David Grusch's DOPSR Cleared Statement and IG Complaint

[Rick Robson]

One could speculate Grush caught wind of something like AASWAP and that became his "secret program", no UFOs needed.

Well then speculation also says that Grusch has been either lying about the whole UFO stuff or has been duped around albeit his own first-hand witness allegations, right? Because the speculation I some times heard that he misunderstood their sources err, I found far-fetched for a man who has a degree (Bachelor, IIRC) in physics.

 

[Mauro]

I agree, not all his claims have been proven. Thus I said originally, many, if including all the prosaic ones, seems to indicate that there is indeed reprisals,

To be completely frank, if I were in charge of an organization and one of my employees started behaving erraticaly on the workplace, with his phantasy world disrupting the workflow, I'd fire him immediately. And yeah, you could call that a reprisal, but I would call it well-justified.

and an illegally funded program running without oversight,

...but which has just been alleged without any substance by the above employee (and was one of the reasons why I fired him)....

if you count only the most prosaic claims. If that adds to 3 claims,

on my count, it adds to 2, but it's a minor point

there's room for more esoteric claims as well, such as the program is a crash retrieval program, of aliens craft,

... or any other phantasy one could imagine...

which in my opinion would still be part of the investigation of the ICIG,

which may well be, being all part of the erratic behaviour which caused the 'reprisals' in the first place

but only so far as its inherently tied to the existence of a fraudulent secret program itself.

or inherently tied to a completely made-up (or imagined) fraudulent secret program.

A whistleblower which reports about real wrongdoings deserves to be protected, but one who disrupts and slanders his organization by phantasizing (inventing, being deluded to believe, choose what you prefer) absurd conspirations deserves the 'reprisals' he gets, imho.

 

[Curious George]

Brian Entin, reporter for Newsnation, today posted a summary with clips of his interviews with members of the House Oversight Committee who attended today's classified briefing with the ICIG.
I will summarize relevant quotes which shed light on which of Grusch's claims that the ICIG has confirmed, according to attendees.

I believe that he's telling the truth. I think that he is a credible witness, and what I can also say is, one thing in particular that really caused me to be concerned about this whole thing is that, Grusch had stated to myself, Rep. Burchett and another member on the phone, that there were people that were hurt, having this information, and keeping this information safe, and or trying to come forward with this information. What I can tell you is I believe that claim after now leaving.

Source: https://twitter.com/BrianEntin/status/1745955998890610952


As reminder, here is the claim that Grusch had made during the public hearing of July 26, 2023:

Tim Burchett (00:52:29):
Mr. Grusch, thank you for being here, brother. Thank you all very much. Have you faced any retaliation or reprisals for any of your testimony or anything on these lines?

David Charles Grusch (00:52:41):
Yeah, I have to be careful what I say in detail because there is an open whistleblower reprisal investigation on my behalf and I don’t want to compromise that investigation by providing anything that may help provide somebody information. But it was very brutal and very unfortunate. Some of the tactics they used to hurt me both professionally and personally, to be quite frank.

Tim Burchett (00:53:07):
It’s very unfortunate. As they say, when you rope the target, that’s when they do the most firing at you. Do you have any personal knowledge of people who have been harmed or injured in efforts to cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technology?

David Charles Grusch (00:53:20):
Yes. Personally.

Tim Burchett (00:53:24):
Have anyone been murdered that you would think that you know of or have heard of, I guess?

David Charles Grusch (00:53:29):
I have to be careful asking that question. I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcript...n-ufos-and-government-transparency-transcript

Since Grusch states there was an "open whistleblower reprisal investigation", I believe that he put this claim in his complaint to the ICIG, and that Luna's statement seems to confirm that after these two years, the claim has been proven. There seems to be serious criminal acts in connection with keeping this program secret, whatever it is.

The next part will be controversial with skeptics:

I think it's incredibly important to listen to the specific words that Grusch uses, you know Grusch never said extra-terrestrial or alien, he said inter-dimensional. I think that that's incredibly important because, those are the types of things that, when we go in there, we- you know, ah- there's certain things that I think it's important that you guys listen to on that.

For reference, here is what Grusch said regarding "inter-dimensional" from the hearing:

Mr. Burlison (01:36:54):
Okay. So with that being said, and the other statement that has been made that was intriguing to me and it’s intriguing because my view has been that we are billions of light years away from any other system. The concept that an alien species that’s technologically advanced enough to travel billions of light years gets here and somehow is incompetent enough to not survive earth or crashes, is something that I find a little bit farfetched. With that being said, you have mentioned that there’s interdimensional potential. Could you expound on that?

