Inquiry with Kelly Chase - [The UFO Rabbit Hole] July 2023 Post-Hearing Analysis

Episode Date: August 3, 2023

In this episode, we do a deep-dive on the historic UFO hearing held by the House Oversight Committee featuring witnesses David Grusch, David Fravor, and Ryan Graves.NEW Class from Dr. James MaddenUnidentified Flying Hyperobject: UFOs, Philosophy, and the End of the WorldFour-week online class via ZoomWednesdays, March 27 – April 24 (skips April 10), 20247 – 9 pm ETLearn More About the ClassSign Up NowGET THE EPISODE BRIEFBECOME A PATRONGET THE BOOKGet a SIGNED COPYGet it on AmazonFOLLOWWebsiteTwitterFacebookMUSICTheme: Cabinet of Curiosities by Shaun FrearsonBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-ufo-rabbit-hole-podcast--5746035/support. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition for Citizens Bank. It's peak pollination season, and my business is scaling fast. To keep the nectar flowing, I need a phone plan with top priority data speed. That's why I chose GoogleFi wireless. My connections stay strong even when the hive is buzzing.

Plus, unlimited plans started $35. months. Now that's a deal that doesn't stay. Explore GoogleFi Wireless plans today. Plus taxes and government fees. GoogleFi Wireless is not subject to data traffic deprioritization during times of high network usage. Whatever your thing. It could be anything. Canva helps you make that thing a thing. Canva is a simple online tool thing. It's a way to design with our magic AI tool things. You can social media your thing,

generate images or videos of your thing. Make decks for presentations to show your thing. Whatever needs to be done for your thing, Canva can make it an even better and bigger thing. Canva, the thing that makes anything a thing. Back to the UFO Rabbit Hole podcast. I'm your host, Kelly Chase. As I'm sure you're all aware, Wednesday, July 26th,

marked a watershed moment in the push for disclosure as a hearing was held by the House Oversight Committee. Three witnesses, former U.S. Navy pilot Lieutenant Ryan Graves, retired U.S. Navy pilot commander David Fravor, and high-level intelligence official turned UFO whistleblower David Crush, offered their testimony under oath with regard to both the reality of the UFO phenomenon and their experiences with what they alleged to be an elaborate cover-up orchestrated by the government. In the days leading up to the hearing, tensions were at an all-time high. Many doubted that these hearings would serve to move the

needle and predicted more of the same stonewalling and obfuscation that we've seen from the last two rounds of congressional hearings. And even among those with a more optimistic view, there was still the persistent undercurrent of anxiety that our hopes would be dashed in the final hour. But that is not what happened. In the last episode, I talked about what I was hoping to see from these hearings. Specifically, one, I wanted to see that all three of the witnesses were taken seriously and were able to give their full and explicit testimony about what they know to Congress and the American people. And two, I've wanted to see that Congress was telegraphing strongly and clearly that they're taking this matter seriously and that they wanted to get to the bottom of why the whistleblowers

that have already spoken to Congress seemingly backed out of this hearing. Just these two things would have marked a major turning point in our fight for meaningful disclosure. And not only did we get that, we got so much more. Wednesday's hearing didn't just signal major progress in the push for disclosure, but I would go so far as to say that when it comes to UFO secrecy, Pandora's box has officially been opened. Don't get me wrong. We still have a long fight ahead of us, and victory is not assured. But the reality of the phenomenon is not something that they're going to be able to put back into the box this time. It's out now. And the world as we know it will never be the same. So let's dive into what was said during the hearing. I want to start with the opening statements of the witnesses themselves. The full hearing was over two hours long, and while I definitely recommend that people take the time to watch it, I know that not everyone has that kind of time. People are busy. They have lives and jobs

and kids and families and a million other things to attend to. To be honest, this is my full-time job and I barely feel like I can keep up with all the new developments. But even if you aren't able to watch the full hearings, I think it's important that you hear from the witnesses themselves. So I'm going to play their opening statements. They're each less than five minutes, so it won't take long. If you've already watched the hearing and you want to skip ahead to the analysis, you can skip ahead to the 17-minute mark. Let's start with Ryan Graves. Chairman Grohman, ranking member Garcia, distinguished members of the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Representative Burchett and Luna.

My name is Ryan Fobbs Graves, and I'm a former FAA team pilot with a decade of service in the U.S. Navy. including two deployments in operation enduring freedom and operation inherent resolve. I have experienced advanced UAP firsthand, and I'm here to voice concerns of more than 30 commercial aircrew and military veterans who have confided their similar encounters with me. Today, I would like to highlight three critical issues that demand our action. As we convene here, UAP are in our airspace, but they are grossly underreported. These sightings are not rare or isolated.

They are routine. Military aircrew and commercial pilots, trained observers whose lives depend on accurate identification are frequently witnessing these phenomena. The stigma attached to UAP is real and powerful and challenges national security. It silences commercial pilots who fear professional repercussions, discourages witnesses, and is only compounded by recent government claims questioning the credibility of eyewitness testimony. Parts of our government are aware of more about UAP than they let on. but excessive classification practices keep crucial information hidden.

