeaway was, which is that she confirmed
Politico's reporting because it has been controversial. He
didn't have a quote, I've questioned it myself full
disclosure, but you actually traced Dana White down. So kudos
to you for for tracing the story. I think in the last
minute or so here, I want you to also point out one other thing
that you had found out, which I found incredibly interesting in
your video, and then and then we'll go ahead and wrap it up.
And I'll urge everybody to watch it, which is in the link below.
But you had learned from the Defense Intelligence Agency,
when the DEA was still speaking for themselves. And Susan Goff
didn't take over that Luis Elizondo had played a role in
the transferring of the a tip program from DEA to essentially
OSD. You had a great point, that would be an assigned
responsibility. So you threw that to the Pentagon and I'll
let you take it from there. You asked them what did they say?
Steven Greenstreet: Okay, yes, sir. James kudla at the book at
the Defense Intelligence Agency, was quite specific with me in
saying Lou Elizondo helped transfer a tip from DEA to
another office. And as I show in the video, I brought that up to
golf and Sherwood and Sherwood replied saying, Yeah, we don't
disagree with that. That's like, what, like, you told me he had
no responsibilities with a tip. This guy said he did. You're
saying you're gonna disagree with him? Would you like to
amend your statement? And they said, No. They said the former
the previous statement stands. And like I said, in the video to
this day, they're still releasing the same statement.
And so just to be technical, let's be technical. If difa says
he had an assigned responsibility, you agree with
the CIA statement? Then your current statement that he had no
responsibilities with? A tip is not it's just because Is that
accurate? Yeah.
John Greenewald: Yeah. And they wouldn't change it. They they
dug their heels in?
Steven Greenstreet: Yeah, I reached out to them. Many times,
man, I don't. They don't they rarely she rarely, if ever
replies to me now. Yeah. Ever replies to me. I think I'm on
some kind of Pentagon blacklist. And yeah,
John Greenewald: I've I feel I'm on the same list. So welcome to
the club. I don't think we're getting holiday greeting cards
this year. But, you know, Steven, I really do appreciate
it. Like I said, a couple minutes ago, I know I pulled you
away from other responsibilities that you do have today. But
thank you for at least giving us a little bit of insight into
your experience, you know, because you were definitely in
the thick of it. I hope you stick with it. I know you will
with the basement office. It sounds like but also future
stories. But thank you for taking the time. I really do
appreciate it.
Steven Greenstreet: Sure. Thanks, john.
John Greenewald: Thank you. Thank you. And thank you all for
listening and watching. This is John Greenewald, Jr, signing
off. We'll see you next time.