Political Volatility Brings Uncertainty and Potential for UFO Disclosure
Photo by Tabrez Syed on Unsplash
Written by Christopher Sharp - 24 July 2024
Unlike last year, there is no buzz, no expectations, and no grand announcements on the Democrats' Senate website from Majority Leader Chuck Schumer or his Republican colleague Mike Rounds.
Earlier this month, once again, the most surreal language ever proposed in the history of the United States on the topic of advanced non-human intelligence has emerged.
Its name? The Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena Disclosure Act (UAPDA).
And like last year’s version, which was eventually gutted, it originates from two of the most respected Senators, representing both political parties.
Outsiders to the UAP topic will likely be shocked by references to 'legacy programs,' which are defined as examining biological evidence of 'deceased non-human intelligence.'
But despite its shock factor - the UAPDA is real.
Aside from those who follow the UAP topic, most people - and more importantly voters - remain unaware.
That’s why Schumer and Rounds might be forgiven for being cautious, for now.
Why risk being seen as kooky at such a pivotal time?
Election season is underway in the U.S - any political slip-up or controversy could prove fatal in tight political races.
The most dramatic Presidential contest in decades is unfolding: the current Democratic President, Joe Biden, has announced he won't seek re-election, and there has been an assassination attempt on the Republican candidate, former President Donald Trump.
So with this in mind, where do we now stand on the Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) topic?
Every politician in the U.S. is now shifting into 'game mode.'
They’re focused on securing re-election for themselves and their parties in the upcoming Presidential, House, and Senate races.
The stakes are high, and each move is carefully calculated to maximise political advantage and voter support.
Like professional athletes in mid-game, politicians are now in their flow.
Their minds are fully focused on debating, verbally attacking their opponents, and ultimately winning. Their strategies are rooted in key domestic and foreign policy issues, like the future of NATO, a potential conflict with China and migration - all heated topics.
For now, the deep state, and those operating within the Intelligence Community (IC) the Department of Defense (DoD) and defense contractors, will be breathing a sigh of relief.
The current state of play means that any planned hearings on UAP will take a backseat, and scrutiny will fade away until the dust settles after 5 November 2024, when the winners are declared.
However, the DoD, IC, and defense contractors have much work ahead if they want to kill the UAP topic.
Reason One - AARO’s Credibility In Pieces
Former AARO Director, Dr Sean Kirkpatrick, above
Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, the former Director (now advisor) of the government's UAP Office, known as the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), recently admitted that he successfully opposed last year's UAPDA language.
This language, which called for a UAP Records Review Board and has been brought back this year by Senators Rounds and Schumer, was considered by Kirkpatrick to be 'duplicative' of AARO's mission.
Since then, the AARO has released a flawed UAP Historical Report and presented an unconvincing ‘resolved’ case report. This adds to a perception that the AARO was merely an effort by the DoD and IC to kill the topic.
This year, with Dr. Kirkpatrick no longer the Director and AARO’s credibility likely shattered in the eyes of Senator Schumer and key members of the Senate’s Intelligence Committee, including Mike Rounds, the Review Board stands a chance - if the UAPDA is included within the Senate’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
Reason Two - Room For Compromise
Representative Mike Turner, above
Sources inform Liberation Times that defense contractors and other commercial entities successfully opposed the eminent domain language in last year’s UAPDA, which has been resurrected again this year.
This year, expect eminent domain to remain fiercely contested.
It's likely that calls have already been made to Representative Mike Turner to vigorously oppose the eminent domain provision in the final version of the NDAA.
If enacted, this provision would require companies like Lockheed Martin or other defense contractors potentially in possession of such materials to surrender them to the government.
Unlike last year when the UAPDA was dismantled, advocates are now better prepared. This means they may be open to negotiating the issue of eminent domain, potentially finding creative solutions or making the language more flexible.
Eminent domain and the Review Board, along with definitions such as ‘non-human origin,’ ‘legacy program,’ and ‘unknown origin,’ are what gave the UAPDA its strength.
