Ryan Graves

Maybe it's time for another one.

We haven't had support from the top in the past. Right. So we're in such a position. You would have to have me working closely with the White House and you would have to have the White House's buy in on this. I think that's the only way.

We haven't had support from the top in the past. Right. So we're in such a position. You would have to have me working closely with the White House and you would have to have the White House's buy in on this. I think that's the only way.

We haven't had support from the top in the past. Right. So we're in such a position. You would have to have me working closely with the White House and you would have to have the White House's buy in on this. I think that's the only way.

And from the top of the executive branch, you use that position of influence, you pass additional presidential memorandums and executive orders that countermand previous memorandums that may have existed in the past in order to legally compel these organizations from the chief executive to be able to move the conversation forward.

And from the top of the executive branch, you use that position of influence, you pass additional presidential memorandums and executive orders that countermand previous memorandums that may have existed in the past in order to legally compel these organizations from the chief executive to be able to move the conversation forward.

And from the top of the executive branch, you use that position of influence, you pass additional presidential memorandums and executive orders that countermand previous memorandums that may have existed in the past in order to legally compel these organizations from the chief executive to be able to move the conversation forward.

to require them to bring this information out, to require them to collaborate. And it doesn't have to be a one-person job. You bring in some of the brightest people in our country in order to evaluate this data, come to a conclusion, and then share those conclusions with the American people.

to require them to bring this information out, to require them to collaborate. And it doesn't have to be a one-person job. You bring in some of the brightest people in our country in order to evaluate this data, come to a conclusion, and then share those conclusions with the American people.

to require them to bring this information out, to require them to collaborate. And it doesn't have to be a one-person job. You bring in some of the brightest people in our country in order to evaluate this data, come to a conclusion, and then share those conclusions with the American people.

I mean, ultimately, if the answer is that there is nothing unusual going on here, then we have to respect that, right?

I mean, ultimately, if the answer is that there is nothing unusual going on here, then we have to respect that, right?

I mean, ultimately, if the answer is that there is nothing unusual going on here, then we have to respect that, right?

Yeah, and I don't think that's the case here for all the reasons that we've discussed today. So ultimately, it's about finding the truth, right? It's not about finding your way to a conclusion that you already support.

Yeah, and I don't think that's the case here for all the reasons that we've discussed today. So ultimately, it's about finding the truth, right? It's not about finding your way to a conclusion that you already support.

Yeah, and I don't think that's the case here for all the reasons that we've discussed today. So ultimately, it's about finding the truth, right? It's not about finding your way to a conclusion that you already support.

We would have for the first time, I think, a clear direction of where we need to go as a society. It would revamp our academic processes, our fields of study, our beliefs in, you know, religious structures. I don't think they would nullify it. I think they would probably amplify it. And it would, I think, have the equivalent impact of a positive nuclear bomb on our economy.

We would have for the first time, I think, a clear direction of where we need to go as a society. It would revamp our academic processes, our fields of study, our beliefs in, you know, religious structures. I don't think they would nullify it. I think they would probably amplify it. And it would, I think, have the equivalent impact of a positive nuclear bomb on our economy.

We would have for the first time, I think, a clear direction of where we need to go as a society. It would revamp our academic processes, our fields of study, our beliefs in, you know, religious structures. I don't think they would nullify it. I think they would probably amplify it. And it would, I think, have the equivalent impact of a positive nuclear bomb on our economy.

We would have certainty in what direction to invest in and what technologies to pursue. And I think that by having that direction, that would, again, nuclear bomb level increase in capabilities where we would be able to, you know, be working on propulsion and energy systems and material systems that would advance us well beyond where we are today. It would leapfrog us.