David Grusch's DOPSR Cleared Statement and IG Complaint

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Grushc DOPSR Cleared 1 page.png

2023-06-15_08-59-43.jpg


CLEARED For Open Publication
Apr 04 2023
Department of Defense
OFFICE OF PREPUBLICAITON AND SECURITY REVIEW

Mr. David C. Grusch

About the Author. Mr Grush has served as an intelligence officer for over 14 years, first as an U.S. Air Force officer attending the rank of major but also as a Senior Geospatial-Intelligence Capabilities Integration Officer for the National Geospatial Intelligence agency (NGA) at a civilian grade of GS-15 (Full-Bird Colonel military equivalent), achieving that position at the age of 35 as a rising star in the Intelligence Community as a known national expert in space control, electronic warfare, and cyber technical intelligence. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in Physics and a Master of Arts with Honors in Intelligence Studies amongst numerous awards and decorations for his service to the nation, both for combat service in Afghanistan and his participation covert and clandestine operations to advance American security. Mr. Grush is a U.S. intelligence community whistleblower

Summary

In May 2022 I became the first government official in the history of the United States to file an Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) whistleblower complaint on credible detailed information I gathered as a member of the Unidentified Aerial (now Anomalous) Phenomena Task Force (UAPTF) on a publicly unknown Cold War for recovered and exploited physical material that has been waged under the noise-floor for decades. I disclosed this evidence under oath to the ICIG, along with close colleagues of mine that found the strength to come forward to support my complaint in what we saw as an unfathomable ethical and constitutional dilemma. The ICIG found this testimony credible and urgent for Congress in July 2022 and a summary was immediately submitted to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the congressional intelligence committees the HPSCI and SSCI. I traveled to DC to provide closed door testimony on the matter

How did I ever get myself involved in this? A question I’ve constantly asked myself over the last 4 years. In my professional career and quite frankly my entire life up to that point, I never even thought any of this was possibly true, as I grew up with an average belief system and world-outlook in the blue-collar town of Pittsburgh, PA. However in December 2017 I was reading the New York Times and a story caught my eye claiming a UFO (UAP) program called the Advanced Aerospace threat identification Program (AATIP) was being run out of an office in the Pentagon I was familiar with, the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (OUSD(I&S)). I had no idea this topic was being taken seriously by the department, as I had given very little thoughts on UFOs or so-called “extraterrestrials” in my entire adult life. Furthermore, I was formally educated in Physics and Astronomy and consider myself a very black-and-white intelligence officer requiring substantial empirical data to make high confidence assessments. Even after reading that article and performing a public-domain literature review, I was skeptical, this sounded to me as probably misidentified near-peer adversarial technology and observer bias. While working at the national reconnaissance office (NRO) in their operations centre as a USAF military reservist, I was asked by my boss if I'd like to be their representative for the newly formed Navy-led UAPTF

I agreed to join the UAPTF, hopefully to confirm a negative to prove this was all misidentification, witness error, or a flight of fantasy. Once I started digging, interviewing witnesses, asking senior government mentors of mine what was really going on here, unexpected doors started to open and others were brutally shut in my face, Many powerful officials were unhappy I was asking these questions

??? DoD/IC. I’m sharing
??? ..des past, either we
??? … agreements that risk putting our future in jeapoardy




Content from External Source
I imagine this will be released eventually, but for now I just took what was shown on screen on the NewsNation special (updated with a clearer version)

Interesting that he got sucked in via the NYT article.

The timeline here is interesting:

While working at the national reconnaissance office (NRO) in their operations centre as a USAF military reservist, I was asked by my boss if I'd like to be their representative for the newly formed Navy-led UAPTF

I agreed to join the UAPTF, hopefully to confirm a negative to prove this was all misidentification, witness error, or a flight of fantasy. Once I started digging, interviewing witnesses, asking senior government mentors of mine what was really going on here, unexpected doors started to open and others were brutally shut in my face, Many powerful officials were unhappy I was asking these questions
Content from External Source
The UAPTF was formed in August 2020.
[CORRECTION] The UAPTF was formalized in August 2020, but actually formed in 2019. The Debrief article says he was a representative for the NGA at the UAPTF, and then the NGA's co-lead for UAP analysis. That seems to contradict Grusch's statement that it was via the NRO. But they are related agencies (NRO deploys and operates satellites, NGA analyzes aerial and satellite images)

Article:
The whistleblower, David Charles Grusch, 36, a decorated former combat officer in Afghanistan, is a veteran of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). He served as the reconnaissance office’s representative to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force from 2019-2021. From late 2021 to July 2022, he was the NGA’s co-lead for UAP analysis and its representative to the task force.