Reason Three - Less Political Risk
President Joe Biden, above
In the end, according to sources, the White House, notably the President’s National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, lacked the resolve to support Schumer, Rounds, and the other Senators who pressed for the language, despite the White House's initial involvement in proposing it.
Faced with hostility from Dr. Kirkpatrick, defense contractors, and their supporters in the House of Representatives—particularly Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Turner, who, according to political sources within the House, opposed it—the full UAPDA was gutted.
It proved too controversial, especially with the ailing President Joe Biden expected to appoint the nine-member Review Board panel and oversee potential earth-shattering disclosures.
All of this, combined with the upcoming election year, meant that the language was gutted and never stood a chance.
Joe Biden, for now, will continue as President, meaning he would be responsible for signing the final NDAA into law, with or without the UAPDA.
This will occur after the elections, reducing political pressure and lowering the associated risks.
As a result, the White House may show stronger resolve. If advanced non-human intelligence and the reality of legacy programs are confirmed, it would cement Biden’s historical legacy.
The Next President
Potential Democrat Presidential Candidate, Kamala Harris, above
Implementation of the UAPDA (if passed in full) would fall to the incoming President—either Donald Trump or, potentially, the Democratic favourite, Kamala Harris.
Both figures were key to the modern-day UAP effort within the government.
It was the Senate Intelligence Committee, on which Harris sat, that requested the 2021 report by the UAP Task Force. And it was Trump’s White House that formally established the UAPTF to compile a report on its findings regarding UAP.
Liberation Times understands that both Harris and Trump - although the latter appears rattled by the UAP topic following classified briefings on legacy programs - continue to take an interest.
The Thiel Factor
Peter Thiel, above
Despite Trump’s concerns regarding UAP, much of the influence on intelligence and defense issues may be orchestrated by an outside figure: entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and political activist Peter Thiel.
Thiel reportedly has an interest in UAP. When hosting donor dinners for J.D. Vance and Blake Masters - candidates he supported for Senate races in 2022 - among topics discussed were, cryptocurrencies, robotics and UFOs.
Sources also tell Liberation Times that Thiel is someone who takes a deep interest in the UAP topic, keeping tabs on the latest developments.
His analytics company, Palantir, with its contracts with intelligence agencies, may have given him a gateway to taking the topic seriously.
Another gateway for Thiel’s interest might be René Girard, the French philosopher who became a mentor while Thiel was at Stanford University.
Girard's central belief was that life can be explained by "mimetic theory," which posits that most human behaviour is based on imitation.
This compels us to compete for the same schools, jobs, and possessions, ultimately derailing true progress.
Thiel embraced this idea, which gave him the intellectual foundation to espouse views and make bets that polite society often finds outlandish, troubling, or simply odd.
J.D. Vance
J.D. Vance, above
Thiel’s presence will likely be felt within the White House, specifically through Trump’s Vice President pick, V.D. Vance.
Vance previously worked at Thiel’s Mithril Capital.
Two years ago, Thiel made the largest individual donation in history for a Senate race, contributing $15 million to Vance’s campaign.
In regards to the UAP topic, Vance seems to have little interest, telling reporter Matt Laslo, “in the grand scheme of conspiracies that I focus on, UFOs are bottom of the list.”
Vivek Ramaswamy
Vivek Ramaswamy, above
Another figure who may be given a seat at the table - perhaps within Trump’s cabinet is - Vivek Ramaswamy whose firm Strive Asset Management raised $20 million, helped by investors, including Thiel and Vance.
Unlike Vance, who hasn’t made any notable statements on UAP, Ramaswamy has pledged to provide transparency on the issue.
In a previous interview, he stated in regards to UAP transparency, "When I know, the public knows."
Furthermore, when the UAPDA was gutted last year, Ramaswamy retweeted Liberation Times’ reporting of the story, commenting ‘The question is: Why?
Ramaswamy has expressed interest in serving as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the same department that would have hosted the UAP Special Access Program, known as KONA BLUE, if previous attempts had been successful.
Notably, if the UAPDA is passed, the Senate's Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs would have legislative oversight of UAP records collection.