David Charles Grusch (01:37:36):
Oh yeah, to answer your first question and I’m here as a fact witness and expert. But I will give you a theoretical framework at least to work off to kind of espouse crashes. Regardless of your level of sentience, right? Planes crash, cars crash, and number of sorties however high a small percentage you’re going to end in mission failure if you will as we say in the Air Force and then in terms of multi-dimensionality, that kind of thing. The framework that I’m familiar with for example, is something called the holographic principle. It derives itself from general relativity and quantum mechanics and that is, if you want to imagine 3D objects such as yourself casting a shadow onto a 2D surface. That’s the holographic principle. So you can be quasi projected from higher dimensional space to lower dimensional. It’s a scientific trope that you can actually cross literally as far as I understand. But there’s probably guys with PhDs that we could probably argue about that.

Mr. Burlison (01:38:36):
But you have not seen any documentation that that’s what’s occurring? This is theory?

David Charles Grusch (01:38:43):
Only a theoretical framework discussion, yes.

 

[Mauro]

Brian Entin, reporter for Newsnation, today posted a summary with clips of his interviews with members of the House Oversight Committee who attended today's classified briefing with the ICIG.
I will summarize relevant quotes which shed light on which of Grusch's claims that the ICIG has confirmed, according to attendees.


Source: https://twitter.com/BrianEntin/status/1745955998890610952


As reminder, here is the claim that Grusch had made during the public hearing of July 26, 2023:

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcript...n-ufos-and-government-transparency-transcript

Since Grusch states there was an "open whistleblower reprisal investigation", I believe that he put this claim in his complaint to the ICIG, and that Luna's statement seems to confirm that after these two years, the claim has been proven. There seems to be serious criminal acts in connection with keeping this program secret, whatever it is.

The next part will be controversial with skeptics:

For reference, here is what Grusch said regarding "inter-dimensional" from the hearing:

Just to reiterate, the only proved facts here are the 'reprisals', which are perfectly consistent with being due to a disruptive conduct in the work environment (which is the other proven fact, at least judging by what happened and was said later). There's nothing more, all the rest are just claims without any proof, speculations, and declarations by believers that they believe him. A nothingburger which managed to reach the US Congress due to, well, other believers supporting him in his crusade.

 

[Curious George]

Just to reiterate, the only proved facts here are the 'reprisals', which are perfectly consistent with being due to a disruptive conduct in the work environment (which is the other proven fact, at least judging by what happened and was said later). There's nothing more, all the rest are just claims without any proof, speculations, and declarations by believers that they believe him. A nothingburger which managed to reach the US Congress due to, well, other believers supporting him in his crusade.

I can follow your line of reasoning that "UFO nuts" are facing some kind of discrimination at work, but I find it hard to accept that this motivation would lead to murders, or, even if you think that is not supported, other people being "harmed or injured", as in, physical attacks, which they perceive is due to keeping the UFO program secret.

 

[Mauro]

I can follow your line of reasoning that "UFO nuts" are facing some kind of discrimination at work,

I'm not claiming that. I'm claiming that any nut will face reprisals at work when his nuttiness starts impinging on the work environment (and especially if it degenerates into invented accusations and slandering). It's a very different thing from what you say in your sentence.

but I find it hard to accept that this motivation would lead to murders,

'Murders'? That's new to me. I may have missed the news, have there been murders proved to be connected to the Grutsch affair, or are you just spicing up your prose?

or, even if you think that is not supported, other people being "harmed or injured", as in, physical attacks, which they perceive is due to keeping the UFO program secret.

Yes, I have seen no support for these claims, so I think they are unsupported. However, I can also easily think of workplace controversies degenerating into a brawl (*), so "harm and injuries" and physical attacks would not mean much by themselves, even when supported.


(*) I have been personally assaulted twice in my work career. No worries: the aggressors had zero idea of what bare-hand fighting is, while I was a reasonable 2nd dan karate black belt. They were easy to subdue without needing to harm them.

 

[Rick Robson]

There seems to be serious criminal acts in connection with keeping this program secret, whatever it is.

If its merely a program to retrieve downed foreign planes, I don't see why it was operated so secretly and illegally.

I think the probability still stands about that secret program being precisely a recovery of foreign/adversary crafts (airplanes or whatever), given the informative points @Duke gave about the possible criminal acts connected to it:

Recovery of foreign/adversary assets such as downed aircraft or other military equipment can be highly classified for a number of reasons. First and foremost, you don't want the other guys to know you've recovered their assets. Additional, such efforts are often undertaken with the assistance of individuals within the service of the nation that lost the asset. You burn them, and the next guy who's considered providing such assistance will think twice about doing so.