In July 2021, Mr. Grusch confidentially provided UAP-related classified information to the
Department of Defense Inspector General (DoD IG). At that time, Mr. Grusch communicated
classified information about the improper withholding and/ or concealment of classified material from
the US Congress by certain IC elements. Mr. Grusch believes that his identity and the fact of his
UAP-related communication(s) with the DoD IG have been disclosed to individuals and/ or entities
outside the DoD IG, and that he has suffered retaliation and reprisal(s) related thereto.
Content from External Source
So in 10 or 11 months two years, Grusch went from curious skeptic to (maybe) an alien crash believer.

I say "maybe" because we don't know what was in the original complaint, and the new complain says nothing about it.

But what happened between August 2020 2019 and July 2021? He was introduced to Jay Stratton, Travis Taylor, and possibly then, via them, to other characters like Hal Puthoff and Eric Davis.
 

Attachments

  • 2023-06-13_09-55-17.jpg
    2023-06-13_09-55-17.jpg
    209.8 KB · Views: 101
Last edited:
David Grusch's IG reprisal complaint and another doc have been released today by Corbell / Knapp

The docs are on their website here: https://www.weaponizedpodcast.com/episodes-1/episode-number-21

Looks like the ICIG whistleblower disclosure is as narrowly-scoped as Compass Rose claimed in their statement about ending their representation of Mr. Grusch, and did not include the stuff about inter-dimensional invaders.

From the PPD-19 (Presidential Policy Directive 19) Intelligence Community Whistleblower procedural filing:

1686650883056.png
1686650939576.png

I wonder if he actually did testify to Congress about hostile aliens and the rest of the things he has been claiming publicly.

I realize it wouldn't be perjury to tell them all that if he actually thinks he knows it, but maybe he is not even required to tell them all that and he can just say "here are a bunch of cases AARO should have realized are legit alien craft and they didn't tell Congress about" and then spend hours talking about a bunch of currently classified UAP events that are like tictac and Nimitz. Like I obviously have no idea about how that stuff works it just seems interesting that the whistleblower disclosure is so constrained and doesn't seem to put him on the hook for much.
 
I wonder if he actually did testify to Congress about hostile aliens and the rest of the things he has been claiming publicly.
Screenshot_20230613-151837_Samsung Internet.jpg
They asked for it.

It's interesting that Weaponized also published a directive that extends whistleblower protection to security clearances. I think it only covered employment-related matters before? So that's definitely an aspect of Grusch's case that made Compass Rose want to take the case on.

it just seems interesting that the whistleblower disclosure is so constrained and doesn't seem to put him on the hook for much.
Legal proceeding is about what you want to achieve (the "relief") and the best way to get it. Grusch wanted a) a direct line to Congress, and b) his security access back. It's good advocacy to put the minimum amount of facts (those they can best support) in the complaint that will get them that. The way the complaint is drafted, all they have to prove is that a) Grusch contacted the DoD IG, and b) consequently, his security clearances were obstructed.

By putting a complaint procedure in place, Haines protects the DoD against future allegations of this sort: in the future, they can say, "we had an uninvolved 3rd party review the clearance, so it had nothing to do with the whistleblowing".
 
Document summary:

1. Grusch found out that UAP-related (not alien-related) intelligence was being withheld from Congress.
2. Higher-ups must have sniffed this out and started "retaliating" against Grusch (removing his clearances, etc).
3. Grusch is complaining about it, hence the purpose of this document.

I mean, it's not proof of anything other than ordinary stuff. Interesting? potentially. But there isn't enough here to be reported the way Weaponized has reported it. Weaponized injected "alien crash retrieval and reverse-engineering program" into this document. This is where Jeremy and George lose me - I don't necessarily think they are dishonest, I just think they irrationally make assumptions (like most of the people in this space) and then they report on those assumptions.
 
Looks like the ICIG whistleblower disclosure is as narrowly-scoped as Compass Rose claimed in their statement about ending their representation of Mr. Grusch, and did not include the stuff about inter-dimensional invaders.

