Rep. Anna Paulina Luna
👤 PersonPodcast Appearances
So I actually had – when I was stationed at Portland Air National Guard, my job there was an airfield manager.
So I would interface and work a lot with the F-15 pilots at the unit.
And so there had been an airspace incursion that had taken place when I was –
still at the time at the Guard.
And I remember kind of talking to some of the pilots about it, and I was like, what was that?
And they're like, eh, we can't really talk about it.
No one really wanted to address it.
And so from what I'd gathered, that had been likely a UAP.
And so that kind of was my perspective.
Granted, I also grew up in the generation of the X-Files and, you know, I don't know if you remember 94 Independence Day.
For me specifically, I didn't look at it with like a crazy lens and perspective.
I'm like, you know, you never know if we're the only ones out there essentially.
Because of the way that he was discussing it.
So he had been, he didn't want to, from what I gather, get taken off flight status.
And he's like, I really can't discuss it.
We couldn't really like identify it essentially.
And it had outperformed them.
And so that was my first from a military perspective kind of experience with someone who basically, you know, there's a stigma within the flight community.
Do you want to lose your security clearance?
What you know, is there this level of crazy that people kind of brand that will stick with you and kind of ruin your career?
Well, at the time, right, so it was an older platform, but he really didn't want to even talk about it.
And I bring that up because now with our investigation and the task force that I run, actually the reason why the task force was formed was because of an event that happened at Eglin Air Force Base where both myself, Representative Mack Gates, and Representative Tim Burchett actually had responded and gone to investigate multiple Air Force pilots that had come forward in regards to UAP incidents.
And they were alleging that the Air Force was covering it up.
which is a big problem because when you have Congress that's supposed to be the advocate and voice for the American people, the oversight body, and you're being denied access not just from a base commander but high level up at the Pentagon, even Secretary of Defense, it's a problem.
I definitely think that there's a level of advanced technology that the U.S.
government has.
And I think that that tech can be housed within the defense contract realm.
And of course, some information is going to be classified.
But I can also tell you, and this might sound crazy, but based on our investigations and stuff that we've seen.
There is definitely something that I think would rival what we know currently with physics and a tech that potentially is out there that we don't have the ability to reproduce because it would basically be like dropping a cell phone off back during the time of maybe cavemans.
So we just don't have the tech to develop it yet.
What I can also tell you is based on our interviews, and this has been something that you can go back and watch with the congressional hearings, but I was actually able to ask some of the witnesses, you know, what are these things?
And they keep saying interdimensional.
And then when you talk about the interdimensional aspect of, you know, are these things preexisting, maybe outside of what we currently know as our own dimension?
That stuff can kind of all sound crazy.
But at the end of the day, you know, my job as an investigator is to receive all the information, decipher it.
And then ultimately, from a congressional aspect, if you do have contractors that are withholding information or operating outside of the purview of the federal government, I mean, there's budgetary issues.
But there's definitely something that I can tell you with confidence that exists that we don't know how to explain currently.
To, I guess, break it down in simple terms is that I think that some of the tech that exists, that whatever these things have, these energy things have.
What do you mean?
Well, they call them interdimensional beings.
I think that they can actually operate through the time spaces that we currently have.
And that's not...
Something that I came up with on my own, that's based on stuff that we've seen, that's based on information that we've been told.
And then also, too, I think that there's this historical aspect of, you know, this gets into the deeper things.
theories and concepts of religion and I think the history that we currently know and that kind of spins off into another topic of, you know, you have the modern day Bible, you have this aspect of books of the Bible that have been removed that explain and kind of touch on these topics.
And I think that we're in a time and age where you have such a vast amount of information that we have access to via social media, via your cell phone, via the internet.
And so it's really changing the way that we understand the origins of life and the spiritual reality that we know.
That, so based on testimony, would be based on witnesses that have come forward.
But what I can tell you is I've— So the witnesses just were told that they were interdimensional?
No, no, that they've seen things.
And what I can tell you without getting into classified conversations is that there have been incidences that I believe where very credible people have reported that there have been movement outside of time and space.
Unfortunately.
Look, have I seen a portal?
Have I seen a spaceship?
Personally, no.
Have I seen evidence of this?
Have I seen photo documentation of aircraft that I believe were not made by mankind?
Is there historical significance to this?
Is there multiple events that go back to, I would argue, maybe even before the time of Christ that have documented this in text?
So do I believe that the government has access to certain technology now?
Yes, to an extent.
And I believe that certain contractors potentially have back engineered this tech.
I think that that's what can explain the advancements that we're seeing.
But I also believe that this is a dangerous level of hidden information from the American people, because if you have an aspect of the federal government, which I can tell you.
I, with two other members of Congress, were denied access to information at Eglin Air Force Base pertaining to whistleblowers because of the fact, and we can get into that story and what happened at Eglin in a second, but we were denied access and told that we don't have security clearance or the read-in authority on a special access program.
That's a problem because I'm supposed to represent and be an investigative body, and you have then people who are unelected that are operating basically in secrecy
And that's a problem.
That's a big problem.
I think it's been decades of classified secret information and also this aspect of the intelligence community that's been empowered.
And it's kind of serendipitous with timing because when you talk about the intelligence communities and what they've done essentially to the trust in this country with the American people, I think this goes all the way back.
even into JFK, with how they basically have operated outside of the purview of Congress.
And basically, to an extent, have gone rogue up until recently.
You're seeing a big push and pull to try to rein in these intelligence agencies currently.
I have seen photos.
I have seen... What have you seen photos of?
So I was in a skiff, and I can't discuss all that was in a skiff, but what I can tell you is based on the photos that I've seen, I'm very confident that there's things out there that have not been created by mankind.
What I can tell you is that when you have thousands upon thousands of people around the planet throughout time that have reported something, to say that those people are crazy, to say that the whole concept of even just asking the question that you might not necessarily be psychologically sound.
That in itself, you know, that's a disinformation campaign to get people to shut up about it.
And that's a problem.
We know that the U.S.
government has not exactly been clean in a lot of what they've done with the American people, specifically to the topic of UFOs.
And he ended up ultimately, though, after all of his investigations, becoming someone that was like, I think there's something here.
But that's true.
By the way, a lot of people might not necessarily go on to Google and look up that information, but you can actually look up the declassified reports from Project Blue Book.
What's also interesting, though, is when we're talking about tech, right, the ability for this tech, being that it exists, to change dependence for entire governments on things like fossil fuel, etc.,
You know, it's – look, I think everyone has a moral obligation to do what they think is right, OK?
And so if you're in a position of power and you see something wrong and you're not addressing it, I think, you know, this in itself, getting the truth out there for people to decide for themselves.
I'm not telling you what to believe.
I'm just telling you in our investigations and what we are pushing for in regards to transparency –
I would like to see the federal government roll out some of the stuff that we've been given access to, because I think that that information belongs in the hands of the American people.
And it's not even just the U.S.
I mean, there's other countries around the world that have done certain things like this.
Now, look, I've had a lot of crazy people show up at my office and say, you know, I like I've heard it all.
Yeah, I've been to Mars.
You know, I have a chip in my brain, all this stuff.
We had this one guy that showed up that was like trying to give us a USB.
He's like, put this in your computer.
They're going to kill me for this, like runs away.
And I'm like, I'm not putting that in my computer.
But based on our investigations, what I will tell you is, you know, there's been two members of Congress that are actually helping to lead out these investigations with me.
And the reason I say that is because up until last Congress, if you even said the word UAP or UFO, people actually told us that if we went forward with these investigations that we were going to ruin our political careers.
And so, you know, we're in the mindset of, well, like, why wouldn't we ask these questions?
And also, too, if no one wants to touch it, like there has to be something here.
And so in these investigations, I mean, the amount of people that will come up to us, very successful people to multiple members of Congress that believe the same thing.
it's definitely changed in regards to the stigma that used to exist about disclosure and all this.
And so what we're trying to do currently was there's a big documentary that was filmed about a year and a half ago, and we're trying to get a screening up on Capitol Hill.
But look, I think a lot of people say, well, this is a distraction from everything else happening in the country right now.
And all I'm simply trying to say is it's not a distraction.
The people that are kind of helping to –
divulge all this information.
You have an intelligence community, you know, Tulsi Gabbard, Radcliffe, Kash Patel.
They have been truly, in regards to our other investigations, extremely transparent and wanting to get this information out.
But it doesn't mean that within these intelligence communities there isn't pushback.
And so part of the reason why the task force was formed pertaining to things like UAP, pertaining to things like the Jeffrey Epstein stuff, pertaining to things like
like the JFK, MLK, and RFK investigations is because even though we don't hold declassification authority, what we're trying to do is push these agencies and be, if you will, the pit bull and the attack dog on trying to get this information released.
And to a lot of these agencies' credits, they've been extremely transparent.
And we have gotten wins specifically on the JFK stuff.
And we're still looking to declassify and ask specifically on the UAP topic.
I think that part of the fear is is that you have advisors that think that, you know, the American people or humanity might not be able to handle it.
There's this like protective complex.
But then also, too, I think when you are talking about these things.
For a lot of people, I think that it kind of can rock your world a little bit in regards to where you stand in a faith perspective.
And then also, too, an aspect of, well, how do you even begin to explain it?
And all I'm going to say is, look, and we can go into some of the books that were removed from what we know as the modern day Bible.
But I read through the book of Enoch multiple times.
And I'm not saying that these things are angels.
OK, that's that's not at all what I'm saying.
But what I am saying is that.
Depending on where you are in regards to your whole perspective on whether or not God exists, like I believe in God, I'm a Christian.
There has to have been and there's admissions that there was other.
creations that God made, but that we were the most prized creation.
And so I think that this can open up a bigger topic of discussion.
What I will say is that what's been interesting is, and I've had a mass array of people that have come in, right?
Like we have people that come in that claim that you can use this ability to basically dog whistle these things in from like a psychic ability.
And I think that there's some something there.
Otherwise, they wouldn't necessarily be able to provide some of the video evidence that they have.
But then that also brings up the question of if these things are interdimensional, which we've had witnesses testify to to members of Congress.