As for Grusch's kind of ramblings on the possible physics explanations for the alleged UFO phenomenon, as expected nothing can be surmised from his usual speculations.

 

[Mendel]

Well then speculation also says that Grusch has been either lying about the whole UFO stuff or has been duped around albeit his own first-hand witness allegations, right? Because the speculation I some times heard that he misunderstood their sources err, I found far-fetched for a man who has a degree (Bachelor, IIRC) in physics.

We skeptics note that much of Grusch's more outlandish claims about craft or bodies are, by his own words, hearsay and not direct knowledge. We don't see sufficient reason to trust it, and the "speculations" about how Grusch might have come to these claims with no substance to them are the explanation for our lack of trust. But the main take-away here is the lack of substantive evidence.

Now the ICIG complaint doesn't deal with any of that. In it, Grusch claims the reprisal, and this:

3. Mr. Grusch previously served as a fully cleared member of the United States (US) Government's UAP Task Force. He has direct knowledge that certain IC elements have purposely and intentionally withheld and/or concealed UAP-related classified information from the US Congress. He has direct knowledge that this classified information has been withheld and/or concealed by the involved IC elements to purposely and intentionally thwart legitimate Congressional oversight of the UAP Program.

Content from External Source

That's the extent of Grusch's claims that the ICIG would have investigated.

Again, which of these claims have "merit", we don't know.

I can follow your line of reasoning that "UFO nuts" are facing some kind of discrimination at work, but I find it hard to accept that this motivation would lead to murders, or, even if you think that is not supported, other people being "harmed or injured", as in, physical attacks, which they perceive is due to keeping the UFO program secret.

Not a claim Grusch made to the ICIG (as far as we know). In the hearing, Grusch affirmed "harmed or injured", which he would as he perceives his career to have been harmed. Grusch did not claim "harmed AND injured". Grusch did not claim knowledge of physical injury or murder under oath.

For reference, here is what Grusch said regarding "inter-dimensional" from the hearing:

Only a theoretical framework discussion

Content from External Source

Grusch has zero proof of this. "Theoretical framework discussion" could stand for "bar discussion with another UFO believer" such as e.g. Travis Taylor. "Inter-dimensional visitors" are NOT a claim of his, they're admittedly a theoretical speculation.

 

[Mendel]

'Murders'? That's new to me. I may have missed the news, have there been murders proved to be connected to the Grutsch affair, or are you just spicing up your prose?

Tim Burchett (00:53:24):
Have anyone been murdered that you would think that you know of or have heard of, I guess?

David Charles Grusch (00:53:29):
I have to be careful asking that question. I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.

Content from External Source

So, hearsay, again.

(And if the context wasn't "in efforts to cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technology", it could even apply to people with theories about the JFK shooting.)

 

[Curious George]

'Murders'? That's new to me. I may have missed the news, have there been murders proved to be connected to the Grutsch affair, or are you just spicing up your prose?

My support was in my last post, but I can repeat it again:

Tim Burchett (00:53:24):Have anyone been murdered that you would think that you know of or have heard of, I guess?

David Charles Grusch (00:53:29):I have to be careful asking that question. I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.

"Do you have any personal knowledge of people who have been harmed or injured in efforts to cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technology?" - Burchett"Yes. Personally."-Grusch, under oath

"Grusch had stated to myself, Rep. Burchett and another member ... that there were people that were hurt, having this information, and keeping this information safe, and or trying to come forward with this information. What I can tell you is I believe that claim after now"-Luna

 

[Rick Robson]

We skeptics note that much of Grusch's more outlandish claims about craft or bodies are, by his own words, hearsay and not direct knowledge. We don't see sufficient reason to trust it, and the "speculations" about how Grusch might have come to these claims with no substance to them are the dxplanation for our lack of trust. But the main take-away here is the lack of evidence.

Well, and I'm for one that doesn't need to be a sceptic to note it about his claims .

 

[Mendel]

My support was in my last post, but I can repeat it again:

Please use this button for external content:

When you use the "quote" button, it won't show up in replies.

"Grusch had stated to myself, Rep. Burchett and another member ... that there were people that were hurt, having this information, and keeping this information safe, and or trying to come forward with this information. What I can tell you is I believe that claim after now"-Luna

Content from External Source

Luna SAYS that Grusch SAYS that he knows someone who SAYS they have been hurt. That's double hearsay, not evidence.

What I would like is for someone to come forward and state that they have been hurt, and talk about how they were hurt. I'd also take the result of an ICIG investigation into this.