Mike Gallagher
Another Thiel-backed figure who has been outspoken on UAP is former Representative Mike Gallagher.
He was the star of the 2022 House Intelligence Committee Hearing on UAP and has frequently spoken on the topic- not shying away about the potential origin of UAP.
Gallagher stepped down from office this year, suggesting that he had received death threats.
He has now joined the venture capital firm TitletownTech, but a Trump presidency could potentially offer him a new role within the administration.
John Ratcliffe
Another potential figure who might be embraced by a Trump White House, despite seemingly having no affiliation with Thiel, is John Ratcliffe, the former Director of National Intelligence.
Ratcliffe, known for his outspoken views on UAP, has sensationally remarked that UAP represent:
"Objects that demonstrate technologies that seem to defy the law of physics and capabilities that we don't have as the world's superpower."
Adding:
“Our role in the federal government is to provide for the common defense and we can’t do that if someone else has technologies that are better than what we have.”
Christopher Miller
One other old Cabinet member, rumoured to be making a return, as Secretary of Defense, should Trump be re-elected is Christopher Miller.
Miller was Trump’s last Secretary of Defense and is rumoured to be at the top of the list.
In an interview with Shawn Ryan, Miller expressed his regret last year for not requesting a briefing on UAP.
He also wondered why no one volunteered to provide him with that information, suggesting that "they" didn't want others to know. Miller added that he believed UAP could be generated by a life form “off planet”.
The Democrats
Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin
Unlike a Trump White House, a Democrat-controlled White House is dependent on the party’s nominee.
Harris, currently the most likely nominee, faces a choice: maintain the status quo by keeping Jake Sullivan as National Security Advisor, Lloyd Austin as Defense Secretary, and Avril Haines as Director of National Intelligence, or appoint her own team who might support greater government transparency.
The status quo may prove a stumbling block, with sources telling Liberation Times that both Austin and Haines are against further UAP transparency.
But a change within the White House cabinet could reflect more openness to disclosing information. And a change may be likely, especially due to the recent health woes experienced by Defense Secretary Austin.
Senate and House Races
In the Senate, Democrats currently face a steep battle to retain control.
If Republicans take control, it would mean Senate Majority Leader and UAP advocate Chuck Schumer stepping down.
This scenario could also lead to Senator Marco Rubio, the current Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, becoming its Chair once again.
Rubio has been a staunch advocate for UAP transparency, and Liberation Times understands he was involved in the resurrection of the UAPDA.
However, after recently losing the chance to be Trump’s Vice Presidential candidate, there are now calls for Rubio to become Secretary of State if Trump wins the election.
In the House, Democrats face another battle to flip the Republican majority.
If they fail, then it means Republicans continue to dominate key committees on Intelligence and Armed Services - which have so far failed to support significant UAP transparency.
Chief nemesis to UAP transparency, Representative Mike Turner is no ally of Trump - that may influence whether he remains Chair of the House’s Intelligence Committee - although Turner would hope for support from fellow Ohio politician, Trump’s Vice President pick, J.D. Vance.
The outcome of these races heavily depends on the Democratic presidential candidate. Kamala Harris or another nominee could provide a significant boost, potentially influencing key congressional races. A strong candidate at the top of the ticket can energize the voter base, driving turnout and affecting results in competitive districts.
Summer and October Surprises
Lue Elizondo, above
If there is anything politics and the world have taught us in recent weeks, it’s this - things are unpredictable.
With the upcoming release, this summer, of Lue Elizondo’s book and two new UAP documentaries, along with the ensuing media coverage, political conversations could shift significantly.
Lue Elizondo, the former Director of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), a secretive Pentagon initiative that studied unidentified aerial phenomena, brings considerable expertise and insights that may influence public and political discourse on UAP.
Additionally, other figures featured in both documentaries could potentially provide new and shocking insights on the topic.
Whistleblowers who have come forward to the Intelligence Community’s Inspector General, alleging retrieval and reverse engineering programs involving non-human intelligence have risked everything for transparency.
They are highly motivated and should not be underestimated.
