“Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets" established by House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

So something will be happening today, it seems.
I will leave uncommented the fact that this man, who obviously caused the unedited publication one day before 80,000 pages are published, believes that they will be published unedited. He won't read a single word of it anyway.
There are various sources, let's pick this one:

External Quote:

Trump to release 80,000 pages of JFK files on Tuesday



President Trump announced he will release 80,000 pages of unredacted files Tuesday about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, after promising on the campaign trail to declassify the documents.

"While we're here, I thought it would be appropriate — we are, tomorrow, announcing and giving all of the Kennedy files. So, people have been waiting for decades for this, and I've instructed my people … lots of different people, [Director of National Intelligence] Tulsi Gabbard, that they must be released tomorrow," the president told reporters while touring the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C.

"You got a lot of reading. I don't believe we're going to redact anything. I said, 'just don't redact, you can't redact,'" the president said, adding it will be about 80,000 pages that he described as "interesting."

He said he has "heard about them" when asked if he has seen what's in the files; he added, "I'm not doing summaries, you'll write your own summary."

Trump in January signed an executive order directing the release of federal government documents related to the assassinations of Kennedy, former Attorney General Robert F .Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.

The order instructed the director of national intelligence and attorney general to present a plan within 15 days for the "full and complete release of records relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy." [...]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5199289-trump-releases-80k-pages-jf-kennedy/
 
I wonder how many people will read all 80,000 pages.

Something AI might be good for uploading it all and then asking it specific questions or to summarise findings etc etc
 
I wonder how many people will read all 80,000 pages.

Something AI might be good for uploading it all and then asking it specific questions or to summarise findings etc etc
The files already have a structure, and some kind of index, and summaries, because people worked with them in the pre-digital age. So nobody needs to read all of it.

AI can't really understand its input, so the output is always going to be mediocre, and any researcher is going to have to read the important pages themselves. Though a lot of people are going to get their opinions from youtube, from people twice removed from the actual documents.

Maybe we could make this a test case:
• is AI going to be instrumental in finding out something new of note?
• is AI going to get new bunk started (or old bunk supported)?

Look to the people who are already experts on the case, my guess is that if there's new insights (however small), they're going to come from them, because they can now confirm or disprove (or just confirm, in the case of conspiracy theorists) thoughts they already had.
 
Last edited:
The files already have a structure, and some kind of index, and summaries, because people worked with them in the pre-digital age. So nobody needs to read all of it.

AI can't really understand its input, so the output is always going to be mediocre, and any researcher is going to have to read the important pages themselves. Though a lot of people are going to get their opinions from youtube, from people twice removed from the actual documents.

Maybe we could make this a test case:
• is AI going to be instrumental in finding out something new of note?
• is AI going to get new bunk started (or old bunk supported)?

Look to the people who are already experts on the case, my guess is that if there's new insights (however small), they're going to come from them, because they can now confirm or disprove (or just confirm, in the case of conspiracy theorists) thoughts they already had.

Information-theory can help. It can find the pages that are the least predictable to someone, or something, trained on the rest of the corpus, and the already publicly-known information in the field. Basically, throw out the stuff we know already. In simple terms, the interesting information content of a page P can be measured as the difference in size between compressing prior-knowledge and prior-knowledge-plus-P. The links between AI and data compression have been reasonably strong for quite a while, Marcus Hutter founded a prize fund to reward advances in data (of knowledge in textual form) compression:
External Quote:
This compression contest is motivated by the fact that being able to compress well is closely related to acting intelligently, thus reducing the slippery concept of intelligence to hard file size numbers. In order to compress data, one has to find regularities in them, which is intrinsically difficult (many researchers live from analyzing data and finding compact models). So compressors beating the current "dumb" compressors need to be smart(er).
-- http://prize.hutter1.net/
For a while, the links were purely theoretical, but in the last decade they've started to become realised, and LLMs/transformers have started to shake up the scene:
External Quote:
Code:
                Compression                      Compressed size      Decompresser  Total size   Time (ns/byte)
Program           Options                       enwik8      enwik9     size (zip)   enwik9+prog  Comp Decomp   Mem Alg Note
-------           -------                     ----------  -----------  -----------  -----------  ----- -----   --- --- ----
nncp v3.2                                     14,915,298  106,632,363    628,955 xd 107,261,318 241871 238670  7600 Tr  88
cmix v21          -t                          14,623,723  107,963,380    281,387 sd 108,244,767 622949 638442 30950 CM  83
fx2-cmix                                                  110,351,665          0 xd 110,351,665        272072  8811 CM  97
tensorflow-compress v4                        15,905,037  113,542,413     55,283 sd 113,597,696 291394 290803 45360 LSTM 94
cmix-hp 10 Jun 2021                           15,957,339  113,712,798          0 xd 113,712,798 189420 194280  6873 CM  89
...
.1072 nncp
nncp is a free, experimental file compressor by Fabrice Bellard, released May 8, 2019. It uses a neural network model with dictionary preprocessing described in the paper Lossless Data Compression with Neural Networks.
-- https://mattmahoney.net/dc/text.html#1072