 

[Curious George]

Please use this button for external content:

When you use the "quote" button, it won't show up in replies.

Thanks for the tip!

Luna SAYS that Grusch SAYS that he knows someone who SAYS they have been hurt. That's double hearsay, not evidence.

What I would like is for someone to come forward and state that they have been hurt, and talk about how they were hurt. I'd also take the result of an ICIG investigation into this.

I agree. What I find important is when Luna says "I can tell you is I believe that claim after now", meaning that the ICIG has confirmed the claims of Mr. Grusch, which were indirect. Also, Grusch has personally been hurt, and the ICIG has apparently confirmed that as well. So we meet your criteria.

 

[Rick Robson]

I agree. What I find important is when Luna says "I can tell you is I believe that claim after now", meaning that the ICIG has confirmed the claims of Mr. Grusch, which were indirect. Also, Grusch has personally been hurt, and the ICIG has apparently confirmed that as well. So we meet your criteria.

Good points. And important to remind them to us.

 

[Mendel]

I agree. What I find important is when Luna says "I can tell you is I believe that claim after now", meaning that the ICIG has confirmed the claims of Mr. Grusch, which were indirect.

Luna did not say that the ICIG believes that claim.
The ICIG may have presented facts that are not sufficient evidence, but that led Luna to believe anyway. (This happens often in UFOlogy.)

Also, Grusch has personally been hurt, and the ICIG has apparently confirmed that as well. So we meet your criteria.

I don't remember that Grusch claimed he had been physically injured; it certainly is not part of the ICIG complaint reproduced in post #2 here. I don't understand how the ICIG confirmed it.

 

[Rick Robson]

The ICIG may have presented facts that are not sufficient evidence

What I can't understand is why (how come?) the ICGC ever present not sufficient evidence.

 

[Mauro]

My support was in my last post, but I can repeat it again:

So, as @Mendel already said, just hearsay. Or Grutsch making it all up (not necessarily willfuly or maliciously, misguidedly is already enough). Or just someone fooling around with Grutsch who fell to it hook, line and sinker. Or many other possible explanations, none of which involves aliens, dimensions or broken physical laws (!).

This whole affair is just an unsupported nothing blown out of proportions for psychological ("I want to believe") and/or political ("I want them UFO believers votes") reasons. And the one who could come out worse off from all this is Grutsch himself, goaded and then used to give a sweared testimony which, I imagine, could expose him to slandering charges. We will see what happens, in the meantime I'd rather move on.

 

[Mendel]

What I can't understand is why (how come?) the ICGC ever present not sufficient evidence.

hypothetically:
ICIG: "we found the person Grusch claimed to have been harmed, and confirmed that they had a car accident and an extended hospital stay a week after they shared information about X with person Y. While we can't prove these events are connected, we can't rule it out, either."
Luna (to herself): "I knew it, it's true!"

This whole affair is just an unsupported nothing blown out of proportions

as yet (and possibly forever) unsupported, but that could change?
if true, "the USG has a secret UAP program where they analyse NHI material" would be big, so the proportion you blow this to depends on how much you trust Grusch (or how much you believe in such a program to begin with).

Why was David Grusch not part of that SCIF session?

 

[2pint]

hypothetically:
ICIG: "we found the person Grusch claimed to have been harmed, and confirmed that they had a car accident and an extended hospital stay a week after they shared information about X with person Y. While we can't prove these events are connected, we can't rule it out, either."
Luna (to herself): "I knew it, it's true!"



as yet (and possibly forever) unsupported, but that could change?
if true, "the USG has a secret UAP program where they analyse NHI material" would be big, so the proportion you blow this to depends on how much you trust Grusch (or how much you believe in such a program to begin with).

Why was David Grusch not part of that SCIF session?

As far as I am aware, he still hasn't had his clearance re-approved.

There's obviously still too much conjecture on the part of both believers and skeptics right now.

I think it's a far assessment that after yesterday, the interest factor has been raised. To say the whole thing is a nothingburger seems a bit dismissive and short sighted to me, clearly SOMETHING is being kept from Congress.

I am excited to finally get an answer as to whether this whole UAP subject is BS or not. I've got my opinion on it but in all fairness, it really doesn't matter what I think. The reality will be what it is.

 

[Mauro]

as yet (and possibly forever) unsupported, but that could change?

Sure it could! Even a dismally low prior probability (as in the Grutsch case) can be overcome by a strong enough evidence. We will see.

 

[JMartJr]

What I find important is when Luna says "I can tell you is I believe that claim after now"

To be fair, she believed him "before now" as well. It is not as if her mind was changed.