From the PPD-19 (Presidential Policy Directive 19) Intelligence Community Whistleblower procedural filing:

1686650883056.png
1686650939576.png

I wonder if he actually did testify to Congress about hostile aliens and the rest of the things he has been claiming publicly.

I realize it wouldn't be perjury to tell them all that if he actually thinks he knows it, but maybe he is not even required to tell them all that and he can just say "here are a bunch of cases AARO should have realized are legit alien craft and they didn't tell Congress about" and then spend hours talking about a bunch of currently classified UAP events that are like tictac and Nimitz. Like I obviously have no idea about how that stuff works it just seems interesting that the whistleblower disclosure is so constrained and doesn't seem to put him on the hook for much.
Just to clarify, this is from the whistleblower reprisal complaint? Not the actual disclosure?
 
Document summary:

1. Grusch found out that UAP-related (not alien-related) intelligence was being withheld from Congress.
2. Higher-ups must have sniffed this out and started "retaliating" against Grusch (removing his clearances, etc).
3. Grusch is complaining about it, hence the purpose of this document.
Your step 2 is really two steps. This is the full sequence, based on the complaint:

1. Grusch finds UAP-related information that the UAPTF didn't look at, thinks it was withheld illegally.
2. Grusch blows the whistle to the DoD IG (July 2021).
3. Grusch experiences problems getting some security clearances outside his own unit renewed, and surmises this is retaliation for step 2.
4. Grusch complains to the IC IG (this document) about step 3, and demands to speak to Congress about 1. (May 2022)
5. Grusch quits his job (April 2023) and goes public (June 2023).
 
Last edited:
3. Grusch experiences problems getting some security clearances outside his own unit renewed, and surmises this is retaliation for step 2.
At some later time Grusch goes public and talks about it (which I don't think he should have done), saying that other people told him stuff ( which I don't think they should have done). Perhaps it wasn't retaliation, but a realization that he should not have had a high security clearance to begin with, if he talked with persons 2, 3, and 4 about what person 1 said to him. We don't know what conversations took place within the organization.
 
However in December 2017 I was reading the New York Times and a story caught my eye claiming a UFO (UAP) program called the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP) was being run out of an office in the Pentagon I was familiar with, the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for intelligence and Security (OUSD(I&S)).
Article:
Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program

By Helene Cooper, Ralph Blumenthal and Leslie Kean

Dec. 16, 2017

The same issue has an article by the same authors on David Fravor's testimony, and there were follow-up articles later.

Note that the same authors, Leslie Kean and Ralph Blumenthal, broke Grusch's story in The Debrief a few days ago. (See https://www.metabunk.org/threads/da...d-craft-and-bodies-of-non-human-origin.12977/ )
 
Last edited:
Hey there, not sure if this has been shared in another thread yet, but here's his full IG complaint, which allegedly we had never seen in full until the latest Jeremy Corbell podcast.



It seems fairly clear from the document that the retaliation he received was in the form of restricting his access to other classified information and programs he previously had access to. That's a strange understanding of "retaliation", but perhaps legally it does count as such.
 

Attachments

  • DAVE+GRUSCH+ICWPA+OCR.pdf
    527.1 KB · Views: 113
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems fairly clear from the document that the retaliation he received was in the form of restricting his access to other classified information and programs he previously had access to. That's a strange understanding of "retaliation",

Wouldn't that be a career ending form of retaliation?
 

Since his protected disclosure(s) to the DoD IG, Mr. Grusch has been subjected to numerous
adverse security clearance actions. These actions have unfairly and unjustifiably impugned his integrity,
character, judgment, professionalism, and mental health. While he remains security-cleared by the
NGA, his compartmented accesses at numerous other IC elements have been - mysteriously and
apparently without plausible explanation - canceled, delayed, denied, and/ or improperly obstructed.

6. Mr. Grusch has reason to believe that the many recent issues with his accesses are directly
correlated to his previous UAP-related protected communication(s) with the DoD IG.
Content from External Source
A plausible but unfortunate interpretation of this is that his DoD bosses considered his talk about non-humans to be irrational, and hence bring into question his "judgment, professionalism, and mental health"

So he's been working since then, essentially to clear his name, as he thinks he is right.
 