(And, yes, I appreciate that this is lossless compression which is an unnecessarily strict constraint. However, there's no way of expressing the amount of deviation from the source text as a cold hard number, yet, and this test demands cold hard comparable numbers.)

Anyway, AI definitely could, in the right hands, be helpful to identify the most surprising or contentious content of the dump.
 
Last edited:
Anyway, AI definitely could, in the right hands, be helpful to identify the most surprising or contentious content of the dump.
I'm not going to comment on the inanity of rehashing an investigation of an event that happened back in my college days. I'm not, I'm not ...well, I guess I just did.

But I had a meeting last night, where our society's president introduced the speaker with a long, complimentary, and apparently accurate biography. She looked in amazement and said "Where did you get THAT?", as she knew she hadn't written it. The president said "AI. Yes, really!".

AI could perhaps summarize the matter well if it's confined to pages of factual data, but as I recall conspiracy theories popped up within moments of the event, and if any of those were officially investigated I can imagine that AI would be led off through the petunia patch. I was in our grad students' communal office space when someone popped a head in the door and told us of the assassination, and one woman from Texas immediately said "Oh, it's those damn John Birchers that did it". Everyone had an opinion, but none of us had facts.
 
JFK files have dropped.
In accordance with President Donald Trump's directive , JFK Assassination Records Collection records previously withheld for classification have now been released. See link below

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2025

Good luck with that!
goodluck.jpg

Did they switch to braille half-way through?
 
Don't underestimate the difficulties of maintaining copies in the days of carbon paper, primitive copiers, and no internet!

Indeed! Reminds me of a journey to the National Archives back in my High School days, as an eager new reporter on the school newspaper, doing research for a story on UFOs (there had been a report in the area and thus some local interest.) The Blue Book files were fairly recently released, and we were excited to read through the wealth of exciting and revealing information... and found ourselves looking at the above sort of stuff, often with massive redactions. And some were negatives, with the bg black and the lettering in white. There were readable pages intermingled, but it was a slog to get through. At least there were the amazing pictures...
1960 battle creek mi ufo blue book.jpg

blue book actual UFO.jpg


But when you dump "the files," you get all the garbage that was stuck in the filing cabinet just to get it off somebody's desk mixed in with anything useful.
 
Don't underestimate the difficulties of maintaining copies in the days of carbon paper, primitive copiers, and no internet!
View attachment 78385

Don't worry, I can never be accused of that. My first job out of university was largely involved in document digitisation and archival. Fortunately, British Gas and Agip take better care of their technical diagrams better than the US government do their documents. No n-th generation copies. No scribbles either. I'm genuinely expecting there to be ciggy ash smears and coffee cup rings on some of them. (An attaboy and ten highly-prized internet plus points to the first person to find such.)
 
On the one hand, I'm thinking this could be a good case of "be careful what you wish for". If one has spent the last several decades "researching" the cover-up and connecting the conspiratorial dots in something like the Kennedy assassination, one can always imagine and speculate what is being hidden in the secret government archives. Along comes Trump and Luna granting what has been demanded for years, only to reveal that one's speculations about cover-ups and conspiracies is just that, speculation.