And that was all publicly out there.
That would then bring up the whole.
If this is really transcending dimension, the power of what you say, thought, all of that.
And then, you know, you can look into our own government's declassified documents that the CIA had on different experiments.
I mean, you can literally last week I was going through actually on a Friday night, just put my son down and I was going through some of the declassified.
You go to CIA.gov slash reading room and you can see all the declassified documents.
And so I believe it's called Stargate.
And it was talking about, you know, the.
basically psychological experiments where they were trying to basically remote view and all that.
Why would our own government be looking into that if there wasn't something there?
And so I'm appreciative to all that information being publicly out there.
But I think this whole idea and stigma of trying to make it sound crazy when people actually have these questions, that needs to stop, which is why the task force is in existence.
And then also, too, they need to release information.
Well, there's looking into it and then there's expanding, right?
And so if you look at all those declassified files, you know, you can pull up – and this is just wild, but there's one where I was looking through and they had basically – you know, the Coast Guard had called in.
There was a ship that they had been given information on that was running drugs.
And so they called in one of their remote viewers and they're trying to give coordinates of the ship and actually, like –
basically locate these things and actually is laughing because I was reading this off the website and I'm telling my husband like imagine you know you're trying to run drugs and then all of a sudden you have some like weirdo at Langley or like in a basement they're like nope just like here's the coordinates you know beam me up Scotty but
Well, I think that this gets into the bigger discussion of what do we know, right?
Going back to some of these books that were moved.
There's a good podcast right now called The Autistic Tapes, and it talks about how some non-speaking or non-verbal autistic kids actually are exhibiting telepathy.
Sorry, the telepathy tapes.
Non-verbal autistic kids are exhibiting telepathy.
You know, this concept, again, if you were to talk about it 20 years ago, people will call you crazy.
But, you know, I think based on what we're seeing now, based on the fact that our own governments looked into it, based on the stuff that you were saying, I mean, you can find all this information publicly available and it's out there.
And I think that there's something to it.
And so, you know, we're seeing and we've heard this is in non-classified settings.
We've heard from people that have come forward that are saying, you know, we're being able to via meditation practice.
We're essentially downloading information.
We can communicate with these things.
Granted, when I'm sitting in my congressional office and I'm hearing this, I take it with a grain of salt because we do get a lot of crazy people.
But when you have people that are high-level executives, very successful, clean-cut, not on drugs, are coming in and they're telling you this stuff, and then you're –
kind of cross-referencing it with various people and intelligence agencies.
I think that there's something there and we need to be at least open to hearing the discussion and the argument for these things.
That's crazy.
And there's an over-classification aspect of this too, right?
Like if you're serving in the military and you're taking a photo on your personal device or a video on your personal device –
That shouldn't be the purview of the federal government in either which way.
I mean, there's been now so much – granted, there's been a lot of fake stuff put out there.
But the stuff that is legitimate that we are seeing, the stuff that we had people testify to in our congressional hearings, I mean, that's not a joke.
And what's even more interesting to this is that I was actually able to talk to David Grush, who now is actually working with the task force to kind of chase down a lot of these leads in regards to some of these contractors that allegedly have this tech, right?
So in talking with him, again, not in a skiff, we were able to actually flesh out that prior to him testifying that he actually received very real threats against his life and his wife, his wife's life.
He's a sound guy.
And then shortly after he testified, this was there's this massive smear operation that was launched against him to try to discredit his testimony.
And so, you know, again, going into, well, if this stuff wasn't real or if he wasn't telling the truth, why would there be this massively orchestrated effort to completely just disprove what he was trying to say or to discredit his actions and his testimony?
It is kind of coming full circle, right?
Going back to what the task force has been able to find out.
I mean, we're conducting these investigations simultaneously and we're doing this in addition to everything else that we have to do as members of Congress, right?
So although I would love to just dedicate...
my full time attention to this, we still have to balance it out.
And so I've, again, had some great investigators who are working with us on oversight, as well as a lot of cooperation from the intelligence agencies.
And we are going to be asking for this information to be declassified, at least information that has been shown to us.
Yeah, I haven't seen it.
Have you seen it?
And they've been lying to Congress.
Very illegal, but it's Congress going to do anything about it because it's not the first time.
We have the ability, and this is the most frustrating thing.
This is my second term in Congress now.
But as a first-term member of Congress, Joe, when you get elected to Congress, you would think that they would bring you in and they'd say, okay, this is how you do the legislation.
No, you get elected.
You show up to kind of a crash course for about like a week and a half on, you know, how to not get in trouble with ethics.
And then you're basically wined and dined by lobbyists.
They don't actually tell you how to do the legislation.
Basically, the only rules that you're told are never vote down a rule, which is a procedural motion to bring legislation to the floor and don't really ever vote against your party, of which within the first week I broke both rules.
And so I was on the naughty list for usual.
Well, they tell you basically those are the two rules and don't go against that and you won't have any issues.
Yeah, because it's like, you know, you're supposed to represent your constituency.
So if you have people calling your office saying, don't you vote for this, then you vote against it.
It's like people forget that you're supposed to represent, right, representative instead of just do what the party wants.
But, you know, there are mechanisms that have existed –
since Thomas Jefferson, who wrote our damn rule manual that enable us to actually pass legislation and actually hold agencies and people accountable from a punitive perspective.
And I don't know if you were tracking, but like I brought a vote on the former attorney general for basically refusing to testify to Congress and respond to a subpoena.
And that was called inherent contempt.
And a lot of Congress was like, what the hell is inherent contempt?
It hadn't been done since the early 1900s.
And I actually read it in the rule manual and I read the rule manual twice.
It's like so crazy what happens when you read books.
But we were able to find this out.
And it was a mechanism that Congress can use to actually basically send the sergeant at arms to go arrest people.
Especially when we're facing a massive deficit and you see that the Pentagon hasn't been able to pass the audit in I don't know how many years.
It's definitely wrong that it's happening for sure.
What I will tell you, though, is the issue that we have with bringing forward legislation that would give mass amnesty and pardon to these people is that there are people within the intelligence community and within Congress on both sides that will try to – if you come forward with this – and I'll tell you a very prime example of this in a moment –
That they will block it.
They don't want it to pass.
They will stop it from even coming to the floor.
They won't bring legislation that will address it because they want to keep this information secret.
So Representative Tim Burchett.
Because I think that their mouthpiece is in control of the deep state.
And that's a thing.
And it exists on both sides.
Representative Tim Burchett, before I got elected, was kind of on his own little island in regard to the UAP stuff.
And he will himself tell you that, you know, this is 100 percent like a thing and that these defense contractors and what he believes, you know, the Pentagon not passing all this, all this, these black budget programs.
I mean, like he will tell you he's, again, been leading out this effort way before I got there.
He had a piece of legislation that was supposed to enable the FAA to report and develop a different reporting procedure for UAP stuff.
And at the time, the chairman of Intel ensured that that legislation was not brought forward, that it was stopped.
The piece of legislation that actually passed out of the Senate really had no teeth to it.
And then Representative Burchett drew a primary challenger that was being backed by the chairman of Intel.
And so, you know, when you are touching these, it's like, you know, that meme where you have that stork that's like, don't touch this.
And then the little foot comes out.
It's kind of like what we're doing.
And it's not exactly easy because you will take heat from both sides.
But there has been a good group that's been assembled that's bicameral, meaning it's both in the House and the Senate and bipartisan, meaning both Democrats and Republicans are saying like, hey, this should actually happen.
It's done behind the scenes.
People would be pissed.
Well, I can tell you is for us specifically, we actually were made aware.
Some people had come forward that said that they wanted to brief.
So about two years ago when all this kicked off, we had requested briefings from Arrow that's in charge of kind of compiling the investigative aspect of the AP stuff.
And by the way, from the get go, I like even in talking to Arrow, I was like, this organization is literally a BS organization.
They're never going to tell us anything.
And every interaction that we had in the SCIF, I was like, this is a nothing burger.
But then these people came forward and said that they were actually denied.
They were told to not brief our group specifically on this topic and that it was from at the time members of House leadership, but they wouldn't say who.
And so I actually went with another member of Congress and confronted multiple people and they all denied it.
denying us access.
So it's done behind the scenes.
You'll see these random little troll blockages that might pop up.
But what I can tell you is that with the new administration, specifically with the FBI, specifically with ODNI, we have gotten transparency to where previously we would have been stonewalled.
We were actually given briefings.
And so what I will tell you is we are going to push for the information that we saw to be out there for the American people to see.
And then the Air Force was like, yeah, it's nothing.
Well, I can tell you in our hearing, we are actually notified and you can pull this up.
I think it was one of the witnesses had talked about what had happened at Vandenberg Air Base where there was this thing that appeared over the base.
It actually had multiple blotters reporting on it from phone calls into law enforcement from like hundreds of people.
And whatever had appeared over the base was basically bigger than a football field and basically a cube, a red cube with some weird thing in the center of it.
I actually had our witness draw this out.
This guy is sober as a priest.
I mean, he was a great pilot.
And he's talking about all this.
And so, you know, you talk about this.
It seems like a sci-fi movie.
But based on the evidence that we've seen, I don't have any reason to believe that these people are lying.
Based on the evidence that I've seen from our own government, I think that there's something there that the American people deserve to have access to.
And so I've been – this is not just on this topic, but again, in other topics as well.
This has been my perspective is transparency is what builds trust.
Other governments have revealed certain information on it.
To think that we are the only life form on this planet or in this galaxy I think is a little bit crazy given the fact that I also think God exists and that there's other creations around.
But then again, you get into this aspect of, you know, why is it that you also have this aspect of, you know, a certain religion that has been very controlled and I think ruled out in a certain aspect.
And, you know, when you have certain books that are removed because they don't think that people should have access to this information or know it, you know, why remove a book from a Bible, right?
Yeah, so from what I gather.
Well, so from what I gather, and by the way, I'm not a theologian in any capacity, but just from my personal opinion on this.
You have the Ethiopian Orthodox text, which has, I think, 88 books of the Bible in total.