The mention of "agreements that risk putting our future in jeopardy" peaked my curiosity. Sounds reminiscent of the Eisenhower Holloman Air Force Base mythos (US/world govt. agreements made with a malevolent alien race, etc.). No way to know what he's thinking as of now, but could lend credence to the idea that he's been previously steeped in ufology lore.

The way NewsNation incorporated that material is interesting:
"But if this non-human intelligence is so advanced, and at least some of them are malevolent, why haven’t they destroyed us already?
Grusch has written an internal document about his discoveries that refers to 'agreements that risk putting our future in jeopardy.'"
Source: https://www.newsnationnow.com/space...erral&utm_source=t.co&utm_campaign=socialflow

It appears the article is *implying* that these agreements may be the reason malevolent non-human intelligences haven't destroyed us yet. If NewsNation has access to the full DOPSR statement, that may indicate the way Grusch is thinking about these "agreements."
 
Hey there, not sure if this has been shared in another thread yet, but here's his full IG complaint, which allegedly we had never seen in full until the latest Jeremy Corbell podcast.


It seems fairly clear from the document that the retaliation he received was in the form of restricting his access to other classified information and programs he previously had access to. That's a strange understanding of "retaliation", but perhaps legally it does count as such.
No, it's only clear he has made that accusation in the IG complaint, not that it actually happened. That's why the claims are being investigated.

Assuming this is a copy of the actual complaint filed, it would have been released by Grusch and his (now former?) legal counsel, not the IG. I forget the specifics, but the IG has a series of dates they must meet in their investigation/judgement processes, including rendering their decision. Also, the IG will not release their findings/decisions to the public, but Grusch may do so if he wishes.
 
A plausible but unfortunate interpretation of this is that his DoD bosses considered his talk about non-humans to be irrational, and hence bring into question his "judgment, professionalism, and mental health"
Why would the ICIG give this complaint the time of day if that were the case? I wouldn't suspect the ICIG to have found his complaint to be credible and urgent if that were the case.
 

CLEARED For Open Publication
Apr 04 2023
Department of Defense
OFFICE OF PREPUBLICAITON AND SECURITY REVIEW

Content from External Source
To clarify, the DoD's approval of this document for publication does not mean it's factual or expresses the views of the DoD. In approving it for publication, the DoD is simply confirming there is nothing classified in it or that is not deemed to present a threat to national security.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why would the ICIG give this complaint the time of day if that were the case? I wouldn't suspect the ICIG to have found his complaint to be credible and urgent if that were the case.
Because no matter how irrational Grusch sounds to them, the DoD IG's office should have kept this confidential.

I forget the specifics, but the IG has a series of dates they must meet in their investigation/judgement processes, including rendering their decision.
Compass Rose wrote in their press release that the complaint process had been "successfully concluded", which implies a decision.

https://www.dodig.mil/Portals/48/Presidential%20Policy%20Directive%2019_update.pdf Whistleblower Protections: Presidential Policy Directive-19
SmartSelect_20230613-215407_Samsung Notes.jpg
SmartSelect_20230613-215437_Samsung Notes.jpg

That sums to 360 days maximum.
 

Since his protected disclosure(s) to the DoD IG, Mr. Grusch has been subjected to numerous
adverse security clearance actions. These actions have unfairly and unjustifiably impugned his integrity,
character, judgment, professionalism, and mental health. While he remains security-cleared by the
NGA, his compartmented accesses at numerous other IC elements have been - mysteriously and
apparently without plausible explanation - canceled, delayed, denied, and/ or improperly obstructed.

6. Mr. Grusch has reason to believe that the many recent issues with his accesses are directly
correlated to his previous UAP-related protected communication(s) with the DoD IG.
Content from External Source
A plausible but unfortunate interpretation of this is that his DoD bosses considered his talk about non-humans to be irrational, and hence bring into question his "judgment, professionalism, and mental health"

So he's been working since then, essentially to clear his name, as he thinks he is right.
As a 14 year federal employee (retired) there are two things in play here (my opinion).

1. Even if all of his statements in the document are true, no retaliation has occurred. He is still a GS-15. He is not entitled to promotion.

2. Security clearance issues are not subject to Merit Systems Protection Board review.
 
Why would the ICIG give this complaint the time of day if that were the case? I wouldn't suspect the ICIG to have found his complaint to be credible and urgent if that were the case.
If an IG complaint is filed, it must be accepted and acted upon. A complaint can be dismissed by the IG without formal investigation if evidence supplied with the complaint is judged insufficient to show the alleged wrongdoing(s).
 