Since 2021, all UAP videos are classified. as secret or above. This level of secrecy not only impedes our understanding, but fuel speculation and mistrust. In 2014, I was an F-18, Fox Drop pilot in the Navy Fighter Attack Squadron 11, the Red Rippers, and I was stationed at NAS Oceania in Virginia Beach. After upgrades were made to our jets radar systems, we began detecting unknown objects operating in our airspace. At first, we assumed they were radar errors, but soon we began to correlate the radar tracks with multiple onboard sensors, including infrared systems, eventually through visual ID. During a training mission in Warning Area Whiskey 72, 10 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach,

two F-18 super hornets were split by UAP. The object, described as a dark gray or a black cube inside of a clear sphere, came within 50 feet of the lead aircraft and was estimated to be 5 to 15 feet in diameter. The mission commander terminated the flight immediately and returned base. Our squadron submitted a safety report, but there was no official acknowledgement of the incident and no further mechanism to report the sightings. Soon these encounters became so frequent that air crew would discuss the risk of UAP

as part of their regular pre-flight briefs. Recognizing the need for action and answers, I founded Americans for Safe Aerospace. The organization has since become a haven for UAP witnesses who were previously unspoken due to the absence of a safe intake process. More than 30 witnesses have come forward and almost 5,000 Americans have joined us

in the fight for transparency at safe aerospace.org. The majority of witnesses are commercial, commercial pilots at majority major airlines. Often, they are veterans with decades of flying experience. Pilots are reporting UAP at altitudes that appear above them at 40,000 feet, potentially in low Earth orbit or in the gray zone below the Kerman line, making inexplicable maneuvers like right-hand turns and retrograde orbits or J-hooks. Sometimes these reports are reoccurring, with numerous recent sightings north of Y and in the north of Atlantic. Other veterans are also coming forward to us regarding UAP encounters in our airspace and oceans.

The most compelling involve observations of UAP by multiple witnesses and censor systems. I believe these accounts are only scratching the surface and more will share their experiences once it is safe to do so. In closing, I recognize the skepticism surrounding this topic. If everyone could see the sensor and video data eyewitness, our national conversation would change. I urge us to put aside stigma and address the security and safety issue this topic represents. If you appear are foreign drones, it is an urgent national security problem. If it is something else, it is an issue for science.

In either case, unidentified objects are concerned for flight safety. The American people deserve to know what is happening in our skies. It is long overdue. Thank you. And up next is David Gresh. Mr. Chairman, ranking members and congressmen. Thank you. I'm happy to be here.

This is an important issue, and I'm grateful for your time. My name is David Charles Grush. I was an intelligence officer for 14 years in the both in the US Air Force, both active duty Air National Guard and Reserve at the rank of major and most recently from 2021 to 2025 or just be 2023 at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency NGA at the GS-15 civilian level, which is the military equipment of Fulbert Colonel. I was my agency's co-lead and unidentified an omniscientificed an officer. phenomena and transmedium object analysis, as well as reporting to the UAP task force, UAPTF, and eventually once it was established the All-D anomaly Resolution Office, Arrow. I became a whistleblower through a PPD-19 urgent concern filing in May 2022 with the Intelligence Community Inspector General. Following concerning reports from multiple esteemed and credentialed current and former military and intelligence community individuals that the U.S. government is operating with secrecy above congressional oversight with regards to UAPs.

My testimony is based on information I've been given by individuals with a longstanding track record of legitimacy and service to this country. Many of whom also have shared compelling evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony. to myself and many my various colleagues. I have taken every step I can to collaborate this evidence over a period of four years while I was with the UAP Task Force and do my due diligence on the individual sharing it. This is because of these steps, I believe strongly

in the importance of bringing this information before you. I am driven by a commitment of both to truth and transparency, rooted in our inherent duty to uphold the United States' state's constitution and protect the American people. I'm asking Congress to hold our government to this standard and thoroughly investigate these claims. But as I stand here under oath now, I am speaking to the facts as I've been told them. In the U.S. Air Force, in my national reconnaissance office, NRO, reservist capacity, I was a member of the UAP Task Force from 2019 to 2021. I served at the Intero Operations Center on the director's briefing staff, which included the coordination of the presidential daily brief and supporting variety of contingency operations, which I was the Reserve Intelligence Division Chief backup.

In 2019, the UAP Task Force Director asked me to identify all special access programs and controlled access programs, also known as Saps and Caps, we needed to satisfy our congressional. mandated mission and we were direct report at the time to the Depsec. At the time, due to my extensive executive level intelligence support duties, I was cleared to literally all relevant compartments and in a position of extreme trust, both in my military and civilian capacities. I was informed in the course of my official duties of a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program. to which I was denied access to those additional read-ons when I requested it. I made the decision based on the data I collected to report this information to my superiors and multiple inspectors general and in effect becoming a whistleblower. As you know, I've suffered retaliation for my decision, but I am hopeful that my actions

will ultimately lead to a positive outcome of increased transparency. Thank you and I'm happy to answer your questions. Bonjour, compadre. It's the... Priceline negotiator. How do I negotiate so many great travel deals? My greatest gadget. The Price Line app.

It's got hotel deals, flight deals, rental car deals. All of those deals in a bundle. Deals. Game Day deals. Concert trip deals. No one deals more deals than Price Line. Hold your horses. There's more. The app lets you filter hotels by neighborhood,

vibe, star level, and amenities like pools and spas and beach fronts. Wait, I'm not done. Stop cutting the... Price Line! Expedia and Visit Scotland Invite you to come experience the beauty that awaits in Scotland. The sweep of wild coastlines, quiet locks and untamed landscapes,

fresh cuisine that feels rooted in the land. Come experience the kind of stillness that stays with you long after you leave. Plan your Scottish escape today at expedia.com slash visit Scotland. This episode is brought to you by Redfin. You're listening to a podcast, which means you're probably multitasking, maybe even scrolling home listings on Redfin, saving homes without expecting to get them.

But Redfin isn't just built for endless browsing. It's built to help you find and own a home. With agents who close twice as many deals, when you find the one, you've got a real shot at getting it. Get started at Redfin.com. Own the dream. And last, but certainly not least, we have David Fraver. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Carson, Men, Congresswoman.

I want to first thank you for the invitation to speak to the committee on the UAP topic. It's been in the news for the past six years and seems to be continuing to gain momentum. As you know, my name is David Fraver. I'm retired commander in the United States Navy. In 2004, I was a commanding officer of Strike Fighter Squadron in 41, the world famous Black Aces. We are attached to carrier Airwain 11 station on board the USS Nimitz and had begun a two-month workup cycle off the coast of California. On this day, we were scheduled for a 2 v2 air-air training with the USS Princeton as our control. When we launched off Nimitz, my wingman was joining up.

