Common Sense with Paul Jacob

The ongoing UFO/UAP disclosure movement, covered periodically in this space, has made some headway in the last year, with a few stories coming out of the congressional hearings led by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna. But the biggest current publicity push for disclosure is the new documentary The Age of Disclosure, directed by Dan Farah and released on November 21, 2025, via Amazon Prime Video following limited theatrical runs in New York and Los Angeles. 

It features interviews with over 30 former U.S. government officials (including figures like ex-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, ex-Pentagon UFO program head Luis Elizondo, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio) alleging an 80-year cover-up of non-human intelligence, reverse-engineered alien craft, and a global “secret war” over such technology.

But all is not sweetness and light shimmering from an upward spiral of increased government transparency. Not a few of the subject’s most interesting figures have upped their skepticism level, uttering dark and disturbing thoughts about the veracity and agendas of the disclosure movement’s current key figures. These dissenters in the UFO/UAP watcher community — ufologists, whistleblower advocates, and disclosure activists — suggest that the current disclosure movement is adding a fresh and disturbing layer of government deception:

• Prominent ufologist and podcaster Daniel Liszt (@darkjournalist), known for “deep dives” into UFO history and covert ops, has repeatedly called the film a “CIA Threat Narrative” and “Big Budget False UFO Threat Documentary,” accusing it of being steered by intelligence insiders (e.g., Clapper as a “disgraced ex-DNI and admitted perjurer”) to hijack genuine disclosure efforts and push a fear-based agenda. He highlights director Farah’s ties to Steven Spielberg (a Hollywood figure long rumored in UFO lore to collaborate with intel agencies) and his role as former AATIP head Luis Elizondo’s agent, suggesting it’s “counter intelligence” to drown out “real UFO file” leakers. 
• Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) described the current disclosure angle as the “Deep State’s Attempt To Take Back Control Of The UFO/UAP Narrative From Genuine Whistleblowers & Leakers,” aired in a joint segment with Liszt.
• Other community voices, like @M_M_Aimee (a quantum/UFO commentator), analyzed the film’s transcript via AI and concluded it’s a looped “framing device” turning unknowns into “threats” to justify government overreach: “They’re not informing you. They’re framing you.”
• Similarly, @ZachBrowne (a hidden history/UFO explorer) ran a “psyop checklist” on it, flagging the coordinated hype, lack of hard evidence, and emotional manipulation as signs of an “engineered influence op” benefiting insiders pushing for more funding and control.
• Broader X threads from accounts like @PostDisclosure (a disclosure-focused outlet) and @AmericaShaman (Jake Angeli, a Q-adjacent UFO skeptic) amplify this, viewing the film’s reliance on “95% intelligence officials who have repeatedly lied” as proof it’s “more Deep State BS propaganda” to obscure real tech like zero-point energy or TR-3B craft.

These critiques may be gaining traction in real-time X conversations among thousands of followers in the UFO niche. Liszt’s posts, for example, appear to be doing well enough, if not showing cultural domination, with 9K–12K views each in the past week.

Could the government be lying via the documentary itself? That notion is largely absent from mainstream news and review outlets, finally (after decades) allowed to treat the subject as respectable — consecrated, as it seems to be, by the government itself.

After a record-tying federal government shutdown, Congress is held in even lower repute than before:

Voters have a less favorable opinion of House and Senate leaders in the aftermath of the 43-day government shutdown, with House Speaker Mike Johnson suffering the worst decline.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 36% of Likely U.S. Voters have a favorable impression of Johnson – down from 45% in May – including 19% with a Very Favorable opinion of the Louisiana Republican. Forty-one percent (41%) now view Johnson unfavorably, including 30% with a Very Unfavorable impression. Twenty-three percent (23%) are not sure. 

“After Shutdown, Congressional Leadership Less Popular,” Rasmussen Reports (November 21, 2025).

But do most people focus on President Trump, however, blaming him for the shutdown? Apparently not. While Rasmussen Reports indeed showed Congress’s approval plummeting to historic lows post-shutdown, President Trump’s job approval ratings proved more resilient but still took a hit. Based on daily tracking from Rasmussen — America’s most frequent presidential pollster — Trump’s numbers held steady in the low-to-mid 40s through early October but eroded gradually as the 43-day shutdown dragged on, bottoming out around November 12, the day it ended. Disapproval climbed, driven by independents and even some GOP softening on his handling of the crisis. Post-shutdown, there’s been a modest rebound.