If an IG complaint is filed, it must be accepted and acted upon. A complaint can be dismissed by the IG without formal investigation if evidence supplied with the complaint is judged insufficient to show the alleged wrongdoing(s).

Let me rephrase my question. Why would the IG state that the complaint is urgent and credible if that were the case?
 
Let me rephrase my question. Why would the IG state that the complaint is urgent and credible if that were the case?

IF (the big question) he lost some of his security clearances because of his disclosure to the IG, THEN it would be urgent. It is a serious claim.

The investigation is to determine whether or not his IG disclosure is the reason his clearances were denied etc.

IT's akin to me filing a complaint of sexual harassment against my boss. It is a serious claim. They can't dismiss my sexual harassment complaint just because they think i'm crazy since ive previously spoken about little green men stored in warehouses.
 
Let me rephrase my question. Why would the IG state that the complaint is urgent and credible if that were the case?
Best answer I can offer is the IG read his complaint and believed he put forth a viable enough argument to warrant an investigation. We'll probably have a better idea if/when we see the decision.

At some point, I'd suspect Grusch and counsel submitted documentation to support his claims. No mention of that I've seen.
 
Wouldn't that be a career ending form of retaliation?
If he didn't have a need to know that material (depending on his current assignments) removing access to them need not matter in his job. He might be offended, but it's not necessarily a mortal blow to his career.
 
Is there case law on whether revocation of clearances constitutes "separated from his or her position"?
RYAN v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (2015)

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-federal-circuit/1707615.html

In that case Joan Ryan, an employee with FEMA was suspended and later terminated because her security clearance was suspended and later revoked. This was as a result of her being indicted by the US Attorney. A case in which she was later found not guilty.

Id. at 54. As already noted, “[a] denial of a security clearance ․ is not subject to [MSPB] review.” Egan, 484 U.S. at 530. The notice discussed in detail the bases for the clearance revocation. It did not alter the basis for suspending Ms. Ryan's employment. The suspension, as stated in the letter informing Ms. Ryan of the indefinite suspension of her employment, was “based exclusively upon the suspension of your access to classified information.” J.A. 78. It was therefore Ms. Ryan's inability to access classified information, rather than the underlying reasons for that inability, that formed the basis of the indefinite suspension. See Gargiulo, 727 F.3d at 1185 (An employee indefinitely suspended for failure to maintain a required security clearance “ha due process rights with respect to [the] indefinite suspension, but they [do] not include the right to contest the merits of the decision to suspend [the] security clearance.”). The revocation of Ms. Ryan's clearance made this inability permanent.
 
Let me rephrase my question. Why would the IG state that the complaint is urgent and credible if that were the case?
There are two IGs (Inspectors General) here.

DoD IG (then presumably Sean O'Donnell), with whom the original disclosure was filed. They did not seem to think it was credible, and possibly took action against Grusch because of this (or, if his allegations are true, as a cover-up)

Then he filed a complain about this with the Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) Thomas A. Monheim
Since his protected disclosure(s) to the DoD IG, Mr. Grusch has been subjected to numerous
adverse security clearance actions. These actions have unfairly and unjustifiably impugned his integrity,
character, judgment, professionalism, and mental health.
Content from External Source
THAT is what is known to be urgent and credible, not the content of the original claim.

Ross seems to say there's more to this aspect, which we will learn soon, where the DoD complaint was inspected.
 
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-federal-circuit/1707615.html

In that case Joan Ryan, an employee with FEMA was suspended and later terminated because her security clearance was suspended and later revoked. This was as a result of her being indicted by the US Attorney. A case in which she was later found not guilty.
Thank you for that case. Ryan was actually acquitted before her clearance was revoked, btw. The ruling cites a Supreme Court decision:
The MSPB does not have authority “to review the substance of an underlying decision to deny or revoke a security clearance in the course of reviewing an adverse action,” such as discharge or indefinite suspension. Dep't of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 520 (1988).