But in the Ethiopian Orthodox text, it's basically kind of like a mainline OG version of the Bible.
And then sometime in the fourth century, there was actually a group that came together and they removed certain books.
The story goes that Revelations actually had replaced Enoch.
And so it's interesting because when you're looking kind of full circle on, you know, you hear the stuff that some of these people are talking about and then you see and you read the book of Enoch, which is a wild read.
OK, and then you look at kind of what our modern day description is of what angels and entities are versus what Enoch was seeing and reporting in his language and ability at that time.
I just I think that there's a lot that.
brings you to then ask the question, well, why would they remove this information?
If it's truly, you know, written and part of the oldest Bible in the world, why would they then take it out and water it down?
And I'm not saying that you can't find God through the new Bible, right?
Like everyone's on their own spiritual journey.
And I think everyone can pray and you can access God.
I just find that very interesting.
And so what I will say is that I like to have the whole kind of picture in front of me.
And so I feel like to fully understand A through Z, you kind of have to be able to read it.
And the fact that this kid, you know, a shepherd kid, was able to even find these scrolls that they were set up and, you know, just has led to that point right in time where he finds this massive, basically, admission that the Bible is real.
You can actually look into, you know, there's a New King James, and then you can actually look into the Catholic Bible as well that also...
has they call them apocrypha texts because the king shames bible doesn't acknowledge them but there are also other books that are not uh considered you know approved by the king shame so look i was um on my mom's side i was actually raised catholic and then had my catechism did all of it and then on my dad's side i was raised christian and then later on messianic jew and so i feel like i kind of have like a good cross-section and i've been exposed to a lot of this growing up
but it's definitely interesting and so look I don't tell people like I'm not I'm not saying that like aliens created mankind I don't believe that because I at the end of the day believe that God is responsible for our creation but I do think that what we've been programmed to believe in regards to our ability to be able to use our mind the spiritual aspect of us really does exist and I think that once you kind of remove yourself out of this basically rat race and you can like really reconnect with that I think that that's when you kind of realize hey I
There's a bigger purpose here in life and like what is our end objective?
And if you're given a position of influence or a position of power and you're not doing the right thing for humanity, you're not guiding people, then that's something that you have to answer for.
So I want to make sure that I'm good with God.
Yeah, I've looked into that.
I actually wanted to, and again... You're in the government.
Yeah, so I actually wanted to do a CODEL to just... But of course, we're focusing on other things right now, right?
I was like, I need to pay for this for myself, so we're not using tax-free dollars, but just go check it out.
What's interesting is the CIA allegedly located the Ark of the Covenant.
I think the...
They remote viewed it.
You can actually find that.
You should actually pull it up.
No, not in Ethiopia, but it was in a Middle Eastern country.
They weren't able to locate the actual.
I think the New York Post did an article on it where they actually had the handwritten notes on the Ark of the Covenant location.
And they remote viewed it.
You should ask them to pull it up.
I'm serious about it.
No, check out, pull up the New York Post one because they actually have the handwritten notes from the remote viewer that actually documents it.
It should be, I think it's like the New York Post.
Oh, there you go.
This is wild because it actually goes into descriptions of angels too.
And so actually, so in Enoch it talks about, well, if you scroll down, now that's the, you can probably click on the scribed because it'll show you all the documents from the actual declassified file.
This is also on cia.gov.
This happened recently.
This was like a couple months ago that this just kind of came all out.
5 December 1988.
So scroll down.
Allegedly, they remote viewed it.
We don't know if they followed up on it.
Okay, so scroll down and then you'll see that.
So this is like, so they're going through in the notes.
You have to read it, but you can scroll down.
The remote viewer.
So you have like the different things that are describing it.
And if you keep going, you'll see like a cherubim.
Sorry, go up a little bit.
So that's interesting because if you look into actual, so there's like a wheel text.
If you look into Enoch's description of angels and Ezekiel too, I think that that's kind of a tie, but go down more.
So, but yeah, you have like the actual here purpose of container.
They should have like a cherubim drawing somewhere down here.
Oh yeah, I see.
So that would be the seraphim.
So it's interesting.
That would be the what?
The seraphim.
So basically when they describe the Ark, and so he's going through describing it.
So these are the hand notes for it.
And then it actually says that it's in a Middle Eastern country.
The remote viewer describes the clothing in which individuals are in the area.
I feel like I'm describing like an Indiana Jones movie, but this is actually from the CIA.
The Covenant, yeah.
He's describing, if you go up, and these are actually the handwritten notes on what was described by the remote viewer.
And you have to go through the entire document, but yeah, that's what's described surrounding the Ark.
Well, yeah, the Ark of the Covenant.
They asked him to go look for the Ark of the Covenant.
Yeah, if you go higher up in the documents, it's over there.
Or can you locate it?
What a great movie.
The 90s, right?
I don't know.
And like the first two are the best.
Well, what's interesting, and I should probably ask Radcliffe, be like, Radcliffe, can you tell me if this guy ever looked into the Ark of the Covenant?
Definitely interesting.
We don't know how far it went, and I definitely have questions, but this would not be the first time that a government would have looked for something, especially because people theorize that the Ark of the Covenant had these abilities as a super weapon.
Well, I think there's this aspect of if you look at it from a biblical perspective, no one would be able to access it anyways because it would be protected, right?
That's what the Bible says.
They had to go through this special process of being considered holy, basically, to access it.
So all that to say that there's something out there, right?
I think that obviously God's real, and this job has definitely put me in a position to where we're able to help get other truths out there, if you will.
Dear Director Radcliffe, as you look at the Ark of the Covenant.
Allegedly they do.
I mean, there's something to be said about the Ethiopian people as a whole and going back to the Ethiopian Orthodox text.
Actually, when I first launched this task force, I actually went and I met with a Ethiopian Orthodox pastor, if you will, just to kind of see and explain and ask questions about
that I can't exactly go to, you know, the Smithsonian and ask.
And, you know, his response was interesting, especially from their perspective.
You know, you have a lot of this aspect of, I think, religion that tries to be doom and gloom.
And then in the Ethiopian perspective, he's like, first of all, your timeline's wrong.
And I'm like, what do you mean your timeline?
He's like, well, the biblical text in modern day Christianity, it's a little bit off, right?
So we use a completely separate, I think it's 364 days out of the year.
And he's explaining all of it
And he's like, but even then, so, you know, we don't have the perspective of, you know, we are in the end of days, et cetera.
But, you know, the way his perspective just seemed very optimistic as opposed to pessimistic and filtering and controlling information.
He's off X. Yeah.
They kind of talk him on, right?
They'll give them something and say, walk us through.
Or just an aspect of spirituality that we've previously forgotten because we're in such a digital age that kind of programs you into the rat race.
And I think people, the more that they're kind of like, you know, there has to be more to life than just like a nine to five.
And, you know, working for this aspect of materialism, like, don't get me wrong.
I like, you know, a nice car and a clean house and all that.
But, you know, there's also this aspect of, you know, being a human.
And like, you know, if you have kids, I think that's like one of the things like I have, you have a daughter, I have a son.
And it's like when you're a parent, it kind of like makes you realize like, wow, there's
This aspect of, like, love that I didn't know existed before and you can kind of really be there and help, you know, grow this next human and influence that person.
And it just kind of – the human experience is something that, you know, you can make it as special as you want.
And this aspect of, you know, us being able to have those little quantum breadcrumbs is what I like to call them.
Like, have you ever –
Have you ever been like talking about something and like you'll go somewhere, hear something and there's like confirmation of what you've been talking about or, you know, something happens and you're like, you know, asking a question, then all of a sudden it pops up kind of there's the answer.
And I think that those little things just mean you're on the right path and doing what you're supposed to do in this bigger picture.
I think that before tech really evolved, there was a bigger aspect of spirituality that actually talks about that.
So like discernment in the Bible, you can talk about, you know, this aspect of being people say like, oh, if someone has like really bad energy, you picking up on it.
There's something to that.
But I think that because – and it's really happened I think in the last like 40 years where people are kind of forgetting that.
But when you actually go back to like for example we're talking just now about the Ark of the Covenant, the Ethiopian Orthodox text and all of this.
There's more of that aspect of spirituality that I think has been removed from society.
I think it's actually –
taken away our ability to really respect one another and value human life.
And I think that that, you know, from like a politico perspective influences decision.
Like you get really pro-war people.
Those people are usually not that spiritual and they really don't have a value for life in that aspect.
I actually had a really groundbreaking conversation.
So, like, the way I'll describe Congress is you ever have, like, a job where 80% of it and 90% of it is just, like, really eating shit?
And then, like, the 10% is, like, really cool?
And it makes up for that, like, 80%, 90% that you're just like, I— That's when I hosted Fear Factor.
OK, so, yeah, that aspect of I think really exists in politics, if you actually care.
And I had a meeting recently where I was with two other members of Congress that were helping me with the JFK investigation.
And we actually met for the first time since 1990 with the ambassador to the Russian government.
And I bring that up because at the time of the JFK assassination, the KGB had actually come forward with their own independent investigation.
And they actually gave it at Kennedy's funeral to U.S.
We never got those documents.
And it's my belief that the CIA actually destroyed that information and evidence because it would have confirmed what the KGB – and mind you, at the time, JFK was actually in talks with the president of Russia at that time.
And his perspective is that he actually wanted to do a joint mission between the U.S.
government and the Russian government to the moon.
And there are aspects and divisions within the intelligence community.
You obviously saw the Cold War was happening.
They wanted war in Cuba.
They wanted war with Russia.
So for them to be able to say that Kennedy, who was not a communist, but that he was a communist sympathizer and how dare he talk to these dirty communists.
I mean, that in itself would have given them any ammunition to turn a blind eye or at least not.
fully figure out who assassinated kennedy but i bring that up to say that you know when you have these people in power you know you can see a lot of it in regards to there's a summit on the 15th actually with president trump and vladimir putin and i think the aspect of you know anytime you have peace and trade it's way better than war for everyone involved for the people of ukraine for russia for the american people
And I think for the surrounding regions, like I recently got back from meeting with government officials in Romania and Moldova.
