My Thoughts On: Actual UFO Disclosure, and One Really Old Senator

Third edition of this thing, and just about everyone is opening it each week. THANKS!

Two fun topics for you today that I explored: some legitimate UFO news, and some concerning Senate drama.

+++

On UFOs

There is a nonzero chance we’re getting proof of the existence of aliens to close out 2023. I’m not kidding!

As reported by Reuters on July 14, the US Senate is considering a measure that would compel the “U.S. government to publicly release records relating to possible UFO sightings”. It’s a 64 page amendment titled: “UNIDENTIFIED ANOMALOUS PHENOMENA DISCLOSURE ACT OF 2023” and it is being pushed forward in a bipartisan effort led by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer; so this is no small potatoes. In fact, Schumer, one of the five most influential elected officials in the country, released a pubic statement saying:

“The American public has a right to learn about technologies of unknown origins, non-human intelligence, and unexplainable phenomena.”

Lets take a step back.

In early June, something big related to UFOs happened. An investigative news outlet called The Debrief reported that a high ranking US Intelligence officer named David Grusch had come forward as a whistleblower alleging that recoveries of “partial fragments through, and up to, intact vehicles have been made for decades through the present day by the government, its allies, and defense contractors.” and that “analysis has determined that the objects retrieved are of exotic origin (non-human intelligence, whether extraterrestrial or unknown origin)”. Furthermore, Grusch says that information pertaining to these recovered crafts has been illegally withheld from Congress.

Not only is this the highest ranking official to ever come forward on this topic, but his claims have been corroborated by other intelligence officials, both on and off the record. Meaning government officials with actual credibility on the line have publicly supported Grusch’s claims. That in itself is monumental.

One of the most interesting parts of the article besides, you know, aliens, is that Congress has actually listened to hours upon hours of testimony from Grusch and other whistleblowers about this withheld information stretching back to 2022.

Now I am not going to jump out of my seat and claim this all means aliens are real. However, the fact that Congress is pushing for disclosure, after hearing dozens of hours of testimony from high ranking intelligence officials means they are taking this seriously. That’s right, the most powerful political body in the world has seen enough credible testimony and evidence that they are legislating the public disclosure of any UFO information that has previously been tucked away.

The bipartisan amendment (which you can read here) has this to say under the section Findings, Declarations, and Purposes:

4) Legislation is necessary because credible evidence and testimony indicates that Federal Government unidentified anomalous phenomena records exist that have not been declassified or subject to mandatory classification review as set forth in Executive Order 13526”.

Even if you are the biggest alien skeptic out there, this amount of activity from both Congress and the intelligence community should certainly at least raise an eyebrow.

A US House Committee has a hearing scheduled on UFOs on July 26, so its possible more details come to light then.

+++

On Not Playing Sides

I want to preface this next one. I’m a big ol’ lefty from the PNW. The type that probably makes Mitch McConnell’s skin crawl. My voting record probably skews like 90% democrat 10% Independent. That all said, I do not consider myself a blindly loyal Democrat fanboy, and I presently despise the way modern politics resembles rooting for your favorite NFL franchise. So with that said, I think its important to call out corruption and unethical practices regardless of political affiliation. Our politicians, regardless of party, are elected to serve our best interests, and compete for our votes through pragmatic solutions supported by the majority of the country.

If you’ve been paying attention, you will have seen something pretty icky going on involving Democratic leadership that is disenfranchising Democratic voters in one of our largest states.

Dianne Feinstein is a US Senator for the State of California serving her fifth and final term in the Senate, a position she’s held since 1992. She is also the ripe old age of NINETY. And due to her age, Senator Feinstein has run into numerous medical problems that led her to miss over 90+ Senate votes during the first quarter of 2023, including a large number of judiciary appointment votes. If you read my first newsletter, you’ll know that appointing new federal judges is one of the most critically important tasks Congress can achieve during a term. Because Mrs. Feinstein has been away, several judges were not voted through by the Senate; a win for Republicans.