We were told that the training was going to be suspended and we were going to proceed with real-world tasking. As we proceeded to the west, the air controller was counting down the range to an object that we were going to, and we were unaware of what we were going to see when we arrived. They're the controller told us that these objects had been observed for over two weeks coming down from over 80,000 feet rapidly descending to 20,000 feet hanging out for hours and then going straight back up for those who don't realize about 80,000 feet of space We arrived at the location at approximately 20,000 feet in a controller called merge plot, which means that our radar blip was now in the same resolution cell as the contact As we looked around, we noticed that we saw some white water off our right side. It's important to know that the weather on this day was just a as close to perfect as you could ask for off the coast of San Diego, clear skies, light winds,

calm seas, no white caps from waves. So the white water stood out in a large blue ocean. All four of us, because we were an F-18Fs, so we had pilots and Wizzo in the back seat, looked down a small, saw a white Tick-Tac object with a longitudinal axis pointing north-south and moving very abruptly over the water like a ping pong ball. There were no rotors, no rotor wash, or any sign of visible control surfaces like wings. As we started clockwise towards the object, my Wizzo and I decided to go. down and take a closer look at the other aircraft staying in high cover to observe both

us and the Tic-Tac. We proceeded around the circle about 90 degrees from the start of our descent and the object suddenly shifted its longitudinal axis, aligned it with my aircraft, and began to climb. We continued down to another 270-degree nose-low where the Tick-Tac, or we consumed two hundred 70 degrees toward, and we went nose-low to where the Tick-Tac would have been. Our altitude at this point was about 15,000 feet in the T-Tick-T-Tac. was about 12,000. As we pulled nose onto the object within about a half mile of it, it rapidly accelerated in front of us and disappeared. Our wingmen, roughly 8,000 feet above us,

lost contact also. We immediately turned back to see where the white water was at, and it was gone also. So as you started to turn back towards the east, the controller came up and said, sir, you're not going to believe this, but that thing is at your cap point, roughly 60 miles away and less than a minute. You can calculate the speed. We returned to Nimitz. We were taken off our gear. We were talking to one of my crews that was getting ready to launch. We mentioned it to him and they went out and luckily got the video that you see that 90-second video what you don't see is the radar tape that was never released and we don't know where it's at the act of jamming that the object put on an APG

73 radar and I can get into modes later if you're interested what is shocking to us is that the incident was never investigated none of my crew were ever questioned and tapes were never taken and after a couple days it turned in a great story with friends it wasn't until 2009 till Jay Stratton had contacted me to investigate unbeknownst all he was part of the A-Tip program and the Pentagon led by Lou Alessando. There was an unofficial official report that came out that's now on the internet. Years later, I was contacted by the other pilot, Alex Dietrich, and asked if I'd been contacted, and I said no, but I'm willing to talk. I was contacted by Mr. Alizando, and we talked for

a short period of time, and he said we'd be in contact. A few weeks after that, I was made aware that Lou had left the Pentagon in protest and joined forces with Tom DeLong, Chris Mellon, Steve Justice, and others to form Two Stars Academy, an organization that pressed the issue with leading industry experts and U.S. government officials. They worked with Leslie Keene, who was present today, Ralph Lewenthal, and Helene Cooper to publish the articles in the New York Times, 2017 New York Times, and it removed the stigma on the topic of UFOs, which is why we're here today. Those articles open the door for the government and public that cannot be closed. It has led to an interest from our elected officials who are not focused on little green men, but figuring out

where these craft are, where they from, the technology they possess, how do they operate? It also led to the Whistleblower Protection Act and the NDAA. There are multiple witnesses coming forward to say that have firsthand knowledge, and Mr. Grush just covered that. What concerns me is that there's no oversight from our elected officials on anything associated with our government processing or working on craft, believe not from this world. This issue is not a full public disclosure that could undermine national security, but it is about ensuring that our system of checks and balances works across all work done in the government using taxpayer funds. relative to government programs, even unacknowledged wave programs, have some level of oversight by the appropriate committee members in the House and Senate, and this work that is said to be occurring from whistleblower testimonies should not be exempt. In closing, I would like to say that the tick-tac object we engaged in 2004 was far superior to anything that we had on time, have today or looking to develop in the next 10 years. If we, in fact, have programs that possess this technology and needs to have oversight from those people that the citizens of this great country elected in office to represent what is best for the United States.

And best for the citizens. I thank you for your time. Thank you very much. All right. Now that we've heard the opening statements from the witnesses, let's dive into our analysis of the rest of the hearing. One of the most important aspects of this hearing wasn't just what was being said by the witnesses, but rather what was being said by the members of Congress who are questioning them. That's not to in any way minimize the witnesses who bravely came forward. But one can easily imagine a scenario where they testified before a board congressional subcommittee, that hadn't done their research and wasn't taking any of this seriously. But thankfully, that wasn't the case. The members of Congress who questioned the witnesses were fully prepared and fully engaged.

Their questions were thoughtful, pointed, and signaled to all who are watching that they found these witnesses to be credible and their testimony to be of the utmost importance. For perhaps the first time in this long road to meaningful disclosure, the witnesses weren't being asked to make the case for why anyone should listen to or believe them in the first place. They were being asked specific questions that would allow Congress to follow up and further investigate their specific claims, particularly those that most closely pertain to matters of national security, congressional oversight, and corruption. And that feels like the best place to start in breaking down the most important takeaways from the hearing. Right now, the ball is in

Congress's court. And by taking a closer look at the issues that seem to be the most urgent and most important to them, we may be able to get a clue about how all of this might unfold as we move forward. One of the key points of interest that was surfaced in the hearing was the need for increased measures to improve reporting and transparency in situations where aviators are encountering unknown objects in the skies. In July of 2022, the All-Domain Anomily Resolution Office, or ERO, was established when Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks, amended the original direction of the Airborne Object Identification and Management Group, or A-O-I-M-S-G, thankfully, renaming it to something less obtuse and more pronounceable, while also expanding its scope.