I'm sure some will twist and contort as hard as possible to make something in the 1000s of documents fit their own pet theory. And I'm betting some of them will breeze through these documents as fast as possible to be one of the first to come out on YouTube or a blog while the story is new and active.

Then there will be those that claim this is still all part of a cover up:

1742400023426.png


The smoking gun evidence is right here, underlined, but nefarious forces have made it unreadable. It's still a cover-up! It will take a while, but I'd imagine most of these can be read at some point, maybe even with AI. Even the last line above can be sorta figured out:

"The CI(?) Staff reiterating(?) that the..."

Once one knows the context of a document, it would be easier.

If all these documents basically just back up the conventional theory that, self-aggrandizing and slightly lucky Oswald acted alone, then how likely is it that the Kennedy conspiracy folks follow the UFO conspiracy folks down the road of ever more secret cabals, secret governments within governments and outside government forces controlling the secrets.

If these documents do NOT offer evidence of a conspiracy, that will be proof that the evidence of the conspiracy is still hidden. There must be more documents.
 
Anna Paulina Luna said on twitter that she spoke to Eric Burlison and he will be bringing on David Grusch to advise him on the investigations

Source: www.x.com/realannapaulina/status/1902425434073293118

As I said here, I thought that would be the case: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/"task-force-on-the-declassification-of-federal-secrets-established-by-house-committee-on-oversight-and-government-reform.14013/#post-336506

And that's why you grift. Grift long, grift hard, and eventually it pays off with a cushy advisory position. Why aren't they teaching the kids this in school?
 
And that's why you grift. Grift long, grift hard, and eventually it pays off with a cushy advisory position. Why aren't they teaching the kids this in school?
At school, they make it difficult for you to cheat in exams. Only the good cheaters graduate. From university onwards it gets a bit more complex, but the monetization picks up speed on both sides. There's a logic to the system ;)
 
Anna Paulina Luna said on twitter that she spoke to Eric Burlison and he will be bringing on David Grusch to advise him on the investigations

Source: www.x.com/realannapaulina/status/1902425434073293118

As I said here, I thought that would be the case: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/"task-force-on-the-declassification-of-federal-secrets-established-by-house-committee-on-oversight-and-government-reform.14013/#post-336506
I'm pretty skeptical this will actually happen if for no other reason than Mr. Grusch's issues with his security clearance.
 
I'm pretty skeptical this will actually happen if for no other reason than Mr. Grusch's issues with his security clearance.
Can anyone here clarify something on this? If I have classified information, which I obtained lawfully (or maybe even I didn't), is it the case that in order for members of Congress (who do not need to be cleared by the DoD in order to hear classified information) to hear the classified information that I already know, that I must be bestowed a security clearance by the DoD? I can't conceptualize how that possibly makes any sense. The DoD cannot block Congress from learning classified information it is statutorily/constitutionally entitled to know. How is it possibly the case that the DoD can legally prevent me from providing Congress with classified information I know? Congress and the executive are coequal branches. So how is it possibly the case that the DoD has any say over whether Congress is legally allowed to hear the information David Grusch says he wants to tell them? If I stumble across some documents about nuclear material smuggling, not through any illegal means on my part, and I want to tell Senator Mark Warner about it in a secure and official manner, am I legally prohibited from doing so until the DoD gives permission for Mark Warner to hear this information? I don't understand how David Grusch not having a security clearance is blocking him from telling Congress anything.
 
Can anyone here clarify something on this? If I have classified information, which I obtained lawfully (or maybe even I didn't), is it the case that in order for members of Congress (who do not need to be cleared by the DoD in order to hear classified information) to hear the classified information that I already know, that I must be bestowed a security clearance by the DoD? I can't conceptualize how that possibly makes any sense.
I was thinking Mr. Grusch being brought on in advisory role to the task force would mean he would be exposed to new classified information, so that's why I was thinking about his clearance status. Long comment with relevant USC statues below, but I think you are right that he is free to report classified information he already knows to Congress regardless of his security clearance status.