And it didn't matter.
And I actually met an actual member of the Moldovan government who is a communist, like an outward communist.
And it didn't matter who I talked to.
Everyone wanted peace.
And then when we had met with the European Parliament and the EU.
Some of them wanted peace, but then the countries that had the shittiest economies, excuse my language, they were the ones that were advocating for war.
Well, you have a war-based economy.
It always helps your economy.
So if you have terrible policy perspectives, obviously you would advocate for something like that.
But it just goes to show that the people that are going through it, the people that are living it, that are directly impacted it, no one would advocate for war.
And so in even just having this conversation, a lot of people even two administration ago, maybe two administrations ago,
Probably would not have had that conversation, but to be able to develop that dialogue, the end result of that meeting was the Russian government agreed to release their investigation onto JFK that the previous congressional task force in the 90s had tried to obtain from the Russian government, and they said no.
So they agreed to release that, and they'll be posting it publicly for the American people to go through later on this fall.
So I'll be seeing it at the same time everyone else does.
So when I was talking to the ambassador, he's actually a history buff, too.
And so he had actually said that the Russian government, when Oswald was actually in Russia, had done a psychological profile because they thought, you know, they're like, is this guy part of American intelligence?
Like, what's his story?
And they thought he was basically nuts.
And apparently he had he tried to go hunting when he was out there and they were observing him and he couldn't shoot for shit.
So they're like, you know, he didn't meet our psychological profile.
Then he shows up to the Russian embassy in Mexico City with a gun.
And they're like, what the hell is it?
Like crazy guys showing up at that.
Like what's going on?
And then we find out simultaneously as this is all happening that the CIA, kudos to Director Radcliffe, had actually released something called the Jonidis file.
And George Jonidis was actually – he's basically our version of James Bond but more corrupt –
And he was basically observing Oswald.
He had lied to Congress.
This was all in his file.
He was then the CIA liaison to Congress during the investigations.
Stonewall, their investigations, was later awarded something from the CIA.
So we have the CIA admitting that they lied to Congress, covered up the investigations.
We had admissions from the Warren Commission.
people that had been subject to the Warren Commission's investigation saying that the Warren Commission engaged in witness intimidation.
They omitted evidence.
The single bullet theory never exists.
The CIA admits that Lee Harvey Oswald was not a lone gunman.
People ask, well, you know, does this mean that you'll ever get the name of who killed him?
No, because I don't think the CIA was like, kill JFK on this day and use this gun and have this person assigned.
But there was evidence of multiple shooters for sure.
We had testimony to that.
And actually, what's interesting is when we first launched the task force, we had left-leaning news outlets that were trying to write hit pieces saying that I was basically launching a conspiracy theory task force.
And they had to print the truth weeks ago.
Well, specifically to JFK for decades, the intelligence agencies were influencing what the print and press was doing.
Well, there's multiple problems, though, because the Warren Commission actually never even put into the report, right?
So, like, if you're conducting a— Well, let me finish.
Let me finish.
It's a magic bullet, don't you know?
Well, what's interesting is the Warren Commission did omit multiple female witnesses who were actually at the book depository that day that actually stated that they had never witnessed Oswald actually in the location or going down the back of the book depository.
He was under surveillance by the CIA.
So there's a lot there.
However, I will say this.
What the official narrative was, we now know is BS, right?
But a lot of the American people did.
But to have their own government say, no, that's not true, to gaslight them and to push this narrative of if you question it, you're wrong, you're crazy.
That in itself, I think when you're talking about like, why do the American people not trust their government?
It's really this fracture that starts around the Kennedy era and time frame.
And you can see then that distrust kind of evolves.
But why do – going back to your original question, why do people refuse to kind of question conspiracy theory?
Maybe there's some substance to it.
And I think it's because it's more comfortable for people from a psychological perspective to live in this comfort area that their government might not do something like that.
Or might not try to cover up something like that because that's just an easy way of life.
It's too scary.
But the fact is, is that, look, I've traveled a lot.
I've dealt with a lot of world leaders.
We are still the greatest country in the world.
Make make no excuse about that.
But it doesn't mean that we can't call out and hold our own government and officials accountable.
And so that's kind of what I've guessed my mission has been this Congress and what I hope that it will continue to be.
But I'm not trying to do this for like even the next 10 years.
So for someone like me, you know, people are like, oh, initially you're going to ruin your political career talking about this.
This is crazy.
Why would you even want to do that?
And then, you know, they're seeing all these big wins coming out in regards to transparency.
And I will say, had it not been for the secretaries that have been appointed by this administration, this wouldn't have happened.
Because under President Biden, he actually also tried to declassify things pertaining to JFK, and the National Archives never released it.
They were up until recently.
And we're still documents that the JFK community, because mind you, I'm actually working with his name's Jefferson Morley.
He is not a Republican.
He's a Bernie Sanders Democrat.
But on this issue, we're working great together.
And he's actually been helping me.
And he's like, look, I've been waiting for this stuff for like 30 years.
Yeah, it's super bipartisan.
I think they're real.
The other part is still outstanding.
But hopefully when the documents are released from the Russian government later on this fall, that might be able to provide a full picture.
Granted, I'm going to take it with a grain of salt because it's still, you know, it was written by the KGB.
But at the end of the day, we have a good mosaic that's been put together with at least the documents that have been released with this administration.
And for any outstanding documents, I actually have a team assigned to me from the CIA who
that is actually helping me chase down these documents.
And I've already had some interesting experiences, like not creepy, but for example, after President Trump signed the executive order and Radcliffe has been super helpful, we actually were made aware of this.
Allegedly, there had been a document that was at the CIA that was a report from the inspector general that had implicated the CIA allegedly in the assassination of JFK.
So I'm following up on this lead and trying to find this report.
And the archives is like, we don't have any documentation of this.
The CIA says they don't have any documentation.
And they've been good with us so far.
So I go to the archives because they're like, we found this weird bag, though.
And it's in the skiff.
And it's been here for five years.
And it was left by our former attorney for the archives.
And so we don't know what's in it.
And I was like, well, go open it.
They're like, well, we don't have the key.
And it's in a vault.
And I said, well, I'm coming over.
So I drive over.
Literally, I put my son in the car.
Again, the card, I go over to the National Archives.
We go into the skiff.
I pulled this bag and I'm like, does anyone have scissors?
And we like cut open this little folder.
And there was a CD-ROM in it.
And this is, again, been declassified now so I can talk about it.
But there was this CD-ROM of a ton of wires from the State Department.
Some of the wires were pertaining to the Kennedy family and it was actually a WikiLeaks document.
And so I think the reason why it was kept at the archives is because you're not actually supposed to have these documents on government computers.
WikiLeaks obviously don't have them with that.
But here I was like cutting it out of a bag at the National Archives.
To this day, I don't know even who left the CD-ROM.
I don't know.
And there's some other stuff in that that I don't need to get into.
Because I don't want to get in trouble.
But the stuff that was on there was interesting.
And I think I saw recently Tulsi had actually talked about some of the State Department wires that had been found.
And I think these are the same ones that had talked about the assassination of RFK.
There were wires going up from the State Department prior to his assassination, which is interesting.
So our next investigation – so we've done multiple hearings.
I haven't seen the actual wires themselves yet, but what that would imply is that the State Department knew about the assassination before it took place.
And that was something she talked about.
So I look at that on my free time, but that's not the purview of the task force.
But there is stuff that you can, again, CIA.gov slash reading room.
Super creepy.
I did find a document on the archives website that actually ties the initial phases of the MKUltra program to Operation Pink.
It is there, and I'm reading this to my husband.
They were doing a lot of bad stuff.
Like a psychosis state.
Well, and they got in trouble for it, too.
Like, the CIA had to do payouts.
They were getting sued for it.
Well, it's interesting.
Well, even just this conversation right now, there's such a stigma that exists around it because it's such a spooky topic.
You don't want to look stupid.
And so, look, anyone watching this can go look at this information.
Go to CIA.gov slash reading room and know it's not going to be a phishing website that's going to steal your information.
Oh, for sure it is.
The CIA is like, where are we accessing?
But, you know, it's it's always been one of those things.
And, you know, if people ask me, I'm just very transparent about it.
And I will say something that started out with a stigma of being, you know, this conspiracy theory investigation, wasting taxpayer dollars has been arguably one of the coolest task force in Congress, I think.
And we have a lot of good people that are behind it and.
Or have disinformation campaigns.
That's what I would do.
We've had our fill.
Like the one thing I wanted to do when I first got the task force is open up a skiff to any person who held a clearance to come brief us.
On what they knew about UAPs.
And I can tell you that we've now had the skiff.
Well, the problem is I've reached out to some of the biggest names in UFO lore.
And they all got skiff flu.
And we call it skiff flu, meaning like the day that the skiff was open that we reserved it.
We're like, we're here.
Like, come on, come brief us.
They get sick or the dog dies.
They didn't recover and then they just don't talk to us anymore.
They ghost us.
Yeah, so I'm like, well, if you're not going to tell me to skiff, then you're full.
Full of crap.
But if people say they're going to go tell us in a skiff and then they don't show up, it's a problem.
That is one of the biggest things that we've had people bring up is that you're a whistleblower, but whistleblower protections only go so far.
And you can't do anything for my physical safety.
And some of them do allege that there's these actual physical concerns.
We actually had someone that we wanted to bring in to testify because our next hearing on UAP is going to be – I believe it's next month.
And the individual that was actually –
Toll test by David Grush is actually a former combat controller.
And so my husband, Air Force special operator, combat control.
So we knew the guy via some friends.
So we knew that the guy wasn't nuts or crazy and reached out to him and he did not want to come in.
He wanted nothing to do with it, was like, I am not touching this.
And so, you know, that stuff like that happens.
Well, we don't have to.
We can do private.
But if we testify.
What, the back engineering potential?
Well, so and that brings us to what happened at Eglin Air Force Base.