The purpose of Arrow is to synchronize efforts across the Department of Defense and other U.S. Federal Departments and agencies, to detect, identify, and attribute objects of interest near military installations, as well as to mitigate any associated breads to safety and national security. Specifically, Aero is in charge of overseeing efforts including surveillance, collection and reporting, system capabilities and design, intelligence operations and analysis, mitigation, governance, and science and technology. With the establishment of Aero, we finally had something that we've desperately needed, a centralized clearinghouse for data related to UAP sightings. When Fravor and Graves had the encounters they described in their opening statements,

and their superiors failed to follow up with them, there was no way to escalate their concerns. They had nowhere to turn. Arrow was created to change all that, at least in theory. The reality of Arrow thus far has hardly lived up to its promise. A year later, they have barely scratched the surface of completing even some of the most basic tasks that they were charged with to improve reporting and transparency. For example, a congressionally mandated website with a portal for reporting UAPC,

sightings has yet to appear. And on the same day that the establishment of Arrow was announced, an official Twitter account went live and was greeted with jubilation and support in the community. The first two tweets said, Welcome to the official Twitter account for the All-Domain Anomily Resolution Office. Through this channel, we will provide updates and information relative to our examinations of unidentified anomalous phenomena across space, air, and maritime domains. As we grow the office, begin building upon the previous Department of Defense efforts in this area and communicate with Congress, we will provide updates on our progress here. This is an exciting and intellectually stimulating

opportunity for us here at Arrow. Sounds great, right? Except that they've literally never tweeted again. In the years since, the almost comical ineptitude and obfuscation from Arrow has become something of a running joke in the community. For example, in a hearing in April, director of Arrow Sean Kirkpatrick played a video of a metallic sphere with no visible means of propulsion, maneuvering through the air, for which his team had no explanation. And yet, in that same hearing, he claimed that Arrow had come across, quote, no credible evidence thus far of objects that defy the known laws of physics. But how can that be true? How can you use the known laws of physics to explain how a spherical object with no means of propulsion can fly. It's a familiar dodge for those trying to muddy the waters on this topic

to say that there is no evidence, when what they really mean is that there is no proof. Evidence and proof are not the same thing. Evidence points to a potential conclusion, but it doesn't necessarily mean that that conclusion is correct. Evidence can be proven to be wrong. It can be proven to be merely circumstantial, but it's still evidence. And in as-of-yet unexplained military video of a metallic sphere flying through the air is evidence of something that is potentially violating the known laws of physics, period. It's asinine to suggest otherwise. And yet, this is exactly what is being suggested by the director of the office that was supposedly set up to increase transparency on this matter. As a result, it's not surprising that the rumor has been

that everyone from pilots who've had sightings to whistleblowers who want to come forward don't trust, Arrow, or Sean Kirkpatrick. They haven't exactly demonstrated themselves to be trustworthy. And so, although we allegedly have a place for people to report their sightings, it has done very little to improve the abysmal state of reporting and transparency. Ryan Graves said in Wednesday's hearing that he estimates that 95% of sightings by military pilots still aren't being reported. And the reason for that goes beyond just a simple distrust of Arrow. The reality is that, despite the fact that the government's not that the government's not that the government's has admitted that UAPs exist and that we don't know what they are, and despite the fact

that legislation has been written and passed, a new office has been established to centralize the data, and hearings are being conducted by Congress. There is still a very real stigma attached to pilots and other members of the military reporting their sightings. For pilots in particular, a UAP encounter can become a stain on their record that can destroy their career and their reputation. So there is very little incentive for them to come forward when they, do come in contact with something anomalous. Tim Burchett said on News Nation earlier this month that he has spoken to multiple pilots

who've reported destroying the tapes and evidence of their encounters themselves to avoid the possible fallout of their encounter being discovered by their superiors. Whether you're convinced of the reality of the UFO phenomenon or not, I think that we can all agree that this state of affairs is unacceptable.

Our government has acknowledged that whatever these things are, they are real, and that they pose a potential national security threat. And yet, the people who are coming into contact with these objects most often are put in a position where they feel like if they talk honestly about what they saw, that they could destroy the career they spent their entire adult lives building. In this culture of fear and silence, we're missing out on what could be extremely valuable data that could help us figure out what we're dealing with here.

And we're failing to both respect and protect the members of our armed forces who are on the front lines of this mystery. Obviously, this needs to change, and it was encouraging to see members of Congress taking this matter so seriously. Another major issue that the subcommittee zeroed in on in their questioning was David Gresh's claims with regard to illegal retaliation against whistleblowers.

In December, landmark legislation was passed as part of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, which offered protection to UFO whistleblowers who wanted to come forward to talk to Congress about what they know. The law shields these individuals from legal action that could arise from breaking confidentiality agreements related to these secrets, and it covers both government employees and people working for private companies involved in UAP research and development. One part of the law creates a safe way for whistleblowers to share information with members of Congress

who have the legal right to this knowledge. The law also includes a provision that protects whistleblowers from a challenge. retaliation or punishment, such as losing their jobs or security clearances for revealing this information. And yet, even with these protections in place, Grush claims that both he and several of his colleagues who have attempted to come forward have been retaliated against. Due to an ongoing investigation being conducted by the Intelligence Community Inspector General, or ICIG, into Grush's claims of retaliation, he wasn't able to offer many specific details, but he did make it clear that he and his colleagues have had credible threats against both their careers

and their lives from various elements within the Department of Defense. And although he's not able to provide further details for fear of compromising the investigation, there is every reason to take these claims seriously. The investigation to which he is referring was opened in July of last year after Grush submitted a complaint to the ICIG. Not only did the ICIG decide to take this case on, but he described the claims made by Grush as being both, quote, credible and urgent. And we have other evidence to support that this retaliation goes beyond just Grush. On June 27th of this year, Senator Marco Rubio said in an interview on News Nation that the Senate Intelligence Committee has already met with several whistleblowers with first-hand knowledge of secret crash retrieval and reverse engineering programs. In his statements, he said that these whistleblowers have held very high clearances and high positions within our government.

