U.S. NAVY MADE A STUNNING
ADMISSION, YESTERDAY CONFIRMED
THAT THREE SEPARATE UFO VIDEOS
RELEASED BY "THE NEW YORK TIMES"
IN 2017 AND ON THE SHOW WERE
ACTUALLY GENUINE.
THEY DO SHOW A REAL PHENOMENON
MAY BE CANNOT EXPLAIN AND AFFECT
OUR UNDERSTANDING OF PHYSICS
THAT CANNOT BE EXPLAINED.
AND ALSO A LETTER TO CONGRESSMAN
WALKER AND UFO SIGHTINGS THEY
TAKE SERIOUSLY WORKING TO
INVESTIGATE THEM.
THE BRITISH JOURNALIST, HE JOINS
US TONIGHT TO EXPLAIN THE
SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS.
NICK, THIS DOES SEEM LIKE A
CHANGE IN THE WAY THAT THE
PENTAGON ALWAYS DESCRIBES THIS
PHENOMENON.
>> YES, IT IS.
UP UNTIL THIS POINT, THE NAVY
HAS HAD VERY LITTLE.
IN FACT THEY LEFT THE DOOR OPEN
SOMETIMES.
ALMOST IMPLIED THAT WE MIGHT BE
DEALING WITH COMMERCIAL DRONES
OR EVEN BALLOONS, BUT NOW WHAT
THEY HAVE DONE, THEY HAVE TURNED
AROUND AND NUMBER ONE, THIS IS
REAL.
NUMBER TWO COMPANY, THIS IS
UNIDENTIFIED AERIAL PHENOMENA.
THAT IS THE PHRASE THEY HAVE
USED.
PREVIOUSLY THEY HAVE SAID
ADVANCED, UNKNOWN AIRCRAFT BUT
NOW THEY ARE SAYING UNIDENTIFIED
AERIAL PHENOMENON.
THAT IS A TERM BORROWED FROM THE
BRITISH GOVERNMENT, WE USE IT
FOR THE MINISTRY DEFENSE AND WE
MEANT UFOs.
>> Sean: DOME XP TO THE U.S.
GOVERNMENT ADMITTING THEY HAVE
NO IDEA WHAT THESE THINGS ARE AD
NO IDEA WHAT THESE THINGS ARE AT
NO IDEA WHAT THESE THINGS ARE AR
NO IDEA WHAT THESE THINGS ARE AE
NOT SOME RUSSIAN SUPER PLAIN, AD
NOBODY'S PAYING ATTENTION TO THI
NOBODY'S PAYING ATTENTION TO TH.
THIS SEEMS LIKE A WATERSHED
MOMENT.
WE HAVE ALL THIS TAPE OF OBJECTS
DEFYING THE KNOWN LAWS OF
PHYSICS RIGHT NEXT TO U.S.
MILITARY AND WHY IS THIS NOT
PAGE ONE NEWS EVERYWHERE?
>> WELL, IT IT SHOULD BE
ABSOLUTELY.
THESE AIRCRAFT CARRIERS THAT
MANY OF THESE UFOs HAVE BEEN
INTERACTING WITH, OBVIOUSLY,
THESE ARE BILLION-DOLLAR ASSETS.
AND IT IS THE OFFICIAL POSITION
OF THE MOST POWERFUL NAVY IN THE
WORLD, FRANKLY A LITTLE MORE
THAN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS IS.
I DON'T THINK THAT IS GOOD
ENOUGH.
I THINK CLEARLY PEOPLE LIKE MARK
WALKER DON'T THINK SO EITHER.
I WOULD URGE HIM TO GET THE
CLASSIFIED BRIEFING THAT OTHERS
SCIENTISTS HAVE RECEIVED AND
WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF NOT WANTING
TO DIVULGE CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION, BUT MAYBE SOME OF
THESE CENTERS CAN STEP FORWARD
AND AT LEAST GIVE US A CLUE WITH
WHAT WE ARE DEALING WITH HERE.
>> Tucker: SO IT TURNS OUT IT
WASN'T A WEATHER BALLOON.
THEY HAVE BEEN TELLING US THAT
FOR 50 YEARS, IT IS A WEATHER
BALLOON.
IT'S NOT A WEATHER BALLOON, IS
IT?
>> ABSOLUTELY NOT.
SOMEONE IN THE PENTAGON MUST
HAVE -- THEY SAY WE DON'T WANT
TO HYPOTHESIZE ABOUT THIS, THAT
IS FINE, BUT THERE MUST BE IN
THE PENTAGON A BEST ASSESSMENT.
THERE MUST BE A VIEW OF WHAT
THEY ARE ROLLING OUT.
WE SHOULD BE TOLD.
>> Tucker: THERE IS OBVIOUSLY
SOME REASON THEY ARE NOT TELLING
US AND 15 SECONDS HYPOTHESIZE
WHAT THAT REASON MIGHT BE.
>> SOME SECRET TOO TERRIBLE TO
BE TOLD, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD
BE TOLD OR AT LEAST WE SHOULD BE
HINTED AT.
>> Tucker: YEAH, OR MAYBE NOT
COME I DON'T KNOW.
THEY HAVE BEEN LYING ABOUT IT