Ms. Feinstein recently returned to the Senate in May. Good news right? Here is where the allegations get “icky”. The New York Times at the end of May reported that Senator Feinstein’s memory has gotten noticeably worse, and it even appears she is relying quite heavily on her congressional aides to remind her where she even is half the time. Perhaps most alarming, Senator Feinstein reportedly doesn’t even remember being absent from the Senate early this year.

In fact, that NY Times article reports that “When Vice President Kamala Harris was presiding over the chamber last year in one of many instances in which she was called upon to cast a tiebreaking vote, Ms. Feinstein expressed confusion, asking her colleagues, “What is she doing here?” Staff members have been overheard explaining to her that she cannot leave yet because there are more votes to come.”

This is icky to me for two reasons:

1) First, it is pretty awful to watch what appears to be a cognitively impaired 90 year old rolled around the Senate and being instructed how and when to vote, when she doesn’t even know where she is.

2) Second, and perhaps more alarming, are the implications that an elected official to one of the largest states in our country is allegedly being told how to vote by unelected aides. This feels decidedly undemocratic.

So why wouldn’t she step down? Afterall, California Governor Newsom is able to appoint her replacement until the term is up anyway. Wouldn’t the Democrats want a more vigorous and youthful politician to fill in?

Here’s another piece to that puzzle: Adam Schiff, a prominent Democratic US House of Representatives figure (he initiated Trump’s first impeachment in the House) is revving up his campaign to run for Feinstein’s open California Senate seat in 2024. His longtime friend and mentor, Nancy Pelosi, has even already endorsed him for the seat. Given his name recognition and $15 million funded campaign, he would be strongly favored to win the election. However should Feinstein decide to step down early, California Governor Newsom could potentially appoint someone else instead of Schiff. In fact, Newsom pledged in 2021 to appoint a woman of color to the seat. Someone else being appointed in the short term would inevitably hurt Adam Schiff’s chances in 2024 as he would then have to run against whoever is selected by Newsom, and incumbents typically have an advantage.

This is where this story gets even messier. POLITICO recently reported that Pelosi’s daughter, Nancy Prowda, has taken an active role in Feinstein’s care, recently being seen with the Senator and her aides at the Capitol on a few occasions. This raises some huge ethical red flags, and has brought on speculation that Pelosi, a prominent and longstanding Democratic leader, is actively pushing against calls for Feinstein to resign in order to give her protégé Adam Schiff the best odds at winning election in ‘24.

Historically, most politicians follow a “career trajectory” of sorts. Many start local, winning town or county positions before moving on to running for seats like Mayor of a major city, or a State representative. After several terms of building up their name, they may shoot for bigger positions, like Governor or US House Representative. The cream of the crop then may go for a US Senate seat, or even the Presidency. It’s not a perfect ladder, but my point is, politician’s often wrongly view that they’ve “earned” the next political step up in the eyes of their peers, rather than in the eyes of their constituents.

If the GOP’s leadership problem is they love getting paid off large sums of money by shadowy interest groups and private industry, then the Dem’s leadership problem is they treat prominent political positions like membership in a fancy yacht club. What’s potentially unfolding with Dianne Feinstein is a demonstrable example of this practice playing out. As voters, we should want and demand the best of the best be put in front of us when we submit a ballot. Unfortunately, the reality is that politicians within political parties are often working to ensure their close friends and peers are elected next by strategically positioning and funding their campaigns.

To me, this is one of the the biggest problems in politics. In 2016, Hillary Clinton seemed to treat her campaign for presidency as an inevitability. She even almost ran a campaign slogan called “Because its Her Turn”. But Politics is not some fancy member-selected yacht club. It is not an entitlement.

I really believe voters can see through this sense of entitlements in politicians. It rubs people the wrong way, is pretty easy to spot, and ultimately hurts the party in the long by damaging the relationship with voters.

I suppose all of this story is really just a long way of saying: I think Congress needs term limits.