Rubio also claimed that, despite whistleblower legislation passed last year, these whistleblowers are afraid to speak publicly. Frankly, a lot of them are very fearful, he said, fearful of their jobs, fearful of their clearances, fearful of their career. Obviously, these allegations are extremely concerned, and so it was encouraging to hear in strong and unambiguous terms from multiple members of the subcommittee on both sides of the aisle, that they were taking this matter seriously and were committed to providing further protections for whistleblowers and to holding those responsible, countable. And finally, the questions for members of Congress also seem to be zeroing in on the crash retrieval and reverse engineering programs themselves and more specifically how they have been kept secret and above the oversight of Congress.

And, as is usually the case in matters of corruption, to find answers, Congress will need to follow the money. A particular interest was how these programs managed to get funding. As I'm sure you remember from grade school, Congress is the branch of government that has the power of the purse. And hypothetically, any program that is operating within the Department of Defense would have to be specifically provided for in the NDAA, which is passed yearly by Congress. The NDAA is a United States federal law that specifies the budget, expenditures, and policies of the U.S. Department of Defense. Each year's NDAA provides funding for the military and defense programs, including salaries for military personnel, operations and maintenance, procurement of equipment

and technology, research and development, construction, and other activities related to national defense. So the question then becomes, if these programs really exist without Congress's knowledge, then where are they getting their money? You have to imagine that programs for retrieving and reverse engineering highly advanced non-human technology, as well as covering it up, has to come with a pretty hefty price tag, even by the standards of the Department of Defense. So how could they hide something like that? David Gresh said under oath that he had specifics about how these programs were being funded that he couldn't discuss publicly, but that he was willing to share with Congress. He was specifically asked if these programs were being funded by defense contractors overcharging

for unrelated goods and services so that the excess money could be funneled to secret programs under the radar. Grush answered in the affirmative and said that that was one method that was being used. And when you look at the Department of Defense and they're seeming complete inability to keep track of the money that it spends,

it's not hard to imagine how even a program as expensive as UFO crash retrieval and reverse engineering could be falling through the cracks of oversight. The reality is that the DOD routinely fails audits, including every year between 2017 and 2021. And in 2021, it could not account for 61% of its $3.5 trillion in assets. That's over $2.1 trillion that is essentially in the wind. It can be almost impossible for the human brain to truly conceptualize how much money

$2 trillion is, but for reference, it's equal to nearly one-tenth of the GDP of the United States. And notably, despite the fact that it continues to fail audits that every other government agency has managed to pass since 2013, they had never once authorized an audit of their contractors. And to up the missing $2 trillion, the chief financial officer of the DOD was quoted as saying that it's a, quote, teachable moment. For the record, when a private citizen can't account for 61% of their assets, they go to jail. But the DOD just calls it an oopsie-dasy and moves on. So obviously, it's great to hear from Congress that they are committed to tracking down these programs and figuring out how this money is being illegally appropriated and spent,

though it does beg the question of why it took them so long to signal that they're ready to tighten the reins. Runaway spending by the DoD, and a complete lack of accountability with regard to how those funds are actually spent, has long been a problem. And the American people deserve to know where their money is going. So those are just some of the areas that seem to be of the utmost interest to Congress, and hopefully as we watch this situation evolve over the coming weeks and months, we'll see them pursuing each of those lines of inquiry with the same conviction and resoluteness that they telegraphed during the hearing.

Because to be clear, David Grush said during the hearing that he has specific information about the locations where these very programs and materials are being hidden, how they are being funded, who is involved, and that he has a list of both friendly and hostile witnesses that he was willing to share with Congress in order to help them in their investigation. So with any luck, we'll begin to see the damn breaking on what has been over 80 years of secrecy and denial.

Now, today we don't have time to do a deep dive on everything else that was said during the hearing. As I said earlier, it was well over two hours long. But I did want to highlight just a couple of particularly notable points before we move on. As we are all aware, David Grush hasn't just claimed to have information about UFO crash retrieval and reverse engineering programs, but he claims that non-human bodies have been retrieved as well. Most of the specific details presented thus far have had to do with non-human craft,

and so obviously people have been eager to hear more about the beings that are alleged to have been flying them. And in last week's hearing, we got exactly that. And although it was just a morsel of information, it was a tantalizing one that sparked a flurry of speculation in the community and online. While responding to questions, Grutch declined to comment further on the retrieved bodies, given the public nature of the hearings. But he did confirm the United States was in possession of what he called non-human biologics. That word biologics is what caught the attention of many. It's a very specific word and one that you don't hear very often. A quick Google search of the word will bring you to the FDA's website, which says that biologics,

quote, include a wide range of products such as vaccines, blood and blood components, allergenics, somatic cells, gene therapy, tissues, and recombinant therapeutic proteins. Biologics can be composed of sugars, proteins, or nucleic acids, or complex combinations of these substances, or may be living entities such as cells and tissues. biologics are isolated from a variety of natural sources, human, animal, or microorganism, and may be produced by biotechnology methods and other cutting-edge technologies. Now, it's that last part about how they may be produced by biotechnology methods and other cutting-edge technologies that got UFO Twitter buzzing, because it seemingly suggests the possibility that these non-human bodies

could be technically living, but also in some very real way, synthetic. This is particularly interesting to many in the UFO community because it comports with the long-standing theory within the lore that certain non-human entities that are reported may be synthetic biological drones of some kind. In particular, many people who have reported contact with Greys have noted that their movements seem strange and almost puppet-like and give the distinct impression of being animated but not insouled. Now, I don't want to get bogged down and worrying about what we mean by a soul, but suffice it to say that many

