Omg! I'm more convinced than ever that Fox News is the publisher to that Charlatan Jay Stratton's book. He's a monstrous liar. He said China, Russia and the U.S. (how convenient) have alien spacecraft wreckage and their in a race to reverse engineer the technology, because the country that gains access to that technology will be the superpower for the next 100yrs. Then, if that wasn't enough, that clown actually said, Aliens "followed him to his house" to his house, his family saw them. And now his relationship with his family is better because now they believe him. Omg, I thought this guy was a clown after his interview with Brett Baier. This one sealed the deal. Why did the Fox (and CNN) interviews stay soft? These were book-tour appearances. Hosts like Bret Baier and Jesse Watters generally don’t run adversarial fact-checks in that format unless they have prepared documents or a clear contradiction ready. Stratton’s official background (Senior Executive Service at DIA, ran the UAP Task Force) creates deference—hosts are often reluctant to aggressively challenge a senior former intelligence official on camera without hard counter-evidence in hand. The topic is also ratings-friendly across outlets: it combines government secrecy, national security, and high-weirdness claims. Soft questioning is common in that environment. In short, the lack of sharp pushback on those specific segments doesn’t mean the claims have been accepted or that no one is scrutinizing them. It mostly reflects the promotional nature of the interviews and the practical difficulty of challenging high-ranking insider assertions in real time when the supporting evidence remains classified, secondhand, or nonexistent in public. The extraordinary claims still require extraordinary evidence, and that evidence has not been produced. Thank God credible people are calling him out. Sean Kirkpatrick (former AARO director) has publicly responded to Stratton’s book. He called the “legacy program” claims absurd and fictitious, said Stratton offers no evidence (and has a financial incentive via book sales), and accused Stratton and associates of violating national security laws (claiming he briefed Congress on it). He labeled them “pseudo-scientists.” Detailed skeptical reviews exist, most notably from Jason Colavito, who points out the lack of testable evidence, heavy reliance on secondhand accounts and memory of conversations (with at least one former official disputing how Stratton characterized their talks), personal experiences that sound like classic sleep-paralysis or waking-dream phenomena, and the book’s structural similarities to other recent UAP memoirs from the same circle. I knew this clown was a fraud. @JesseBWatters