So in a nutshell, we had been told by so Representative Gates had come forward and said that he had two or two or three pilots said to contact him saying that the Air Force was covering up information regarding to UAP activity.
in the panel handle and he wanted us to go with him to investigate so we show up at Eglin Air Force Base we're met by the base commander previous says even showing up on this congressional delegation to investigate the Pentagon had tried to cancel the meeting and you can't so this is under the last administration so you can't just cancel a meeting and say you can't come to the base that doesn't work so Gates actually was on house armed services at the time that oversees the U.S.
And so Gates got the chairman involved, calls back onto the Pentagon and gets this meeting on the books.
And, you know, we told them specifically we want to see information on UAPs.
We want to see the evidence and we want to have the pilots that saw these aircraft, whatever they are, or the spacecraft.
We want to have briefings from them.
In a nutshell, we get to Eglin Air Force Base.
They keep BSing us about the Chinese spy balloon.
That's not what we were there to see.
And ultimately, we were in the SCIF.
We got into a verbal disagreement with the base commander at the time who was denying us access to the pilots and to the information and said that we didn't have the authorization.
In the SCIF, there was many members of the intelligence community.
We then go back upstairs to the conference room and proceed to, again, basically have it out with this commander.
And Representative Burchett said, you know, we can do this the easy way or the hard way.
You choose, sir.
Kind of, but at the time... I like it when people use a movie way.
And if it's the hard way, you're going to have Representative Gates and Luna in D.C.
questioning you, so I suggest you do it the easy way.
So he actually, in the middle of the meeting, we were kind of holding his feet to the fire on it.
He like kind of got nervous as we were talking to him.
And he, I kid you not, he goes, you know, they're going to like that.
I'm not going to let you see this.
So he like kind of was like thinking out loud, but didn't realize that he was basically saying it.
And then in the middle of our meeting, he gets up and leaves the room.
Like I have to go to the restroom or something.
And then maybe like five minutes later, this tech sergeant comes in and says, oh, the base commander's been authorized to go on leave to Georgia.
He won't be coming back.
And I'm sitting there looking at Gates and Burch, and I'm like, he just left?
Like, in the middle of a congressional delegation?
Like, that's never happened.
Like, verbally articulated it.
Gates was there.
My husband was there.
Burchett was there.
But here's the problem.
Even if it was someone like the Secretary of Defense, right?
Because at the time, this got pretty high level.
I'm not saying it's not illegal.
He still at the end of the day, you're in the military.
How our government functions is the military does not decide what the civilian sector and what representatives can and cannot see.
It's not supposed to function like that.
So he got up and left like I've never seen this happen.
I was in the military.
I've never seen like in the middle of a congressional delegation.
These are big deals.
You just get up and go and leave to Georgia and you just don't come back like in the middle of the meeting.
It never happens.
We were in Florida.
Oh, that's hilarious.
He just like got up and drove to Georgia like, what the hell are you doing in Georgia in the middle of a congressional delegation?
And then his second in command comes in and they managed to get one pilot to come down and brief us.
And what I will tell you is, I will say it, Representative Gates has gone on record.
He actually did as soon as he left office that we've seen stuff that I don't believe was created by mankind.
I should be able to tell you without losing my clearance.
Which is why we have to declassify, which is why— Do you know the Hal Puthoff stuff?
But don't you think that that's where kind of it's been interesting because society has moved away from this aspect of like having a spiritual grounding and even believing and like, you know, most people today think when you talk about like praying, even that whole concept is kind of just like, oh, you know, they're just.
And I feel like that thing's kind of pooh pooh.
But if you have like a grounding in that and going back to what I was saying earlier, I think that.
I don't think that society would do that.
Granted, I'm not a scientist.
I'm not running numbers.
But just based on how we've kind of been evolving with access to information and kind of the questions, the discussions that have been happening, not just here, but I think internationally, I just think a lot's changing.
Now, to say that we were, you know, and I've heard some wild theories, like people think that, you know, humanity was seeded by UFOs.
I don't agree with that theory.
I'm going to address it.
It's an interesting theory.
I mean, I'd be transparent about it, but I just don't personally believe it.
Well, I'd put it out there because that's what I'm supposed to do.
That would suck.
Well, I think that it depends on what book you're talking about, right?
But I mean the Old Testament.
Written into text.
Well, some of them are written by prophets and then – but Enoch is apparently supposed to predate even the time of Genesis and talk.
I'm telling you, Enoch is even crazier than Ezekiel.
You can look up the 4th century.
But what's interesting is, is that even if that's the case, though, you have the Ethiopian Orthodox Church that actually there's Ethiopian Jews and that's considered the most pure form of the Bible.
So like you actually have a division of like the Ethiopian Jewish class that actually recognized Enoch.
But that's what I'm saying.
You can't discredit it.
But you can't discredit it because, again, when you have people removing books, I think, look, and I'm not telling people what to believe.
I'm just saying you should take a look at it.
yeah they but that's the thing is it's a disagreement in religion and perspective but they should have still not removed it and so it's interesting because then you have you know the evolution of what the king james bible is we all know that story he wanted to get remarried they rewrote it but you even have the catholic bible that has it's what happened right and you have the catholic bible that had books that were taken out and then right we have the king james so i'm not saying that you know if you read the king james you're not getting um you don't have access to god that's not
But I am saying that there's a bigger picture here that we need to discuss.
Well, it's – OK.
So if you read it, it talks about the fall of angels, thus creating really the precursor of civilization that led to the first flood.
I think that when you even go into potentially the technology that was given to mankind by these angels, it talks about the hidden beliefs and theories in astronomy, et cetera, metal workings, all of it.
But it really does explain, you know, you were talking about earlier how you have a lot of these religions around the world that kind of say the same thing.
This is kind of the OG text that leads to those stories that we're hearing from many religions around the world.
to talk about angels mixing with mankind and then seeding a super essentially race of humans that essentially were responsible for basically damning mankind to the flood.
I mean, you hear about stuff in Greek and Roman mythology, people who had these super crazy powers.
And you talk about it out loud and it sounds crazy, but that's what the book says.
And then the fact that it was taken out and then it's papood, yet you have one of the oldest religions in the world, be it the Ethiopians saying,
that actually still have it you have you know the catholic church that has books that are missing out of the king james version i'm just saying that you know when you read it you should read it and decide for yourself don't listen to what i'm saying don't listen to what you're saying but truly give it a chance and see what you have to say and then you know you're going back to this whole concept of if you have this information pertaining to uaps whatever might they might be the origins i mean if you have a understanding of what enoch was talking about kind of makes sense
I mean, that's smart because there's always an aspect of translation where you lose certain implications.
I'm telling you, the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible, I actually had a staffer that went to Ethiopia.
She was on a church trip, and she actually brought me back a copy.
And she's like, you can translate it via Google Translation.
So kudos to modern-day technology.
So I have it in my office.
And actually, when I did my swearing-in, I actually did my swearing-in on the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible.
It's direct translation.
Well, I think that brings us back to square one.
So, by the way, I'm by no means saying that aliens are God.
That's not what I'm saying.
But I think that brings us back to the fundamental question on do you believe that God exists?
Because if you do, then you realize that our freedom—
You know, the freedom of choice is not a man given right, but a God given right.
And I think that that goes back to the fundamental principles of like what we believe in true representation.
So if you believe that God is real, God is powerful, then it shouldn't be a king or a man that you're looking to, but to God for divine inspiration and to make your life decisions.
That's ultimately what freedom of choice is.
Well, that's true.
Well, it does say in Enoch and then also, too, I think in Genesis that the stars cried out.
And so if you're looking, well, a star, if it's not, you know, what do they mean by stars crying out?
And then Enoch actually alludes to stars in certain capacities being potentially angels.
Now, I'm not saying like...
And this is kind of interesting because, you know, I've had this aspect of my task force, what we've been investigating.
But then I have, you know, my personal beliefs and, you know, my religious beliefs.
And what I'm telling you is that in my position officially, I've seen men pervert information to get what they want.
So it's not unlikely that an entire –
Very secret, very truthful text was omitted in an effort to control population and to insert yourself between individuals' relationship between them directly and God.
Well, I mean if you're having people determine any information, yes, you should not be able to do that.
I think we're probably going to be responsible for the book of Enoch sales probably increasing on Amazon.
But if I did.
You should see if there's like an audible.
Well, Plato talks about it, hearing it from Egyptian teachers and then going back to the Atlantean civilization.
Well, so I actually, when I was in my early 20s, I actually went to Egypt to see the megalithic structures there.
And then I went to Turkey to see the Sumerian inscriptions and carvings and what they thought the ancient Sumerian gods were, the Anunnaki, all that.
What's interesting is in Enoch, it actually has reference to the Anunnaki, but a different, I think it's like Anu is like the term, the root term that's used for it.
I have heard of it, yeah.
Well, I will say with all of that going back to if you read Enoch and then follow about the fall of mankind and the angels with, you know, and this is Christian theology, right?
So like angels came down, rebelled against God, interbred with humankind.
That would be, I think, a good starting point for what potentially the Anunnaki were.
Heaven did not approve.
Well, there's definitely something to be said.
It actually talks about this in Enoch about a divine justice.
And so I think, you know, again, going back to what is our job, you know, how would society function?
You have aspects in like government.
Do you trust your government?
Is government going to follow through and bring accountability?
You know, that's our job at the same sense in that we have to ensure that if we are to truly have an equal and fair society, that you have to have this aspect of justice that has to be carried out.
And I can go back to something that I found kind of crazy, but the mandatory minimums for child predators are not that high in this country.
And so Congress can actually increase the mandatory minimums.
But there's been a lot of lethargy about that.
It's like, why would you not want to increase it?
Some people are against the death penalty.
And I would say that it's not my job to play God or to judge people, just to help to arrange the meeting.
We're pushing for it.
And there's a good group of people that are assigned to it.
I did say recently, so the MLK documents just came out and we're wrapping up our JFK investigation.
So after we finalize the JFK investigation, we're putting out an official congressional report on our findings and people can read it and decide for themselves.
And then we have RFK and then MLK.
But I think a lot of the MLK family was actually very concerned that we were going to go into extracurricular.
And that's not the objective of the task force.