experiencers have reported that the grays that they saw seemed like robots of some kind. And as bizarre as this may sound, it does make a certain kind of sense if you think about it. Given what we know about deep space travel, it's clear that having a biological body is not ideal in that situation. Bodies break down over time and space. It would be much more convenient to send your tech ahead and basically grow some of the bodies that you could then control remotely once it got to where you were trying to go. And if what you're dealing with is a species that's coming from another planet, it could be that they evolved in a

totally different environment than Earth, which could make it difficult or even deadly for them to spend much time here in their own bodies. And even if what we're dealing with isn't extraterrestrial and is from right here on our own planet, there are still plenty of reasons why an advanced species would choose to use biological drones. I mean, if we could send remotely controlled, controlled biological drones to war or to space, we would. Beyond just the obvious intrinsic value of saving a human life, it costs a lot of money and a lot of time to train a military pilot or an astronaut. If there was a way that a disastrous end to a mission didn't mean losing all the knowledge and expertise of the people on board, it would be a no-brainer for us to do so. But before we get

too excited about this idea, I think it's important to ground ourselves with a little context. Popular UFO commentator Dan Warren, asked Dr. Gary Nolan to weigh in with his tweet, which read, What does biologics mean to you? And can you dumb it down for the rest of us? Please and thank you. Dr. Nolan replied, like the catch-all term non-human intelligence and identified anomalous phenomena, it's an attempt to create a term that does not convey bias. It's the right way to do things. As a uphology heavyweight, a highly respected scientist and the chair of the pathology department at Stanford, Gary Nolan is the guy to ask that question. And that was his answer.

So while it's fun to speculate about the details of the retrieved bodies and what it all might mean, we shouldn't rush to any conclusions without having more data. Another new revelation that set the UFO community on fire after the hearing was Ryan Graves sharing an account of an enormous UFO that was seen at Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara County in 2003. According to Graves, a group of Boeing contractors that were working at the facility one morning around 845 observed a very large, 100-foot-long red square approached the base from the ocean and hover at low altitude over one of the launch facilities. This object remained for about 45 seconds or so before darting off over the mountains. The enormous UFO returned that evening after sunset, but this time we've had to be a little bit of

more aggressive behaviors, Graves said. These objects were approaching some of the security guards at rapid speeds before darting off. Anyway, without more information, I don't really have much else to offer on the big red square, except for to say, dude. But it was really cool to hear a new account of such a dramatic and unusual sighting, and I hope we hear more. Long live the big red square. Obviously, these allegations are breathtaking, and for many, hard to believe. And that's understandable. Skepticism is a natural and rational response to being presented with information that doesn't fit with your models of reality. People should be questioning everything about this process. That's a good thing. But while cultivating healthy skepticism is a good thing, we shouldn't allow our thinking to stop at the place where our doubt begins.

When your face was startling new information that has the potential to upend your worldview, it's easy to latch on to one detail or one argument that sounds right and seemingly confirms that you've been right all right. along and immediately stop digging. That's something that I'm seeing a lot in the aftermath of the hearings, and I 100% understand the impulse. Grapling with ideas that have the potential to destabilize your most fundamental beliefs about the nature of your reality is a decidedly not chill experience. It can be exhilarating and inspiring and fulfilling and a whole lot of other positive things if you give it a chance, but it isn't without profound challenges as well. there will be many Dark Nights of the Soul, where you may find yourself wishing that you'd never even started this line of inquiry. I've been there. I still find myself there from time to time.

And so I understand why a person might not want to chase this particular experience down, and why, when offered an escape hatch in the form of an answer that sounds like it's probably right, most people opt to take it and just stop thinking. And so I want to take a little bit of time to talk through some of the most common criticisms being leveled against both the hearings and the witnesses themselves, because although many of them are fair and rational on their face, and most importantly, they sound like they're probably true. If we don't allow these ideas to immediately turn off our thinking and do the work of digging a little deeper, we quickly see that they're largely built on misperceptions and a lack of important context.

Let's start with one of the most common thought-stopping objections that has come up in the wake of the hearings. If you've been online at all in the last week, you've probably heard some version of this. These hearings are nothing new. It's been 80 years and there's still no evidence to support the idea that UFOs are real. This one is probably the most frustrating because it's just simply not true. My bookshelves are overflowing with books of evidence. We have decades of research. We have the accounts of thousands upon thousands of individuals who have seen these things up close and personal. We even have to classified government documents in which government officials speak directly to the reality of the UFO phenomenon. Not to mention the fact that the government's

official stance on UFOs is that they exist and that they are worthy of our attention and investigation. On July 17th in a White House press briefing, White House National Security Council coordinator Admiral John Kirby was asked by a journalist specifically if the Biden administration considers UAPs to be a real and legitimate issue. This is what he said in reply, quote, Yeah. We wouldn't have stood up this organization at the Pentagon to analyze and to collect and coordinate

the way these sightings are reported if we didn't take it seriously. Of course we do. Some of the phenomena we know have already had an impact on our training ranges. You know, when pilots are out trying to do training in the air and they see these things, they're not sure what they are

and it can have an impact on their ability to perfect their skills. so it's already had an impact here, and we want to better understand it. Now, we're not saying what these things are or what they're not. We're saying there's something our pilots are seeing. We're saying it has an effect on some of our training operations, and we want to get to the bottom of it, end quote. So we can debate about whether or not any of the things that I've mentioned constitute proof of the reality of the UFO phenomenon. But what is simply not up for debate is whether or not it constitutes evidence. It is evidence, and there is a lot of it. To say otherwise is assinine and is demonstrably untrue.