The Supreme Court has made clear “[a] denial of a security clearance is not ․ an ‘adverse action,’ and by its own force is not subject to [MSPB] review.” Egan, 484 U.S. at 530.
Content from External Source
Obviously that makes messing with someone's clearance an ideal vehicle for retaliation, and that's possibly why Haines added a layer of due process with the SECURITY EXECUTIVE AGENT / DIRECTIVE 9 / WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION : APPELLATE REVIEW OF RETALIATION REGARDING SECURITY CLEARANCES AND ACCESS DETERMINATIONS (EFFECTIVE 28 MAY 2022) published by Weaponized.
 
But what happened between August 2020 and July 2021? He was introduced to Jay Stratton, Travis Taylor, and possibly then, via them, to other characters like Hal Puthoff and Eric Davis.

Yes, but his interest was peaked 3 years before when he read the original AATIP article by Kean and Blumenthal:

However in December 2017 I was reading the New York Times and a story caught my eye claiming a UFO (UAP) program called the Advanced Aerospace threat identification Program (AATIP) was being run out of an office in the Pentagon I was familiar with, the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (OUSD(I&S)).
Content from External Source
Did he know people in the OUSDI&S that called their organization AATIP? This is where Elizondo worked:

From 2008 until his resignation in 2017, Elizondo claimed to work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence in The Pentagon.[7][8] Elizondo claims that ending in 2012, he was the director[1][9][10][11] of the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, a special access program funded at the initiative of the then Senate majority leader, Harry Reid (D-Nevada)[12] to investigate aerial threats including unidentified aerial phenomena.[10]

According to the Department of Defense, the AATIP program ended in 2012 after five years. Elizondo claims he worked with officials from the U.S. Navy and the CIA out of his Pentagon office for this program until October 2017, when he resigned to protest what he characterized as "excessive secrecy and internal opposition".[8]
Content from External Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Elizondo

Supposedly AATIP is a made-up acronym to hide AASWAP:

A new unclassified nickname, the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), was created for use within the unclassified letter because it was decided for security reasons not to use the AAWSAP acronym. Reid’s letter was carefully crafted to initiate the process of urgently conferring Special Access Program (SAP) status to some of the more sensitive projects at BAASS.
Content from External Source
And AASWAP was under the DWO at the DIA. I don't know the relationship between DIA and OUSDI:

The Senators also designated the Defense Warning Office (DWO) at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) as the architect of the program, thoughtfully named the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) specifically because the program and the money was targeted to DWO at DIA. No other names for the program were either contemplated or discussed; this AAWSAP name was created in order to make sure the $22 million Program Element (PE) reached DWO, and only DWO, at DIA. No variations on the AAWSAP name would have been allowed because of the technical nature of the PE financial conduit.
Content from External Source
Kelleher, Colm A.. Skinwalkers at the Pentagon: An Insiders' Account of the Secret Government UFO Program. RTMA, LLC. Kindle Edition.

The original article has him working for the UAPTF starting 2019, so before it existed. This could be a misunderstanding on the part of the writers or does it mean he was "working" on UAP stuff before the UAPTF was even formed? With Stratton and others?

The whistleblower, David Charles Grusch, 36, a decorated former combat officer in Afghanistan, is a veteran of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). He served as the reconnaissance office’s representative to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force from 2019-2021. From late 2021 to July 2022, he was the NGA’s co-lead for UAP analysis and its representative to the task force.
Content from External Source
Unfortunately, his interview seems to be lite on actual dates, so another unknown.
 
Your post is an absolute nightmare for me to read, since I'm somewhat acronym-blind! :D

That's a real problem with some of these government UFO claims and programs and such, the acronyms are hellish. And trying to understand if the DIA's DWO where AASWAP was run from is under the DoD in the same way the OUSDI&S where the likely non-existent AATIP was run from is gets a bit confusing IMHO. But IIRC the UAPTF was sorta in the department of the Navy but also under the OUSDI&S and later became AARO. Just to clarify.
 
Grusch is naive if he thinks he knows everything the HPSCI and SSCI leaders (the Gang of Eight) have been informed of. The entire reason for the existence of that group is to brief Congress on things that don't exist and have never existed...

He also seems to be something of a busybody, asking about things he should not be, seeking answers he is not entitled too and then talking to people about things they are not entitled to know.
 
That's a real problem with some of these government UFO claims and programs and such, the acronyms are hellish. And trying to understand if the DIA's DWO where AASWAP was run from is under the DoD in the same way the OUSDI&S where the likely non-existent AATIP was run from is gets a bit confusing IMHO. But IIRC the UAPTF was sorta in the department of the Navy but also under the OUSDI&S and later became AARO. Just to clarify.
LOL.
 