 

[Curious George]

Luna did not say that the ICIG believes that claim.
The ICIG may have presented facts that are not sufficient evidence, but that led Luna to believe anyway. (This happens often in UFOlogy.)

I don't remember that Grusch claimed he had been physically injured; it certainly is not part of the ICIG complaint reproduced in post #2 here. I don't understand how the ICIG confirmed it.

I literally don't have that "external quote" button you taught me to use.


Luna didn't say the ICIG confirmed that claim. Moskowitz did:

“This is the first real briefing we’ve had,” @JaredEMoskowitz says, adding it’s first time the IG let members know where they land on the merits of Grusch’s claims. All they learned inside from intelligence IG is classified, and he says the info “actually moved the needle.”

Source: https://twitter.com/ask_a_pol/status/1745823479197229453


So its clear that in that meeting, the ICIG told members the results of its investigations on Grusch's claims, which it has had over 2 years to investigate. Now that we have context for what happened in that meeting, we can judge comments by other members. There's a total of 4 people who re-iterated in various statements that they found Grusch to be credible and his claims to have merit after attending the meeting.

Based on what we heard many of Grusch claims have merit!

Source: https://twitter.com/JaredEMoskowitz/status/1745852400630456618

I think everybody left there thinking and knowing that [UFO whistleblower David] Grusch is legit.

Source: https://twitter.com/colmanjones/status/1745862522429714580

Grusch [was] determined to be credible in some of the things that we discussed today.

Source: https://twitter.com/MvonRen/status/1746061155557384701

If there was any doubt in anyone’s mind that [Grusch] isn’t credible… after leaving [the ICIG briefing], where I’m at is that I feel that he’s a very credible witness.

Source: https://twitter.com/MvonRen/status/1746066769893347686

I think the important take-away from this, Grusch isn't just lying, a grifter, or repeating UFOnut stories - that at least some of his claims were investigated and verified, so there is something here.

 

[Rick Robson]

To be fair, she believed him "before now" as well. It is not as if her mind was changed.

Would you mind giving me some clear evidence to support this claim?
Because my search couldn't find anything that would do that, alas.
These are the former Luna statements I found having more relevance for that matter:

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...ers-brace-for-a-fight-over-government-secrets
"In July 2023 Luna argued the SCIF with Grusch would help lawmakers better understand the type of legislation they need to write regarding UAPs. She said she supports legislation that would declassify information on the phenomena."

https://themessenger.com/politics/f...cy?utm_source=onsite&utm_medium=related_story
" 'If these are programs that are being set up without congressional oversight and are responsible for, you know, billions of dollars being lost, that could be going towards other things. I think that that's something that absolutely is pertinent,' Luna told FOX 13." . (November 2023)

 

[Duke]

Would you mind giving me some clear evidence to support this claim?
Because my search couldn't find anything that would do that, alas.
These are the former Luna statements I found having more relevance for that matter:

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...ers-brace-for-a-fight-over-government-secrets
"In July 2023 Luna argued the SCIF with Grusch would help lawmakers better understand the type of legislation they need to write regarding UAPs. She said she supports legislation that would declassify information on the phenomena."

https://themessenger.com/politics/f...cy?utm_source=onsite&utm_medium=related_story
" 'If these are programs that are being set up without congressional oversight and are responsible for, you know, billions of dollars being lost, that could be going towards other things. I think that that's something that absolutely is pertinent,' Luna told FOX 13." . (November 2023)

Wasn't Rep Luna one of the three Congress persons who went to Eglin AFB to talk with aircrew about a UFO they'd reported?

 

[JMartJr]

Would you mind giving me some clear evidence to support this claim?

I was basing that in part on the letter she signed to Speaker McCarthy:



That seems to me to accept as true Grusch's claims that there is a secret program about which Congress is being denied information. It does not ask for a committee to find out IF these claims are true, it asks for a committee to expose an existing conspiracy.

I will admit that this might not be her sincere view, or those of the other signatories -- she may be playing up to a block of voters who believe in such conspiracies, or adding weight to a request to be handed a special committee outside the control of other existing committees by making the object seem more of a threat. But it's what she told the Speaker that she believes.

 

[Rick Robson]

Wasn't Rep Luna one of the three Congress persons who went to Eglin AFB to talk with aircrew about a UFO they'd reported?

Good question, will have to find out. What I know is that she worked for the US Air Force, and I think it was precisely in Eglin AFB.