And speaking of evidence, let's talk about one of the most common criticisms being leveled against both David Grush and Wednesday's hearing, which is that thus far, no concrete evidence has been put forward to corroborate Gresh's claims. If David Gresh is telling the truth, then where is the evidence? And listen, I think this is fair. Any rational person who is confronted with claims as extraordinary and unprecedented as these is not going to just accept them at face value. They're going to demand evidence to back it up, and they should. So what are we to make of the fact that thus far no solid evidence has been presented

of grushes claims about secret UFO crash retrieval and reverse engineering programs? First of all, before we go any further, it's critical that we all get on the same page about something and that is this. There is no legal mechanism by which classified information can be shared directly with the public. It's really important that we understand that. Anyone who is waiting for that evidence to be unveiled in Wednesday's hearing simply doesn't understand how the classification system works, which is fine. If you're new to this world, there would be no reason for you to know that.

But those are the facts. David Grush can't share any of the corroborating evidence of his claims with the public without going directly to jail, there is no scenario where he would have been allowed to share that publicly within the hearing. So if we can't see the evidence, how do we know that it even exists? Couldn't he be lying? This is where we have to look past the headlines and dig into what David Gresh has said, what he has done, and how the various arms of our government have responded. In Wednesday's hearing, David Gresh said, under oath, that it is four years as an investigator for the UAP task he spoke to over 40 individuals who had firsthand knowledge of these secret crash retrieval and

reverse engineering programs and that these individuals provided him with official documents, images, and videos to corroborate their claims. Grush said that he took all of this information and he turned it over to multiple inspectors general, including the intelligence community inspector general. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough.

Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your ocean front room. Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises.

It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. Study. And play. Come together on a Windows 11 piece. And for a limited time, college students get the best of both worlds. Get the unreal college deal, everything you need, to study and play with select Windows 11 PCs. Eligible students get a year of Microsoft 365 premium and a year of Xbox GamePass Ultimate with a custom color Xbox wireless controller.

Learn more at Windows.com slash student offer. While supplies last, ends June 30th, terms at AKA.m.m.S. College PC. Did you know if your windows are bare, indoor temperatures can go up 20 degrees. Get ahead of summer with custom window treatments like solar roller shades from blinds.com and save up to 45% off during the Memorial Day Early Access sale. Whether you want to DIY it or have a pro handle everything, we've got you. Free samples, real design experts, and zero pressure. Just help when you need it.

Shop up to 45% off site wide right now during the early access Memorial Day sale at blinds.com. Rules and restrictions apply. It's important to recognize that by doing this, Grush has put some serious skin in the game. If he's lying, he can be charged with perjury and contempt of Congress, both of which are very serious charges that potentially come with jail time if convicted. It would also spell the definitive end of his career. So by going on the record, Gresh isn't just risking his career and his reputation, but his freedom. And if it is a lie, it would be a very stupid lie to tell. Because he didn't just say that he had this evidence, but that he already handed it

over to not just one, but multiple inspectors general. If this evidence is fictional or fraudulent, it would take no time at all for them to figure that out. So that's one strong indication we have. This evidence does in fact exist. Another is the sustained campaign of retaliation against David Grush, which dates back to 2021, and it has only escalated in the week since he went public as a whistleblower. Skeptics here might argue that we have no details about this retaliation because, other than saying that he fears for his career and for his life, Grush hasn't publicly offered any further details on what exactly that retaliation has entailed or who might be responsible.

However, once again, the reason for his vagueness on this issue is because there is an ongoing investigation into his claims that was opened in July of last year. The ICIG said at the time that these claims were both credible and urgent, so one has to assume that the evidence he presented to support this alleged retaliation, must have some significant weight to it, and once again, all of this was said under oath. If he's found to be lying, the consequences for that, both legally and professionally, would be severe. Another argument being made by those who are skeptical of the claims being made during Wednesday's hearing is that thus far, no other whistleblowers have stepped forward to corroborate Gresh's claims.

In the weeks leading up to the hearing, Tim Burchett had publicly teased that the hearing would feature an all-star lineup of witnesses and that as many as six would be called to testify. And yet, no new whistleblowers ever materialized. So if David Grush is telling the truth, then where are the other whistleblowers? Once again, it's a fair question. But what most people asking it don't recognize is that, although these whistleblowers have yet to come forward publicly, several of them have already spoken to Congress, and specifically to the Senate Intelligence Committee. As we discussed a little earlier, Marco Rubio confirmed this back in June, and he further confirmed that the whistleblowers he's spoken to are afraid for both their careers and their lives.

This is a big statement coming from the vice chair on one of the most coveted committees in Congress and from a man with clear presidential ambitions, no less. The idea that he would lie about the Intelligence Committee having heard from these whistleblowers stretches the limits of credulity. He has literally nothing to gain for making those statements and absolutely ever. everything to lose. We also have further evidence that whistleblowers have already provided Congress with very specific information that it is already using to craft sweeping new legislation that would mandate that the government disclose what it knows about UAPs. Introduced by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the UAP Disclosure Act of 2023,

has very telling language with regard to what whistleblowers have told them. One section that lays out the specific need for the legislation reads as follows, quote, Legislation is necessary because credible evidence and testimony indicates that federal government unidentified anomalous phenomena records exist that have not been declassified or subject to mandatory declassification review as set forth in executive order. I'm not going to read this long string of numbers, but you can find it in the episode brief, due in part to exemptions under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as well as an overbroad interpretation of trans-classified foreign nuclear information, which is also exempt from mandatory

declassification, thereby preventing public disclosure under existing provisions of law, end quote. So not only do we have proposed legislation saying that Congress has heard credible evidence and testimony that information about UAPs is being intentionally hidden from both Congress and the American people, but they have outlined the very specific act and the interpretation of that act that is being used to hide information about UAPs. So at this point, it's clear that these whistleblowers aren't fictional. They have spoken to Congress, and the evidence that they have presented was deemed credible enough for them to take very specific and nonpartisan action in the

form of legislation. Those who are arguing otherwise are either not operating with the full set of or they aren't acting in good faith. So where are the whistleblowers? Based on the evidence, it seems pretty reasonable to assume that what we've heard from David Grush, from members of Congress, and from various other insiders, specifically that whistleblowers have been retaliated against for coming forward is true. And the reason that they haven't come forward publicly is because they are in fear of their careers and their lives. Which brings us to another of the most common criticisms leveled against last week's hearings, which is this. Why haven't we heard from any firsthand witnesses of these crash retrieval programs?