(1) As per @NorCal Dave 's post #32 and other evidence for prior camaraderie with firebrand ufologists, there's good reason to doubt Grusch's sincerity behind his statement "I agreed to join the UAPTF, hopefully to confirm a negative to prove this was all misidentification, witness error, or a flight of fantasy". It's plausible he's been in touch with Lou Elizondo at least since the 2017 NYT article whilst both Lou and Grusch were serving under the DoD.

(2) It's a common trope for a firebrand believer of any persuasion to accentuate they were skeptics before. This allows them to cast themselves as sensible scientifically-minded people merely following the evidence wherever it leads, and to highlight the credibility of the body of evidence that allegedly exists.

(3) Speaking from my own experience, in modern militaries and government agencies an official's security clearance level concerns the maximum security clearance level to classified information s(he) has on a need-to-know basis and to a type of classified information necessary for the discharge of their specific assigned duties. In other words, you may boast the highest security clearance level available whilst remaining legally forbidden to access even lower level classified information which is unrelated to your mission / assigned tasks.

(4) Having collaborated closely with whistleblowing mechanisms within organizations in both the public and the corporate sectors, I've often heard the complaint that most of the 'whistleblowing' turns out to be noise rather than signal, often stemming from personal grievance and dissatisfaction rather than genuine wrongdoing or abuses within the organization. Hence the personnel tasked to serve on these support mechanisms are often overworked separating the wheat from the chaff. And yet it remains an important task albeit often frustrating to listen to employees gossiping about other employees and slinging mud on people they don't like, whilst falsely calling it 'whistleblowing'.

(5) To repeat what @Mendel wrote in post #7 and @Mick West in post #29, the IC IG Monheim's office, and further possible formal proceedings, seem to be legally only concerned with whether or not security clearances have been withheld from Grusch illegitimately and in reprisal. Not with whether or not the DoD is illegitimately withholding evidence for aliens.

(6) However, contrary to the suggestion in post #19, the DoD IG has a legitimate reason to alert the DoD on a potential leaker of classified information as per the following point 7, despite Grusch approaching the DoD IG confidentially as a self-styled whistleblower. The subsequent turn of events is unfortunate since the DoD IG's dutiful discharge of his over-arching mandate to act in the interest of national security (to alert the DoD of a loose cannon in information security) was bound to be taken as a personal betrayal by Grusch who approached him in confidence.

(7) Snooping around classified programs within the DoD with a mission to uncover epic secrets is bound not only to raise eyebrows but to be deemed as posing a legitimate national security risk, entirely irrespective of whether these programs involve aliens or not. As a result, such risky DoD personnel are destined to have their security clearances restricted, and thereby to become emboldened in their belief in a cover-up, to 'resign' and to go public. It's a bit of a vicious circle.

Yet the only reprisal and retaliation that's occurring and unfolding before us is actually on Grusch's side against the DoD. Which makes this whole case Elizondo Part 2.
 
Last edited:
There are two IGs (Inspectors General) here.

DoD IG (then presumably Sean O'Donnell), with whom the original disclosure was filed. They did not seem to think it was credible, and possibly took action against Grusch because of this (or, if his allegations are true, as a cover-up)

Then he filed a complain about this with the Intelligence Community Inspector General (IC IG) Thomas A. Monheim
Since his protected disclosure(s) to the DoD IG, Mr. Grusch has been subjected to numerous
adverse security clearance actions. These actions have unfairly and unjustifiably impugned his integrity,
character, judgment, professionalism, and mental health.
Content from External Source
THAT is what is known to be urgent and credible, not the content of the original claim.

Ross seems to say there's more to this aspect, which we will learn soon, where the DoD complaint was inspected.
Was the complaint filed with Monheim or McCullough? I'm hearing two different things about this. Going off the timeframe, It seems like Monheim would have been the sitting IC IG.
 
Was the complaint filed with Monheim or McCullough? I'm hearing two different things about this. Going off the timeframe, It seems like Monheim would have been the sitting IC IG.
I think I follow what happened now. McCullough was sitting IC IG, he quit that position, became Grusch's lawyer. McCullough and Grusch filed a complaint with the now sitting IC IG, Monheim.
 
Back
Top