 

[Curious George]

Good question, will have to find out. What I know is that she worked for the US Air Force, and I think it was precisely in Eglin AFB.

yes, she was there

 

[NorCal Dave]

I think the important take-away from this, Grusch isn't just lying, a grifter, or repeating UFOnut stories - that at least some of his claims were investigated and verified, so there is something here.

No. We don't know that. What we know is that 4 congresspeople, have said that they think Grusch's claims "have merit" or that he is "legit". One cannot conclude from these statements anything beyond some congresspeople think some of Grusch's claims have some merit. That is all. As we don't know what claims and how much merit they may have, we're not much further along than before.

As noted above, in the case of Burchett and Luna, this is nothing new. Burchett is the reason UFO promoters and conspiracy guys like George Knapp and Jeremy (secret videos of balloons) Corbel were allowed to enter statements into the congressional record and sit behind the Grush at the hearings. As for Luna, she claims and believes a lot of stuff (and I'm a registered Republican):

In June 2022, Luna said of the 2020 United States presidential election, "I believe that President Trump won that election, and I do believe that voter fraud occurred." The previous month, she attended a red carpet event and screening of 2000 Mules, a film that claims to show evidence of widespread electoral fraud in the 2020 election.[33] She authored the 2023 Christian children's book, The Legend of Naranja, which suggests that Biden stole the 2020 election.[34]

Content from External Source

She has said her anti-abortion stance originates from having dissected a chicken egg in college and seeing the chick react to a scalpel blade: "God was using that opportunity to really wake me up."[3]

Content from External Source

Luna has claimed her father raised her to follow Messianic Judaism, an evangelical movement that incorporates Jewish traditions into Protestant Christianity, and that she is "a small fraction Ashkenazi".[57][58] Members of her extended family have said her father was Catholic and that "they were not aware of him practicing any form of Judaism while Luna was growing up".[2] Her mother has said that Luna's father was a "Christian that embraced the Messianic faith" after getting clean from drug addiction. Her grandfather, Heinrich Mayerhofer, identified as Catholic when he immigrated to Canada in 1954.[2]

Content from External Source

In 2020, Luna claimed in a PragerU documentary that her "entire mother's side of the family and father's side of the family on both sides are from Mexico".[5] Her paternal grandfather, however, was German.[2]

Content from External Source

In 2019, Luna said that she suffered "enduring trauma" after experiencing a "home invasion" by her landlord at 4 a.m. while stationed at Whiteman Air Force Base. "Had my friend Jeremy not been there to protect me, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be standing right here in front of you guys right now."[2]

Luna's roommate said she did not remember such an incident. Instead, the roommate recalled a daytime break-in when Luna was not home. A Warrensburg Police Department report described the July 2010 incident as a "burglary not in progress". The report states that Luna and her roommate had reported to their landlord that the home's rear door had repeatedly been left open, so the landlord installed new locks, deadbolts and latches, but the problem persisted. Police records indicate that no suspect was arrested or charged in the case.[2][62][63][64]

Content from External Source

In 2019, she took her grandmother's maiden name, Luna, to represent her Hisanic heritage.[1]
Luna began describing herself as Hispanic in 2019; when she registered to vote in 2015, she marked her ethnicity as "White, not of Hispanic origin."[2]

Content from External Source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Paulina_Luna

I'm just saying, she may hear one thing and interpret as she sees fit.

 

[JMartJr]

That seems to me to accept as true Grusch's claims that there is a secret program about which Congress is being denied information.

...and to be fair to Congresswoman Luna, her statements on UFOlogy in general have been orders of magnitude more restrained than those of Congressman "They could turn us into a charcoal briquette" Burchett.

 

[Rick Robson]

No. We don't know that. What we know is that 4 congresspeople, have said that they think Grusch's claims "have merit" or that he is "legit".

Again, please see above @Curious George's post addressing Moskowitz assertion that Grusch's claims have merit. Based on what they were briefed, none of them ended up "thinking" his claims have merit.

Having said that, Moskowitz's statement that the info “actually moved the needle" is rather a bit vague in my viewpoint. Therefore, given the lack of further public info nobody can make a judgement of what was really revealed to them by the ICIG, and I'm not sure it will ever some day come to the public sphere. Who really knows anyway.

 

[Rick Robson]

No. We don't know that. What we know is that 4 congresspeople, have said that they think Grusch's claims "have merit" or that he is "legit". One cannot conclude from these statements anything beyond some congresspeople think some of Grusch's claims have some merit. That is all. As we don't know what claims and how much merit they may have, we're not much further along than before.