David Grush only claims to have secondhand knowledge of these programs. So where are the people who can corroborate his claims? Now, obviously, this can be explained by everything we just discussed with regard to the intimidation of witnesses who have already spoken to Congress. But there's another level to this that I think it's important to talk through. Part of the reason that I think this question comes up for people is because David Grush has come forward with some very specific allegations over the last two months, and so they imagine that these firsthand witnesses should be able to do the same thing. But as we've discussed in previous

episodes, David Grush is a special case, and here's why. Back in April, David Grush did something rather brilliant. He sent his whistleblower allegations to the Department of Defense and asked them to clear him to say these things publicly. The process that he used to get these statements cleared is interesting because in clearing his statements, the Pentagon isn't saying that they approve of his statements, nor are they saying that his statements are factually accurate. All that they're saying with this clearing process is that his statements aren't a threat to national security. This was a brilliant move on Gresh's part because it forced the DOD to make a tough choice. They could choose not to clear his statements, but in doing so, they would have had to say that his statements were a threat to

national security. If they're not true, then how could they be a threat to national security? So the Pentagon instead chose to clear his statements, which allows them to maintain plausible deniability, but it also gives Grush the ability to speak openly about the allegations that he cleared by them. So for those who continue to question Grush's claims on the basis that he doesn't have first-hand information about these crash retrieval programs and was only told about them by intelligence officials who were in those programs, I think it's important to point out that. that it's very likely that the only reason that this plan worked is exactly because Grush wasn't claiming to have firsthand knowledge. As we've discussed, there is no mechanism by which members

of special access programs can share classified information directly with the public. But being one degree removed, and having had his statements cleared by the DOD, Grush is able to say things that they can't. What we need to recognize is that even if the whistleblowers with firsthand knowledge of these programs had testified in front of Congress last week, there is very little that they actually would have been able to say publicly. The whistleblower legislation passed in December doesn't allow whistleblowers to go public with classified information. It only allows them to take that information to Congress. And as we've discussed, it's clear that they already have. And as a result of those conversations with

whistleblowers, the ball is already moving on legislation that would make it possible for what they know to actually become public knowledge with the newly proposed UAP Disclosure Act of 2023. Before we wrap this episode, there's one more thing that we need to discuss, which is an open letter the director of Aero Sean Kirkpatrick wrote in response to the hearing. Strangely, the letter wasn't released through any official channels and wasn't on any official letterhead. It was just one typed page that was posted on Kirkpatrick's LinkedIn account of all places, the day after the hearing. Kirkpatrick expressed that he found the hearings to be insulting to the people who work for Arrow.

He said that Grush never came to Arrow to discuss his accusations of retaliation, and he doubled down on claims that Arrow has found no credible evidence of non-human technology or any related reverse engineering programs. The tone of the letter is very strange. It's definitely not very professional. I won't say anything else about that. You can read it for yourself and decide what you think. But it definitely doesn't sound like something that the Pentagon

would have approved of him posting publicly, especially because, as many people pointed out, it seemed like it could be a violation of the Hatch Act. The Hatch Act is a United States federal law, formerly known as an act to prevent pernicious political activities. In accident in 1939, the main goal of this legislation is to prevent federal employees from engaging in political activities while on duty in a government office, wearing an official uniform or using a government vehicle. It's basically a safeguard against people in the executive branch using their position to influence political activities. If Kirkpatrick was found to have been using his official position to give credence

to his comments or to influence others, it could be seen as using official authority for a political purpose. Now, I am not a lawyer, and it's not at all clear that he did violate the Hatch Act with this letter. But if he did, it could lead to suspension, demotion, termination, disbarment from federal employees. and other civil penalties. And we have a hint that the Pentagon might see his actions as a potential violation of the Hatch Act in the official statement released by the Pentagon on the matter. Here's what they said, quote, the department is aware of Dr. Kirkpatrick's posts, which are his personal opinions expressed in his capacity as a private citizen, and we won't comment directly on the contents of the post. The words, as a private citizen, are doing a lot of work there.

How could it be that Kirkpatrick, making a written statement on a professional networking site that specifically references his position and work with Arrow could be considered to be just the personal opinions of a private citizen? His position as director of Arrow is the entire reason he wrote the letter and is the main subject of the letter, to say otherwise as assonine. But it's just the sort of hedge that they would have to make if they were concerned about a Hatch Act violation. But regardless of the ethics and legality of the letter, I'd argue that the claims made by Kirkpatrick are largely meaningless. What David Grush is alleging is that the people who are charged with investigating UAPs, across programs and across decades, have not been given the resources and access that they need to conduct that investigation thoroughly, and that very specifically, these illegal crash retrieval and reverse engineering programs have been intentionally hidden

from investigators because they are illegal. In short, if Grush is lying, Arrow, and by extension, Kirkpatrick, would it have evidence of these programs because they don't exist? And if Grush is telling the truth, Arrow in Kirkpatrick still wouldn't have this evidence because it has been intentionally hidden from them. Kirkpatrick's statements are a date point, but they do nothing to confirm one way or another if Grush is telling the truth. What we need is a rigorous and thorough investigation. If the evidence that Grush turned over to the ICIG is fraudulent, that shouldn't be hard for them to figure out. And that's where we'll leave it for today. I don't know about you, but the developments of the last week have left my head absolutely spinning. I'll continue to keep you

updated with more analysis as the push for disclosure moves forward. Until next time. There's a new way to Sweet Green. Meet wraps, handheld, hearty, and made for life on the move, With bold, chef-crafted flavors, fresh ingredients, and over 40 grams of protein, they're built to satisfy without slowing you down. Try wraps today in the app or at order.com, available at all participating locations.