It's to specifically expose what the government was doing if they knew about the potential threats.
And people say, well, why do we care about – I constantly get, well, we shouldn't care about this.
No, you should because there has to be a check and balance.
And when you know if the CIA was operating outside the purview of the federal government, if you know that whistleblowers are being punished, if there needs to be reformed to –
to the FOIA Act, all this stuff, then we have to be able to put forward legislation to ensure it doesn't happen again.
And what's been very interesting and almost serendipitous about the whole JFK investigation is you have President Trump now in the second term that's released all this information.
And multiple presidents tried to, but they were worked against by their own secretaries within these agencies themselves.
and then deep-sea actors that try to block the efforts for release.
Now you're seeing kind of a flush of the system.
And even though information hasn't come out as fast as we would like it to, the fact that they've made these admissions is really good.
But moving forward into how do you prevent this from happening again, people really do, like young people especially, because there's so much fatigue for people that have been in office.
And the reason I say I don't even want to do this for the next 10 years is because
Everyone, even people I've looked up to, after a certain amount of time, they lose their edge.
And I think that that's because like you're up there, you're taking in a lot of incoming.
It's not a fun job.
Like you're getting attacked, like you're getting beat down.
It's stressful.
But if you can put all your energy in it now and then you can cut ties and pass it on, that's how our founding fathers wanted us to do is like pass the torch, stand up the next generation.
And that's a problem.
And it's on both sides.
So I'm trying to do a discharge petition now on term limits.
So back in January of my first term, so back in January of 2022, I'm sure you saw there was like this massive speaker's fight about confirming Kevin McCarthy as a speaker of the House.
And I was part of one of those 20 that said, we're not going to vote for you just yet.
We need to reform the institution and the way that we function because power had been consolidated within the speaker's position so much so that –
How it's supposed to work is you're supposed to be able to bring a bill forward.
That bill is supposed to come to the floor.
All of these policies were being consolidated in one person.
And if you didn't fall in line, you wouldn't get committee assignments.
You wouldn't be able to fundraise.
They would basically cut off all aspects of fundraising in Washington.
And the mainstream media for a while was like, you guys are disrupting the process.
You know, like you guys are fighting.
Well, what the hell do you want Congress to do?
You want us to just fall in line and not argue our principles?
Like that's the last time I checked, you're supposed to fight for that.
And so we were able to reform the institution.
But one of the things that we had negotiated with the former speaker was we wanted a vote on term limits and that never came up.
And so now because of our very slim majority, one of the most slim majorities in US history, we have the ability to do something called a discharge petition.
And it's where you can physically go down and basically collect signatures on a bill.
And so I'm bringing forward two that have already been filed.
One is going to be to force a vote on term limits.
So I'm going to see if members of Congress will actually put their name to actually bring that bill to the floor.
There's going to be a massive, I hope, pressure campaign to activate members to do that.
And then the other one is banning insider trading.
But hasn't been done.
And we can do it now.
Well, it's not.
You know, there was a comms director meeting for the entire GOP.
And I'm calling up Burchett's bill on banning insider trading.
And we were not invited to that meeting.
Our staff was excommunicated from that.
Yeah, I know.
Something about making money.
People say that it doesn't exist.
But last time I checked, when you are given access to CEOs, when you're given access to information that are affecting markets, and then you're on the committee that has purview over those bills...
You do have information.
And there's a lot.
You can look at people's, they go in, you're making $175 a year, and then all of a sudden you come out, you're worth like $20 million, $200 million.
It's kind of shady.
How about that?
So you can't do it, but Congress can.
Yeah, I was told if I forced to vote that I was going to cost us the republic is what I was told.
I saw upwards of $200 million, but compounding interest.
But it's not just her.
It's on both sides.
I told my husband, I was like, we're not going to do stocks because it's just that's the one thing.
You can talk to anyone.
I actually was reading an article.
So and the local press are like, Replune is trying to force a vote on this.
And so, like, I'm always the kind of redheaded stepchild, usually with especially in dumb circles.
But this one lady posted, I actually started laughing.
She goes, well, a broken clock is right twice a day.
And I started laughing because I'm like, it's such like a bipartisan issue.
Like over 80% of Americans don't think that Congress should be able to trade stock.
And it's true because we're given access to information and that that's truly influencing your decision.
I mean, I tend to, I think it's just, I think it's party associations.
Like some people just will never vote.
A broken clock.
I think a lot of it, though, is driven by bot activity, I think, is really big.
I can tell you that when I first launched the task force, people were like, she's an intelligence asset.
She's never going to release information.
Then it came out that I actually don't have declassification authority.
But we have been able to produce wins, and we are getting full cooperation from the executive branch.
So we're just simply investigating the findings, collecting the information, and pressuring for release.
They exist in Florida, actually.
There's a couple of social media influencers that have been approached.
I've seen it, so I know it exists.
What's interesting, though, is it goes back to the you never want to get in trouble in a crowd of people because they'll just look at each other.
You ever see like someone getting beat up and they just like film it.
So I'm going to help that person.
And that's part of that group.
Think it exists online.
I do think X need to do something, at least like be able to label bot accounts, because I've seen it happen, especially on certain things.
Like I had done something to allow new moms to vote when you're recovering.
Our job is different.
Like only 13 women in U.S.
history have ever given birth.
It's about to be 14 now.
um who are members of congress and god forbid we enter a war or something we're not going to be able to vote if you're recovering in a hospital that's a pretty like rare circumstance and so there was definitely bought bought accounts that were attacking me for that and accusing me of like destroying the republic again i said i don't think that that's the case but
So it is legal.
And in politics, what's interesting is they'll test like especially when you're running for office.
It's kind of interesting because you'll actually during my first race, I actually had a firm that I was going to for consulting.
And they had someone that had worked at the firm that had also worked with like McDonald's branding.
So people that are running for office will bring on these firms and then they'll like give them kind of like a branding profile, right?
What was interesting about that is that, you know, you have this aspect of bot activity.
Social media at the time was kind of just resurfacing as if you want to be kind of influential, you have to be able to use social media, share your message and get that out there.
And I think Trump really kind of refined that and was kind of one of the leading figures in that, especially when Twitter 1.0 was in existence.
But then you had this aspect of people that were running for office.
And then there was actually a censorship state in this country.
And we found that out that Twitter 1.0 was coordinating with the Department of Homeland Security.
We found this out actually in a congressional hearing where they were actually in DHS had a division under size that was supposed to be monitoring terrorist organizations.
And they were using it on the American people to censor information specifically on COVID on January 6th, all of that.
That is scary.
You still have censorship issues in places like the EU.
So to think that they wouldn't use social media platforms especially to influence the masses is just – that's not a conspiracy theory that happens.
We have evidence of that.
Yeah, not wanting to have conversations.
Well, and scary regulations at that because COVID was really kind of dystopian.
And going back to kind of, you know, I think you'd mentioned foreign government influence using bots.
The one thing that's been interesting is in our investigation.
So like taking now my task force hat off and going into actually problems that we see right now happening.
You saw this like massive a couple of weeks ago.
Rift that was taking place between the American people specifically on immigration and all of a sudden these like pop up riots.
I actually call them the Timu riots like the Timu Chinese out because it came out via actually this woman.
Her name's data Republican on X and she actually.
tracked down the funding line.
And what was happening was the Chinese government was basically propping up this billionaire, American billionaire, Neville Singham.
And actually, he was donating money to organizations like Party of Socialism and Liberation.
And they were actually funding a lot of these riot pop-ups in the area.
So you had people that were being used, divided, for example, on the immigration topic.
You literally have them passing out Mexican flags saying that they cared about immigrants when in actuality,
The financial ties are actually coming from the CCP.
So the Chinese government on many occasions, and it's not uncommon within Congress to know even on apps like TikTok, they were showing certain information in order to cause a rift and influence people.
This same individual, Neville Singham, actually, once we got this information, we sent a request to have him come testify to Congress.
And he spends part of his year in Shanghai, China.
And so we were not able to deliver him his subpoena, basically.
And so there's a letter that Chairman Comer has now authorized to be sent that will go to the Treasury Department to freeze his assets unless he comes to testify to Congress.
And that, mind you, this is not, you know, people and like, look, I started out before politics with my feet getting wet as an activist.
Like that's actually how we started out in politics.
So like I understand the immigration, the board.
I like understand all arguments because I've I've been through and I've had a debate on debate it.
But what's the problem for me is that you have foreign governments trying to cause a rift and then promote ideologies that will empower people specifically to push forward
policy that will actually put us as like second tier as opposed to the Chinese government.
And I do think that the Chinese government in their execution has been very, very specific about how they want to hinder our ability to be global dominators.
I think when you're looking at what happened in COVID timeframe, right, so like a lot of people said that
Wuhan lab leak that that was a conspiracy theory.
We now know that it happened and that was true.
But at the same time, if you look at what President Trump was doing, he was actually trying to negotiate trade with China and he was winning.
And then all of a sudden COVID happened.
Well, what was interesting second time around in Trump 2.0 is that you have all these Timu riots taking place at the same time and almost got no coverage in the mainstream media.
But you had multiple Chinese nationals that were caught trying to release agro-terrorism weapons.
Agro terrorism weapons.
And then at the same time, the tariff war was taking place.
And then you actually saw them trying to infiltrate.
So I don't think it's by accident, but I do think that it's important to remember that just because you see something happening on the mainstream media, the media will always try to amplify something because it's rage baiting and it's clicking its views, which translates to money.
Of course, of course.
But when you actually look at where the funding stream is coming from, it actually goes back to China.
And this is not the only incident where they try to drive a wedge between Americans and then actually compartmentalize with Hispanic Americans specifically.
So in 2016, now the largest voting minority in the country are Hispanic Americans, specifically of Mexican descent.
And I think you can find that stat on pewhispanic.org.
So when you're looking at voting demographics, how could you influence an entire demographic to help skew or influence a midterm election?
And it would be specifically probably on the immigration topic to try to race bait people.
But then you have this aspect of the same guy, Neville Singham.
His wife actually...
funds an organization called Code Pink.