As noted above, in the case of Burchett and Luna, this is nothing new. Burchett is the reason UFO promoters and conspiracy guys like George Knapp and Jeremy (secret videos of balloons) Corbel were allowed to enter statements into the congressional record and sit behind the Grush at the hearings. As for Luna, she claims and believes a lot of stuff (and I'm a registered Republican):

In June 2022, Luna said of the 2020 United States presidential election, "I believe that President Trump won that election, and I do believe that voter fraud occurred." The previous month, she attended a red carpet event and screening of 2000 Mules, a film that claims to show evidence of widespread electoral fraud in the 2020 election.[33] She authored the 2023 Christian children's book, The Legend of Naranja, which suggests that Biden stole the 2020 election.[34]

Content from External Source

She has said her anti-abortion stance originates from having dissected a chicken egg in college and seeing the chick react to a scalpel blade: "God was using that opportunity to really wake me up."[3]

Content from External Source

Luna has claimed her father raised her to follow Messianic Judaism, an evangelical movement that incorporates Jewish traditions into Protestant Christianity, and that she is "a small fraction Ashkenazi".[57][58] Members of her extended family have said her father was Catholic and that "they were not aware of him practicing any form of Judaism while Luna was growing up".[2] Her mother has said that Luna's father was a "Christian that embraced the Messianic faith" after getting clean from drug addiction. Her grandfather, Heinrich Mayerhofer, identified as Catholic when he immigrated to Canada in 1954.[2]

Content from External Source

In 2020, Luna claimed in a PragerU documentary that her "entire mother's side of the family and father's side of the family on both sides are from Mexico".[5] Her paternal grandfather, however, was German.[2]

Content from External Source

In 2019, Luna said that she suffered "enduring trauma" after experiencing a "home invasion" by her landlord at 4 a.m. while stationed at Whiteman Air Force Base. "Had my friend Jeremy not been there to protect me, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be standing right here in front of you guys right now."[2]

Luna's roommate said she did not remember such an incident. Instead, the roommate recalled a daytime break-in when Luna was not home. A Warrensburg Police Department report described the July 2010 incident as a "burglary not in progress". The report states that Luna and her roommate had reported to their landlord that the home's rear door had repeatedly been left open, so the landlord installed new locks, deadbolts and latches, but the problem persisted. Police records indicate that no suspect was arrested or charged in the case.[2][62][63][64]

Content from External Source

In 2019, she took her grandmother's maiden name, Luna, to represent her Hisanic heritage.[1]
Luna began describing herself as Hispanic in 2019; when she registered to vote in 2015, she marked her ethnicity as "White, not of Hispanic origin."[2]

Content from External Source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Paulina_Luna

I'm just saying, she may hear one thing and interpret as she sees fit.

Surprising to me seeing a post with such a political content having been allowed on this topic. But maybe I'm wrong and it doesn't contradict the forum headlines. Anyway, in my opinion that post of yours turns out to be a bit derailing.

 

[Ann K]

Surprising to me seeing a post with such a political content having been allowed on this topic.

I disagree. The post doesn't discuss politics at all, but mostly the personality quirks of one of the people involved. Their prior behavior and statements of belief matter, because this is a discussion about "he said, they said". If it were a thread about material evidence only, we wouldn't be having this discussion, but as you may have noticed, material evidence is pretty thin on the ground on the topic of UFOs.

 

[Mendel]

Surprising to me seeing a post with such a political content having been allowed on this topic. But maybe I'm wrong and it doesn't contradict the forum headlines. Anyway, in my opinion that post of yours turns out to be a bit derailing.

Use the "report" link and see what staff decide.

@NorCal Dave is discussing Luna's credibility, not her politics. Her credibility matters to this topic because her words have been used here to draw inferences on what went on in the SCIF meeting with the ICIG.

 

[Rick Robson]

Their prior behavior and statements of belief matter, because this is a discussion about "he said, they said".

Sorry then, I thought we were discussing about "whether or not she said", which would demand some concrete instance of the person's statement in question.

 

[Rick Robson]

Use the "report" link and see what staff decide.

As I just said, I misunderstood the true intention of that post. Anyway, as nothing is wrong with that let us move on please.

 

[Mendel]

I think the important take-away from this, Grusch isn't just lying, a grifter, or repeating UFOnut stories - that at least some of his claims were investigated and verified, so there is something here.

Let me first summarize your post—please correct me if I'm wrong.
• Moskowitz confirms ICIG Monheim reported "on the merits of Grusch’s claims".
• He claims there was new information, because it “actually moved the needle.”
• He also said, "many of Grusch claims have merit!"
• Burchett said, "Grusch is legit"
• Nancy Mace said, "Grusch [was] determined to be credible in some of the things".
• She also said, "Private contractors should be on that witness list".
• Luna said, "I feel that he’s a very credible witness."