My understanding is that only certain committees have access to specific Intelligence Community (IC) classified information, like House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) and Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), House/Senate Armed Services Committees, etc, but I don't know details about who gets to see exactly what.

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) can receive complaints about misappropriation, illegal activity, withholding classified IC related information from Congress, etc, and then can pass it on to Congress if appropriate. This is what Grusch was doing with with PPD-19 filing.

https://ia903401.us.archive.org/7/items/grusch_icig/David-Grusch-PPD-19-Procedural-Filing_text.pdf
External Quote:
2. The Intelligence Community Inspector General ("ICIG"') has jurisdiction to receive a report of Urgent Concern when the disclosure involves, among other things, "a false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity"' 50 U.S.C. § 3033(k)(5)(G)(ii). Moreover, jurisdiction exists when "an action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(92)(A) of title 5, United States Code, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection E(3)(B) in response to an employee's reporting an urgent concern...". 50 U.S.C. § 3033(k)(5)(G)(iii).

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-telated 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.

[...]

7. Consistent with 50 U.S.C § 3033(k)(5(D)(ii), Mr. Grusch now wishes to directly communicate the classified specifics of his UAP-related Urgent Concern(s) to the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) and the US House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI). Accordingly, we hereby request that your office facilitate Mr. Grusch's direct communication with the SSCI and HPSCI.

His complaint was "urgent" as defined in (G)(i)-(ii) below, and the ICIG assessed the complaint "appears credible" within 14 days as required by (B) below, so Grusch was sent to HPSCI and SSCI by director ODNI as required by (C). Incidentally, this shows that "urgent and credible" are just procedural legal definitions and not the assessment of the ICIG about the substance of Grusch's claims after a lengthy investigation.

50 U.S.C § 3033(k)(5)(A)-(G)
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml...section3033&num=0#substructure-location_k_5_A
External Quote:
(5)(A)(i) An employee of an element of the intelligence community, an employee assigned or detailed to an element of the intelligence community, or an employee of a contractor to the intelligence community who intends to report to Congress a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern may report such complaint or information in writing to the Inspector General.

(ii) The Inspector General shall-

(I) provide reasonable support necessary to ensure that an employee can report a complaint or information under this subparagraph in writing; and

(II) if such submission is not feasible, create a written record of the employee's verbal complaint or information and treat such written record as a written submission.

(B)(i) In accordance with clause (ii), the Inspector General shall determine whether a complaint or information reported under subparagraph (A) appears credible. Upon making such a determination, the Inspector General shall transmit to the Director a notice of that determination, together with the complaint or information.

(ii) The Inspector General shall make the determination under clause (i) with respect to a complaint or information under subparagraph (A) by not later than the end of the 14-calendar-day period beginning on the date on which the employee who reported the complaint or information confirms to the Inspector General the intent of the employee to report to Congress that complaint or information.

(C) Upon receipt of a transmittal from the Inspector General under subparagraph (B), the Director shall, within 7 calendar days of such receipt, forward such transmittal to the congressional intelligence committees, together with any comments the Director considers appropriate.

(D)(i) If the Inspector General does not find credible under subparagraph (B) a complaint or information submitted under subparagraph (A), or does not transmit the complaint or information to the Director in accurate form under subparagraph (B), the employee (subject to clause (ii)) may submit the complaint or information to Congress by contacting either or both of the congressional intelligence committees directly.

(ii) An employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee-

(I) before making such a contact, furnishes to the Director, through the Inspector General, a statement of the employee's complaint or information and notice of the employee's intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and

(II) obtains and follows from the Director, through the Inspector General, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with appropriate security practices.

(iii) A member or employee of one of the congressional intelligence committees who receives a complaint or information under this subparagraph does so in that member or employee's official capacity as a member or employee of such committee.

(E) The Inspector General shall notify an employee who reports a complaint or information to the Inspector General under this paragraph of each action taken under this paragraph with respect to the complaint or information. Such notice shall be provided not later than 3 days after any such action is taken.

(F) An action taken by the Director or the Inspector General under this paragraph shall not be subject to judicial review.