So this is all Chinese money now going to a separate cause.
And this one specifically is on the Israel versus Palestine issue.
They don't care about Israelis or Palestinians.
This is a Chinese funded group.
And what they're doing is they're using that front in an effort to then divide on that topic as well.
So it's a multifaceted approach using minority classes in order to actually push the end goal, which would be communism.
And also, too, you can actually look on the flyers for these organizations.
So PSL, Neville Stingham is actually an open admirer of Mao Zedong.
I mean, like it's all up there and it's out there for you to find.
But it's just crazy because most people, you know, you see this aspect of propaganda that's being shown to you.
And you're not going to be like, who's funding that?
You know, you're going to say like, you know, tell that person I'm going to fight for this.
But that's they don't actually realize the more nefarious perspective of what's happening behind the scenes.
But the question is, why didn't they do it then during – why did these riots and why did this disagreement not happen under Obama-Biden?
I don't disagree with you.
Well, they fundraise.
But to your point, so how do you fix something like the immigration system as a whole, right?
That's crazy.
Tyson Chicken Farm is one of them.
Last year, I was putting out some messaging on them because I had watched this documentary about the slaughterhouses, how they're actually using migrant children, like 14, 15, in some of these slaughterhouses.
And the lobbyist from Tyson Chicken Corporation contacted my chief of staff at the time and was trying to basically say, hey, basically back off.
But I don't care.
I don't care where you're on the spectrum.
You shouldn't allow migrant labor with children specifically because it's child slave labor.
Wait, so he was on here, so then that narrows it.
Okay, it's okay.
I actually think that it'll never stop, at least not in Congress.
Or pay them at all.
I've heard cases where people specifically contractors will walk on people if they know that they're here illegally.
And like so going back to like how do you how do you fix this?
Is one of the top cases that I handle aside from Social Security help and refunds like within my congressional office.
So a congressional office does constituent services and it's basically like customer service.
Like have you been victimized by the federal government?
You know, call this number.
That's your congressional office.
So specifically on immigration cases, like if you've had an issue with the State Department visas, all that.
You can contact your local congressman.
And so what I will say is that we've had people that have spent like tens of thousands of dollars to come here, but it takes like 20-something years to do.
And that's part of the problem is there's been such an influx and such a bog down of the actual system that our actual system is not functioning at the capacity that it should to actually help people come here the correct way.
Like a doctor.
I do think that unless we are able to, A, assign probably more lawyers, more judges to actually hear these cases, it's going to continue to be a problem.
And I have heard, okay, on the floor, these are conversations between members, that to a certain extent, especially when you're talking about, you know, like an e-verify system within the ag industry, that actually members of that committee don't want that because they know that the farmers are actually heavily relying on some of these illegals to work in their fields.
So I can confirm that.
Well, yeah, because you don't have the decrease in wages.
However, I think the bigger problem that we have here, though, is that at least specifically in my district and then also to having argued this is that this gray area that's been created, in my opinion, they don't want a solution for.
They do it intentionally with the understanding that both sides are going to fundraise off of it.
In my opinion, if I was to be able to actually fix this, I would say that you have to, I would say, pause, let the system run through, take everyone in, vet them, make sure that they're not criminals, etc.
But then the system allows time for it to actually catch up to itself and then you can continue as is.
And you know what's crazy is most elected officials might send out that email, but the email fundraisers actually are taking like 80% of that dollar.
That's like usually the average.
And it's like, I'm in the wrong business.
This is crazy.
Is this Spencer Pratt?
I was like Spencer Pratt for governor.
And then they promised all these celebrities are like, yeah, donate.
We'll give it to the victims.
It's like, where did it go?
There's like this fine print that he wrote.
Which is why, going back to what I said, we need younger people and we need more normal people to run for office.
I don't know about that.
We need to – I think AI can be used in good senses.
Like, I can – and I ask Grok things a lot, and I will argue points.
But I think we need to work alongside it because there's this aspect of AI that removes the humanity.
Like, I don't think you can teach AI empathy.
And there's a certain aspect of humanity that needs to be kept involved in these decision-making processes.
For example, if you have a drone –
That's been targeted to, let's say, eliminate a terrorist at this grid location and it's functioning solely on AI.
Well, what's going to enable it to be able to pause on destruction of a location if there's children within it?
I mean, if it's a bot, it's not thinking.
Well, there are oversights and massive investigations, especially if it's in regards to civilian casualties.
I would say, based on the people that I've talked with and interacted, it's definitely happened in the past and it's definitely problematic.
However, people get in trouble for it.
I'd have to, I mean, I don't.
Well, and that's a problem, and that's where a lot of these people do.
You have LOAC, so there's massive investigations with the JAGs, et cetera, that get involved in these investigations.
Well, I think you can have an AI decision-making process, but where there is a human involved in that step process.
So, like, the human would be the final step in authority, so the AI would rank it.
And, like, granted, I'm not an AI programmer, but I am saying that I think that there's an interface where you can have humans involved in the final step.
Yeah, they're suicide drones.
Don't freak me out too much because the Chinese have a little spy drone that's like literally this big.
Have you seen it?
I don't think that any other government is as advanced in regards to that topic as we potentially are.
And I say that because if that were the case, then they would be the world superpower.
And Congress gets infiltrated.
Like how many people like have all of a sudden like girlfriends.
The University of Michigan has now had, like, what, two?
I think those agro-terrorism was, like, University of Michigan.
The one thing that's been interesting is, and a lot of people aren't talking about, there's one representative member, Republican from California, that's addressing it, but the
When they have surrogates have children here for U.S.
citizenship, but then they take them back and fully integrate them and educate them in China.
And so technically they're U.S.
citizens, but they are being totally raised with the ideology and perspective of the Chinese government.
And that's an interesting perspective.
Working for the Chinese government.
Yes, access to all of our resources, everything, education system.
Oh, that has been, I get, you know, I love our libertarian brothers and sisters, but I have gone into so many debates on this because they're like, well, you know, we shouldn't limit an American's ability to actually sell their property.
And I'm like, yeah, but the Chinese government literally wants to eliminate the West as we know it.
And so we have to be cognizant of that.
And also, too, by the way, it's not like you're just like buying a military installation.
You think that they're not actually like actually putting tech and observing, monitoring, pulling all of our resources.
And a lot of the tech that they actually sell here, whether it's to our law enforcement, so like anytime you have –
Specifically, I would say like within even our craning and like our actual shipping operations.
Those things are sending signals back home.
Well, we should.
We should be making.
So there's policy changes where if you have an American business, you can now actually get a big tax incentive for manufacturing back home.
They sold us out in the 70s for manufacturing.
And I think that that's where you're seeing this aspect of people that are very like if you talk about and I'm not like an isolationist by any means, but like I do believe that we should have, especially with COVID, everyone saw this.
We should have certain things that are just manufactured here.
I think tech is extremely important.
I think Palmer Luckey is doing like laptops or something now.
And the United States are trying to actually move that over.
I have a Gronk app on my phone.
Elon, make a phone and we'll try it out.
Oh, is his AI rival the Sam Altman free guy?
He definitely – he's not a dummy.
There's definitely something there.
Oh, and Deep Seek's freaky about some of the stuff that it can do.
I mean it's literally – when you go to buy a phone, it's usually an iPhone.
Oh, don't get me – if you have a kid, keep them off phones as long as you can.
Yes, for sure.
To be honest with you, I've only ever had an iPhone, and so that's the only platform I've ever used.
I know it's like Android versus iPhone.
No, I have both.
But it's still freaky.
Well, it's still freaky though.
Then you have these phones that are considered actual safe phones that aren't ripping your data and basically turning on every 10 minutes to kind of be able to target you for sales, whatever it might be.
I can tell you that given my job and some of this stuff, I am totally freaked out by having an iPhone and I look forward to the day where I don't have to have a phone.
I'm going to get a flip phone and be a beekeeper.
Me, of all people, no chips.
We're chip-free.
Because they're like, we can't track you.
Well, and from a government perspective, you have this aspect of a lot of people don't want to reform FISA.
FISA in the way that it can surveillance Americans is pretty freaky.
Really freaky.
And we, you know, I actually did not get a committee assignment on House Armed Services as a vet because I voted against FISA.
And I was one of two that voted against it.
And they said that I was not a team player.
It seems to be like an ongoing thing.
I am playing for the team, but it's just not the D.C.
There's still a few good representatives.
I believe you.
But it's few and far between.
You have to not.
So some of the best representatives, best even people in government, are the ones that did not have to do this job.
And that's because if you're giving up something to come here, it means that you're doing it for the right reasons.
If you have nothing to gain from this position and this is the only thing you've ever wanted to be, you're usually not the best person for that job.
And I say that because you are then only going to do what it takes to get reelected, which means that you are willing to compromise your principles because there will be decisions that you have to take where you're going to have to stand firm on your principles and be like, I can't vote for that.
And there's massive pressure campaigns like
When a certain bill comes up, if I'm voting against it, you have planted stories in the press.
You have super PACs that will come in and drop text messages in your district to your constituents saying, did you know that Representative so-and-so voted against this?
And so you have to be able to be like, all right, I'm just going to just disconnect.
And at a certain point, you do have to do that because then you'll go crazy.
Oh, you can't read – don't fight with the bots.
Don't read anything.
He's not too – he's changed.
He's like actually –
Makes sense on some issues.
Well, he's a big guy, too.
He probably sweats a lot.
Not saying that we know he sweats, but just, you know.
So I actually was on Oversight with all those people except for Fetterman.
And what I'll tell you is that Oversight tends to bring out the characters for sure.
And what I will say is that actually I have been able to on certain things like with AOC, I introduced a piece of legislation.
So there was a partner bill in the Senate with Bernie Sanders and I think Josh Hawley to cap credit card interest at 10 percent.
And then we started getting I started getting a lot of heat for it because of people like you can't do that.
And I was like, well, most of these banks that we're talking about are actually taking government bailout.
So if you're taking a government bailout and you're essentially operating off the goodwill of the federal government, then you should be held as standard.