(Note that even credible witnesses can be mistaken.)

Now, as I've explained before, Grusch's published ICIG submission did not involve any "UFOnut stories", it involved 1) a UAP-related project concealed from Congress, and 2) whistleblower reprisal.

I've always opined that these claims are somewhat credible: that Grusch may have reason to suspect reprisals, justified or not; and that he may well have found a secret project, the legality of which he was unable to determine.

Nothing in your quotes gives me the confidence to believe that Grusch knows more than this.
The public hearing indicated that the secret project may have been legally removed from oversight by locating it at a contractor with fewer reporting requirements.

There is still no evidence that a crime has been committed.
There is still no evidence that the US has NHI material or bodies.
In summa, there is still no evidence that this is more than a "nothingburger".

 

[John J.]

Well then speculation also says that Grusch has been either lying about the whole UFO stuff or has been duped around albeit his own first-hand witness allegations, right? Because the speculation I some times heard that he misunderstood their sources err, I found far-fetched for a man who has a degree (Bachelor, IIRC) in physics.

From what Mr Grusch has said, he hasn't been in a position to examine any evidence that would benefit from evaluation by someone with a physics degree. He hasn't seen any physical evidence at all.
Having a degree in anything isn't necessarily useful in assessing if someone else's verbal account is reliable, if that account doesn't contain novel, testable information.

Traditionally, the armed forces (and many civil employers involved in technology) had many people in highly technical roles who hadn't acquired a university degree; they gained their proficiencies through apprenticeship-type programs and /or trade-related training. Maybe less common over the past couple of decades. I'm lucky enough to know some (middle-aged) engineers who trained this way whose knowledge in their respective spheres far exceeds that of the average new graduate (also their wider understanding of science/ technology, and indeed general knowledge IMHO).

There are quite a few instances of people with respectable degrees- and doctorates- advancing or supporting implausible theories in UFOlogy, think Jacques Vallee, John Mack. Some religious groups are eager to point to the (tiny minority of) scientists who believe the Earth was created in 7 days around 6,000 years ago. More generally, even well-regarded professional scientists can make- and stand by, at least for a while- howling errors or misconceptions; re. Fleischman and Pons with cold fusion, and Fred Hoyle whose pioneering work on stellar nucleosynthesis didn't prevent him from believing that archaeopteryx fossils were fakes (debunked) and musing that an outbreak of meningitis in a specific small town in England was brought by a comet (epidemiologically silly, and unhelpful).

Right now there will be physics graduates doing their best for the rulers of, e.g., North Korea or Iran, just as there will be chemistry graduates working for drug cartels. As per the wider population (and graduates of all disciplines) there will be some physics graduates who are mislead by others, who have unusual or erroneous personal beliefs, who falsify results, etc. etc.

(I'm not claiming that physics graduates are more prone to these traits than anyone else!)

So I don't know if Mr Grusch misunderstood his sources, or if he has been deliberately misled, or if he's reporting an important objective truth that he's been made aware of, but I don't think his having a degree adds weight to any one of those explanations (or any other) being correct.

[Edited, 23:03 to add: Just to clarify, I think it's unlikely that Grusch has found "an important objective truth that he's been made aware of", but that's more to do with general context, i.e. the total lack of convincing evidence of alien craft crashing / landing anywhere, anywhen; the total lack of evidence for any technologies or information of intelligent extraterrestrial origin being used by anyone, and the "believer" assumption that all of the many claimed alien craft are seized by shadowy US agencies (or counterparts in other nations, acting in precisely the same manner) before anyone else can take decent footage or acquire physical parts of the craft, and all the "acquiring agencies" have managed to enforce essentially 100%-effective secrecy for decades.]

 

[Rick Robson]

He hasn't seen any physical evidence at all.

If you're not speculating, how do you know that?

So I don't know if Mr Grusch misunderstood his sources, or if he has been deliberately misled, or if he's reporting an important objective truth that he's been made aware of, but I don't think his having a degree adds weight to any one of those explanations (or any other) being correct.

The problem here is that we're talking about probability on that issue. Yes indeed, it's not a requisite to have a degree in physics in order to differentiate what's nonsense/fantasized from what has some truth to it. However, no doubt you ought to possess at least a basic physics knowledge to make you less prone to being deceived or deliberately misled for that matter.

 

[John J.]

If you're not speculating, how do you know that?

Because he says so.

 

[Rick Robson]

Because he says so.

I beg your pardon, but again, would you please provide some quote to back up his claim?