(G)(i) In this paragraph, the term "urgent concern" means any of the following:

(I) A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity of the Federal Government that is-

(aa) a matter of national security; and

(bb) not a difference of opinion concerning public policy matters.

(II) A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity.

(III) An action, including a personnel action described in section 2302(a)(2)(A) of title 5, constituting reprisal or threat of reprisal prohibited under subsection (g)(3)(B) of this section in response to an employee's reporting an urgent concern in accordance with this paragraph.

(ii) Within the executive branch, the Inspector General shall have sole authority to determine whether any complaint or information reported to the Inspector General is a matter of urgent concern under this paragraph.

Now with the establishment of AARO and a reporting mechanism, my understanding that any UAP related classified information can be shared with AARO in a secure setting, regardless of classification level, NDAs, or other laws or policies otherwise prohibiting the disclosure.

50 U.S.C § 3373b(a)(1)
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml...50-section3373b&num=0#substructure-location_a
External Quote:
(a) Mechanism for authorized reporting
(1) Establishment
The Secretary of Defense, acting through the head of the Office and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall establish a secure mechanism for authorized reporting of-
(A) any event relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena; and
(B) any activity or program by a department or agency of the Federal Government or a contractor of such a department or agency relating to unidentified anomalous phenomena, including with respect to material retrieval, material analysis, reverse engineering, research and development, detection and tracking, developmental or operational testing, and security protections and enforcement.
(a)(4)(B)
External Quote:
(B) Congressional notification
Not later than 72 hours after determining that an authorized disclosure relates to a restricted access activity, a special access program, or a compartmented access program that has not been explicitly and clearly reported to the congressional defense committees or the congressional intelligence committees, the Secretary shall report such disclosure to such committees and the congressional leadership.
(b)(1)(A)-(B)
External Quote:
(b) Protection for individuals making authorized disclosures
(1) Authorized disclosures
An authorized disclosure-
(A) shall not be subject to a nondisclosure agreement entered into by the individual who makes the disclosure;
(B) shall be deemed to comply with any regulation or order issued under the authority of Executive Order 13526 (50 U.S.C. 3161 note; relating to classified national security information) or chapter 18 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2271 et seq.); and
(C) is not a violation of section 798 of title 18 or other provision of law relating to the disclosure of information.
(d)(1)
External Quote:
(d) Definitions
In this section:
(1) The term "authorized disclosure" means a report of any information through, and in compliance with, the mechanism for authorized reporting established pursuant to subsection (a)(1).
 
Reporter Joe Khalil reports on twitter that Mr. Grusch will work as a staffer to Rep. Burlison, not on the HOC declassification task force.
External Quote:
UAP whistleblower David Grusch has officially been approved for and accepted a position to work on Congressman
@RepEricBurlison's personal office staff. Grusch's title will be "Senior Advisor" and will mostly advise on UAP/UFO related topics.

His roll will begin as a temporary 4-month post.
External Quote:
Important note here:

Grusch will NOT be working with the House Oversight Committee -the committee before which he once testified. He will only be working with/advising @RepEricBurlison , as we originally reported.

Burlison serves on Oversight Committee and the UAP Task Force.
Source: https://x.com/JoeKhalilTV/status/1903129094755061812

Ps. Mr. Khalil seems to be confusing the "UAP caucus" with "UAP Task Force", and last year after the HOC hearing, he incorrectly reported that Rep. Burchett entered Shellenberger's documents into the hearing record rather than Rep. Mace, so I am waiting for a more reliable source to confirm this.
 
I'm pretty skeptical this will actually happen if for no other reason than Mr. Grusch's issues with his security clearance.
Did Grusch have issues with his clearance? He had complained about having lost accesses, but afaik his clearance per se was not affected?
He'd be not very useful to support an Oversight committee member if he did not hold a clearance.
 
Could lack of clearance affect what questions you can be asked? Such as, "Were you aware of Operation 27bslash6 at this point?" where 27bslash6 is a classified program (as opposed to the website of humorist David Thorne).
 