Because then you have predatory lending, and what ends up happening is some of these people will max out their credit cards for the rest of their life.
They're paying back the debt.
And then also there's something that we've been able to introduce.
So this is like the more populist representation where you see both the right and the left kind of agree on certain things.
And there's another bill that I'm introducing with another Democrat and another Republican that's a more moderate Republican.
But it's actually to cap student loan interest at 2.5%.
So what they do is they actually – and I've been quoted on this, but it creates an indentured servant basically for the rest of their life.
They're paying off this debt and you can never actually –
For people that are actually trying to better themselves that might have to take out loans for that, it's crippling.
And then they actually can't get a good start at being contributing members of society because they're always functioning in the debt.
And to be clear, I'm not talking about student loan forgiveness.
I think you're not either.
But I had to join the military.
I paid for my college using the GI Bill.
And so do I think student loan forgiveness is fair?
But is this a way that we can actually make a happy medium to where people are actually given the opportunity to pay back the debt?
I look forward to introducing that.
But that's a piece of legislation that should be on the floor and that it's not.
I will tell you like from a personal lens and perspective.
So when I was in my freshman year in high school, I moved up to L.A.
And by the time I graduated, I went to six high schools and an adult school.
That's actually – I like barely graduated.
And what I will say is that one of the high schools I went to was – Why did you go to different schools so much?
It just – how it ended up functioning.
So like my freshman year, my mom went through a divorce.
My dad got arrested.
So I have an interesting background.
So there's that.
But I ended up actually going to Venice High School one of these times.
And that was around my junior year.
And what the L.A.
Unified School District was doing at the time is they're actually busing in kids from other parts of L.A.
And at the time, specifically in the early 2000s, there was a big issue with the black and Chicano gangs in L.A.,
And so, you know, what was happening outside in the neighborhoods was carrying on into the school districts.
And when you have gang activity and like kids, the only opportunity that they have is like being able to join a gang and that's it.
You know, they're never going to go to college.
They're never going to have the opportunity.
And so that carries on into the education system.
They're never given a chance.
And so I think in Florida we've been doing it right with school choice.
President Trump's been pretty big on that.
But being able to give students or their parents the ability to send them to good schools without gang activity outside of their zip code, that matters.
And that does impact people.
So there was a kid that was shot in the parking lot of my school.
And shot and killed.
You can actually pull up the article, Venice High School shooting.
Back before it was gentrified, it was rough.
I haven't been back since I basically left.
So when I was 19, I joined the military.
And then my mom ended up leaving California with my little brother and sister probably about like five years ago now.
Well, in the early 2000s, it was cool, too.
But it was rough.
I mean, I am.
Well, I got jumped.
And when I was.
Yeah, I got jumped in high school.
I swear, like part of the reason why I'm such a huge advocate for like standing up to bullies is probably because of that.
Honestly, so like seeing all that though, like being able to see that and then kind of
tell that story like I do think that there's power in that because people there's people that go through that and like think like man I might not be able to like be successful but that's not true you can always fight your way out of it I joined the military at 19 best thing I ever did and I met a lot of other people in the military who like grew up in inner city Chicago or wherever it was they're able to go back and help their family and like to my mom's credit you know my mom also has like an incredible story but she had me at 20 years old single mom
My dad ended up eventually getting clean, but my husband and I moved him in with us and then he got sober.
And so that story in itself, I think, you know, you tell your story and it empowers other people, especially to be fighters and not just give up.
And people aren't going to tell you that.
Like, no one's going to be like, you know, but.
Well, and it is.
And it's powerful, I think, to an idea that would like to box certain people, whether like you're a woman or you're Hispanic, into this stereotype on like how you should believe and think and vote.
Well, what was interesting is I shared my story.
So, like, remember I told you I started out as an activist, and I would tell people this because, you know, I do feel like, too, at a certain sense, when you tell your story, you can share that you're empowering other people to take something and turn it into a positive.
And within like maybe a couple of weeks of me getting elected, I all of a sudden started having this Washington Post reporter reaching out to my family and actually asked my mom whether she had proof that my grandmother had actually passed away HIV positive.
And was harassing.
And so they put out this nasty, nasty article about me basically trying to say that I had fabricated my dad's incarceration record.
They had tried to say that I was a registered Democrat in Washington, like all this stuff that was categorically false.
And I had actually gotten contacted from like my old old little smear piece.
Always terrible, but I had receipts.
And so after this came out, I said, no, hold up.
And I actually gave Fox News all of my stuff that I had and I was able to refute.
And then Time magazine had actually reached out and they said, would you mind if we conduct like an interview on your background?
I said, how about it?
Here's my information.
I had actually even gotten my DNA done to like prove that I'm Hispanic because of the fact that I'm lighter skin.
When I got elected, there was like this controversy on how Hispanic was I and like it was actually a thing.
I'm like, I'm not like Speedy Gonzalez with a sombrero running around.
Just like so crazy.
It was crazy, but I actually gave all this information to Time Magazine.
When people would ask me, I actually mentioned that to a reporter, actually, because of the fact that he's half white and half black.
And I said, I'm sorry, last time I checked, am I not allowed to be white, too?
Because there's this aspect of I wasn't Hispanic enough because I'm white, but then also this aspect of I'm not white enough because I'm Hispanic.
So, like, which one are you?
I said, well, if my mom's half and my dad's half, what does that make me?
And she goes, a quarter.
I said, no, that's half.
And also, too, if I were on the other side, I'd probably be like a rock star.
So long story short.
So this this article comes out.
Time magazine investigates after doing like 20 something hours on background.
I gave them all the evidence and they actually ended up writing an article on me called The Influencer That Came to Congress and then named me as Time magazine's next 100 most influential in the world.
I'm just glad that it vindicated me because it was not a fun spot to be in.
It was done, though, because of the fact that people like me specifically don't meet a certain stereotype.
And so it was an effort to discredit that effort.
Oh, I get it.
I get why they did it.
But it's like for people wondering why.
I think it was actually for my mom especially.
I've been through the ringer of politics, so I'm kind of battle-hardened for it.
I'm like, oh, another hit piece.
I don't care.
But it was my mom and what she was subjected to.
And I was like, my mom is really cool.
She put herself through law school when I was in high school.
She left an abusive marriage.
She has come a long way.
And so for her to be treated like that, it's just like one thing in politics.
You leave the family out of it.
I prefer debating on ideology.
It tends to be the best.
But people always – it's like in fighting.
You can't like just go and sucker punch someone.
It's kind of like the same thing and that was kind of – they tried to sucker punch me and I was like – Jackie Chan it up.
It's a lot interesting how Congress functions when the cameras are off.
And I think people would definitely change their opinion because a lot of people will do it for clicks, ratings.
And social media has not helped with that because people are looking for what can go viral next.
There's like this viral thing.
theory that people you know they think that they can only be successful in their policy or their argument whether it's committee hearings or whatever they want that clip that they can post and they get notoriety for so social media has been both a blessing and a curse in this social media sphere because or in the political sphere because you can get your information out directly to the american people using it and refute bad information but then there's also this aspect of like i wish people could see the conversations that take place behind the scenes because it wouldn't be so inflammatory
It's definitely not something I want my son to do.
So when I first started out in politics, I started out as – so I joined the military at 19.
I paid my way through college.
I wanted to be a doctor.
So I got into a med school program at SU in Grenada.
And I was supposed to go to that.
And then I kid you not, like the day before I was supposed to leave, I got recruited to work for a nonprofit to basically help lead out Hispanic activism nationally.
And I thought that's how I could make a difference.
And then I realized that as part of that job, they're putting me on television.
I had a booker.
And so I was talking about stuff happening, but it was more more the commentary on inflammatory things.
I actually wanted to address what was happening with human trafficking.
And I actually requested the State Department's report.
I was a big activist with that.
I was working with a nonprofit at the time.
And I realized that they only wanted me to talk about what was getting them the ratings.
And so I did realize, I was like, well, they keep, though, talking about what people in D.C.
So if I want to change the discussion, I have to go to Washington to do it.
So I called my husband.
I was like, we're going to run for office.
He goes, what do you mean, we?
Because what do you mean?
I was like, well, from what I gather, everyone's like a team effort.
And it's totally true.
If your spouse isn't on board, good luck because politics is nasty.
And so he ended up basically figuring it out with me.
And for someone like me, there's no how to manual on how to run from off.
It's usually family, like literally family affairs where like people like their parent did it or they have like a direct immediate tie to it.
So I figured it out.
And now that I'm in office, I'm realizing that I can make an impact to an extent with some influence, but it would be a lot more helpful if there were 10 other of me.
And so when I'm done in office, I'm going to help recruit younger candidates that have the ideological perspective that I do to run them.
And then I'm going to help do things for them behind the scenes to help get them in.
So I've traveled a lot.
I've seen a lot of other parliaments.
I'm a member of the House Democracy Partnership Institute.
I've gone to a lot of countries and we still have the best system.
Yeah, but we need.
It's a mess, though, because good people don't want to run and they have to.
Young people have to run.
It is if you have enough fresh blood.
So like, how do you shock a system?
And you need to infuse it.
And so right now we have an interesting time period because we have a division.
So like going back to kind of the declassification efforts that we've been working on for the first time in U.S.
history, you have an aspect of the government that's being transparent and releasing information like we're helping wherever we can on that.
But that is only possible because the right people with the right mindset were appointed in those agencies to be able to try to force the system to do something.
But there's this aspect of that's just the executive branch, but you have the legislative branch.
And the legislative branch needs younger people that...
want to do this because they truly believe in fixing the system.
And you cannot be a pessimist in this job or else you will go crazy.
You would go crazy.
So you have to be an optimist and understand that there is a solution for it.
And going back to kind of like those like little quantum breadcrumbs, I've had enough stuff happen where I know I'm on the right path.
But I also think that, you know, part of what I'm supposed to do is like to help other people do this.
So I'm going to help kind of execute that mission.
I don't know, but definitely in the next 10 years, I promise you I'm going to be with a beekeeper and a flip phone, and that's it.
No internet, just software grid.
At least we'll get some declassified stuff, right?