If there are no classified materials in the SCIF beyond what Grusch brings with him, his clearance doesn't matter. He's there to answer questions, not the other way around. I've played pinochle in a SCIF and I've never even had a TS-SCI clearance.
Yeah exactly. Grusch is the one testifying to Congress. The classified information that will be in the meeting is information that is already inside his head. He should not need an active security clearance in order to tell proper members of Congress who have the legal ability to hear it.

Basically I feel this sentence by Luna cannot possibly be true:

External Quote:
We couldn't get GRUSCH in a SCIF bc his clearance is not active.
That can't actually be the reason Grusch hasn't given Congress his information. Like this isn't the reason Grusch gives for not giving his information to AARO either. At first Grusch and co tried to pretend AARO didn't have the authority, but this was false, or at any rate is no longer true. So now the story is that he isn't talking to AARO just because he doesn't like them or doesn't trust them or whatever that means.
 
Could lack of clearance affect what questions you can be asked? Such as, "Were you aware of Operation 27bslash6 at this point?" where 27bslash6 is a classified program (as opposed to the website of humorist David Thorne).
Of course but Grusch says he already found out tons of evidence, and I think he has simply refused to tell anyone what it is, for whatever reason. He's gotten longevity out of it, because since he hasn't gone on the record about where the alien spaceships are, or who was murdered by an alien, those claims can't be conclusively refuted. And now he's being officially hired by a UFO proponent in Congress to "advise". So maybe *not* going to AARO will pay off in the end.
 
It's always incumbent on the people asking questions not to reveal information that the interviewee is not cleared for regardless of the setting. Doing so could result in a security breach. Not saying it's never done but the risks need to be considered against the benefit of the information the committee seeks to gain.

During open hearings, legislators frequently do most of the talking. It creates the appearance of acting on the public's behalf and sound bites they can use in fundraising. Since everyone in this case benefits from the publicity, I don't take their claims of security risks at face value. This feels more like reality TV.
 
the latest researched article i can find says,, nuthin new here

What is in the JFK files? Hear from one historian about whether there
were any new revelations

We asked Edward H. Miller, a teaching professor and political historian, about whether there is any new information in the trove of documents concerning JFK's assassination.

https://news.northeastern.edu/2025/03/25/jfk-files-released/

External Quote:

The release of documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy offered some new tidbits — but nothing to change one historian's opinion that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole assassin.
 
Rep. Burlison has confirmed directly that Mr. Grusch will be working as his personal staffer. Interestingly he says Grusch can't work for the House Oversight Committee.



External Quote:
Reporter: So what are the things that he can do then that you can't necessarily believe that you could do right now?

Burlison: Yeah. One is that, well, A, it's the amount of time. So getting him committed and where he's able to provide counsel to me, he's putting together a plan that we'll be able to execute and then work alongside, really through my office, work to try to get some more information out through the committee staff and other things. But at the end of the day, he's working for my staff, and so that has to be kind of the parameters. He can't work for the committee. He's working for me.
 
External Quote:

He can't work for the committee. He's working for me.
Could that be interpreted as "Because he is working for me, he can't work for the committee?" That would not be odd, he'd have to work for one or the other, I'd think.

I am many many years past my time on staff for Senator, but there were very strict rules about outside income or doing other work while on staff... something to keep in the back of one's mind as this unfolds -- unless the rules have changed massively, he's closing off a lot of other potential streams of income for as long as he's on Burlison's staff.
 
Mar 27 Matt Laslo from AskAPol interviewed Rep Burlison regarding the onboarding of David Grusch. Apparently it was confirmed by Rep Luna and Burlison, that at the end of April there is a planned SCIF briefing with David Grusch, Lue Elizondo, Christopher Mellon, and AARO.

Here are a couple UAP you tube channels sharing the Laslo material:

Down To Earth With Kristian Harloff (UAP NEWS)
UFO SCIF CONFIRMED with David Grusch and members of Congress in April.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0s0DSb-niw


VETTED
Bombshell Story about David Grusch, Lue Elizondo, Chris Mellon & AARO

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYOWd9v1Ocg
 
So...exposed some innocent people's social security numbers,
for nothing that could remotely, even minutely, alter the assassination narrative.
Swish!! How was this not worth all the hype?
 
Last edited:
Mar 27 Matt Laslo from AskAPol interviewed Rep Burlison regarding the onboarding of David Grusch. Apparently it was confirmed by Rep Luna and Burlison, that at the end of April there is a planned SCIF briefing with David Grusch, Lue Elizondo, Christopher Mellon, and AARO.

Grusch himself has already confirmed that he doesn't really know anything personally, just that he's been told stuff. So, at best he can finely tell some people what some people told him in a SCIF and maybe tell people who the people were that told him things. I doubt that will happen, he'll maintain his sources confidentiality.

Mellon and Elizondo are interesting. Lue has faded a bit in the UFO community with events like him passing a Hungarian hotel ceiling light off as a Mouther Ship UFO and other situations that have increasingly made him look more like a hustler than a discloser advocate. Mellon has bragged on Twitter/X that he sent Hal Puthoff, Eric Davis and Elizondo to AARO as "whistleblowers".

I'll bet anyone a couple of donuts that Puthoff and to a lesser extent Davis, are the primary sources for most of what Grusch and Mellon would talk about in a SCIF. Maybe a bit of Stratton and Gallaudet thrown in.

I don't think any of these people really have the goods and any SCIF interviews will ultimately lead to claims of further cover-up.
 
Grusch himself has already confirmed that he doesn't really know anything personally, just that he's been told stuff. So, at best he can finely tell some people what some people told him in a SCIF and maybe tell people who the people were that told him things. I doubt that will happen, he'll maintain his sources confidentiality.

Mellon and Elizondo are interesting. Lue has faded a bit in the UFO community with events like him passing a Hungarian hotel ceiling light off as a Mouther Ship UFO and other situations that have increasingly made him look more like a hustler than a discloser advocate. Mellon has bragged on Twitter/X that he sent Hal Puthoff, Eric Davis and Elizondo to AARO as "whistleblowers".

I'll bet anyone a couple of donuts that Puthoff and to a lesser extent Davis, are the primary sources for most of what Grusch and Mellon would talk about in a SCIF. Maybe a bit of Stratton and Gallaudet thrown in.

I don't think any of these people really have the goods and any SCIF interviews will ultimately lead to claims of further cover-up.
Them bringing Mr Grusch in is a reasonable decision I think. His background and resume make him well qualified to work with true-believers and at the same time he is familiar with the way government departments work, so he will hopefully not make blunders like the recent Signal users made. He has also met or communicated with some of the people who will be involved, and will listen to them with a straight face (which I could never do). Of course his familiarity with the topic will rob him of excuses for mis-statements and the ability to deny knowledge of things that he has already commented on.
 
Of course his familiarity with the topic will rob him of excuses for mis-statements and the ability to deny knowledge of things that he has already commented on.

I can sit here and rant about these people wasting time and money looking for ET. I usually get an invite to a town hall with our local Republican congressman around once a year and I've thought about bringing up the UFO shenanigans, but I'd likely be barking at the moon. There is usually an agenda of topics and UFOs aren't one of them. He's a farmer, not interested in UFOs AFAIK, so he tends to stick to local issues like water, insurance, fires and farming.

For right now, people like Luna are in the government's driver seat for UFOs, it is what it is.

If we believe that so far, there has yet to be any credible evidence for alien UFOs and that many of the UFO claims from people like Grusch concerning the retrieval of crashed UFOs are unlikely, then maybe the prudent thing to do is sit back with a bowl of popcorn and watch the spectacle.

This may be like a fox being let into what he thought was a crowded henhouse only to discover there are no hens then forced to explain why. Recall that Grusch has repeatedly told the story of the Italians recovering a crashed UFO in ~1933 and the US, with the help of the Pope, expatriated it as WW2 ended. I did a deep dive on this claim. It's based in part on almost certainly hoaxed documents, and even if they are real could just be some confusion about a crash of some sort, combined with the ramblings of a serial fantasizer. It has little to no basis in reality, yet Grusch often repeats it, not only as fact, but as one of many operations that predated Roswell, sometimes even hinting at UFO recoveries dating to the turn of the century. Secret UFO recoveries that are still classified from the Roosevelt administration, as in Teddy!

They have the power, the will and the right people to reveal the truth about UFOs and the government cover up. Let's see what they actually produce.

Grusch, Elizondo, Mellon and the rest have likely heard a lot of these UFO recovery tales from Puthoff, who's been obsessed with it for decades. He was part of Stargate, he worked in Bigelow's NIDS, he was instrumental in Bigelow buying Skinwalker ranch, he provided all the DIRDs for the AAWSAP program, he was involved in the failed attempt to create KONA BLUE, he was instrumental in Flugel buying Skinwalker Ranch from Bigelow and Mellon considered him a "whistleblower" when he testified to at AARO. I'm not saying he's a puppet master behind all of this, but more like the shaman, high-priest and keeper of the wisdom for this UFO cabal.

And if Puthoff's likely testimony before ARRO is any indication, these guys will just be chasing their own tails. From Kirkpatrick's comments and other things written, it seems that Puthoff, among others, helped to create KONA BLUE, then helped add UFO language to KONA BLUE resulting in it never getting off the ground and then had the balls to claim to ARRO he knew about a secret government UFO program. Because he tried to set it up!

My own predictions are that nothing will really come of this. The UFO folks will blame a government within the government that keeps the secrets at place like Lockheed and Boeing. The standard UFO story will just chugg along on hearsay, speculation and entertainment with no real evidence, until the political winds shift, and the UFOlogist will be back on the outside looking in. We've been here before with AAWSAP, when the same group got $22mil to do what they wanted and had nothing to show for it besides some werewolf stories.

If we get really lucky, they'll make complete fools of themselves. As I said before, be careful what you wish for if you're a UFOlogist.
 
I usually get an invite to a town hall with our local Republican congressman around once a year and I've thought about bringing up the UFO shenanigans, but I'd likely be barking at the moon.
Wise move not to mention it. It would be likely to derail the entire shebang, and none of the listed agenda would ever get attention. Plus it might be disheartening to find out how many of your fellow citizens follow the subject eagerly.
 
Mar 27 Matt Laslo from AskAPol interviewed Rep Burlison regarding the onboarding of David Grusch. Apparently it was confirmed by Rep Luna and Burlison, that at the end of April there is a planned SCIF briefing with David Grusch, Lue Elizondo, Christopher Mellon, and AARO.
If Kosloski or whoever else is there from AARO doesn't press these guys hard to get specific, I fear this is going to be leveraged after the fact as validation of all the stories the Stargate/Skinwalker/Bigelow/Puthoff associated circle of influencers been spinning for the public. As proof that there is important secret information about ET visitation that Congress is taking seriously. You'll probably even get clips of members of Congress interviewed in the hallway afterward saying "these allegations are very serious" and "this involves highly credentialed people so we have to trust it", etc. Even what actually happened is that Grusch, Elizondo, and Mellon just did more of the same vague references to stories they heard.
 
If Kosloski or whoever else is there from AARO doesn't press these guys hard to get specific, I fear this is going to be leveraged after the fact as validation of all the stories the Stargate/Skinwalker/Bigelow/Puthoff associated circle of influencers been spinning for the public. As proof that there is important secret information about ET visitation that Congress is taking seriously. You'll probably even get clips of members of Congress interviewed in the hallway afterward saying "these allegations are very serious" and "this involves highly credentialed people so we have to trust it", etc. Even what actually happened is that Grusch, Elizondo, and Mellon just did more of the same vague references to stories they heard.

That could be very likely, but in the end were exactly does that leave them? You and me and others here will throw the BS flag that nothing was really confirmed, and no evidence was really presented. For the believers, it will be enough, but it's not going to really move the needle. A bunch of guys and congress people blowing UFO smoke up each other's back side is just enough to keep the train rolling for those that care.

For many, anything short of full disclosure, as in bodies and flying saucers, is just more evidence of a coverup, not a lack of evidence. And for others, anything short of full disclosure, just keeps the grift rolling.
 
Back
Top