House Oversight Hearing on UAPs - July 26, 2023

tjskep said:
is it a big deal that nasa didn't want to be a part of this hearing?
Click to expand...
I understand that NASA was not invited to participate. See @MonkeeSage 's post number 237, just above. The announced invitees seem to be UFO supporters, but I'm not sure if other voices will be called on at a later date.
 
Ann K said:
I understand that NASA was not invited to participate. See @MonkeeSage 's post number 237, just above. The announced invitees seem to be UFO supporters, but I'm not sure if other voices will be called on at a later date.
Click to expand...
yeah i got things confused David Spergel, president of the Simons Foundation and chair of NASA's UAP Independent Study, was invited but declined to attend
 
tjskep said:
yeah i got things confused David Spergel, president of the Simons Foundation and chair of NASA's UAP Independent Study, was invited but declined to attend
Click to expand...
Which is expected. Since the report isn't finalized, he would not be able to speak for the whole panel. I'm sure he'll be available to testify on their report when that's published.
 
Mendel said:
Which is expected. Since the report isn't finalized, he would not be able to speak for the whole panel. I'm sure he'll be available to testify on their report when that's published.
Click to expand...
Spergel does not have to speak, he just has to ask questions to the three witnesses. This would have been a unique opportunity for him to educate the public in asking critical questions and reasoning scientifically. It's an open hearing! The fact that he let this opportunity slip shows how much the stigma still affects NASA.
 
Itsme said:
Spergel does not have to speak, he just has to ask questions to the three witnesses. This would have been a unique opportunity for him to educate the public in asking critical questions and reasoning scientifically. It's an open hearing! The fact that he let this opportunity slip shows how much the stigma still affects NASA.
Click to expand...
Are you sure the rules of procedure would have allowed that?
My impression is that the witnesses are "put on the stand" one after the other, and talk to the committee members.
 
Mendel, that is my impression as well. I do not know if Spergel (or anybody else) could be granted permission by the committee to ask questions, and I doubt the True Believers on the committee would want to do that. But if there is a skeptical member on the committee there would have been nothing to prevent them from asking questions suggested by Spergel -- or, for that matter, by a concerned citizen, of which there are some present here. We may want to think about supplying some questions and points to any potential ally, in any future hearings....
 
Grusch's prepared opening and closing statements for tomorrow:

External Quote:

Opening Statement

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Members, and Congressmen,

Thank you, I am happy to be here. This is an important issue, and I am grateful for your time.

My name is David Charles Grusch. I was an intelligence officer for 14 years, both in the US Air
Force (USAF) at the rank of Major and most recently, from 2021-2023, at the National GeospatialIntelligence
Agency at the GS-15 civilian level, which is the military equivalent of a full-bird
Colonel. I was my agency's co-lead in Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) and transmedium
object analysis, as well as reporting to UAP Task Force (UAPTF) and eventually the AllDomain
Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO).

I became a Whistleblower, through a PPD-19 Urgent Concern filing with the Intelligence
Community Inspector General (ICIG), following concerning reports from multiple esteemed and
credentialed current and former military and Intelligence Community individuals that the US
Government is operating with secrecy - above Congressional oversight - with regards to UAPs.

My testimony is based on information I have been given by individuals with a longstanding track
record of legitimacy and service to this country - many of whom also shared compelling
evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony.

I have taken every step I can to corroborate this evidence over a period of 4 years and to do my
due diligence on the individuals sharing it, and it is because of these steps that I believe strongly
in the importance of bringing this information before you.

I am driven by a commitment to truth and transparency, rooted in our inherent duty to uphold the
United States Constitution and protect the American People. I am asking Congress to hold our
Government to this standard and thoroughly investigate these claims. But as I stand here under
oath now, I am speaking to the facts as I have been told them.

In the USAF, in my National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) reservist capacity, I was a member
of the UAPTF from 2019-2021. I served in the NRO Operations Center on the director's briefing
staff, which included the coordination of the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) and supporting
contingency operations.

In 2019, the UAPTF director tasked me to identify all Special Access Programs & Controlled
Access Programs (SAPs/CAPs) we needed to satisfy our congressionally mandated mission.

At the time, due to my extensive executive-level intelligence support duties, I was cleared to
literally all relevant compartments and in a position of extreme trust in both my military and
civilian capacities.

I was informed, in the course of my official duties, of a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and
reverse engineering program to which I was denied access to those additional read-on's.

I made the decision based on the data I collected, to report this information to my superiors and
multiple Inspectors General, and in effect become a whistleblower.

As you know, I have suffered retaliation for my decision. But I am hopeful that my actions will
ultimately lead to a positive outcome of increased transparency.

Thank you. I am happy to answer your questions.

Closing Statement

It is with a heavy heart and a determined spirit that I stand, under oath, before you today, having
made the decision based on the data I collected, and reported, to provide this information to the
committee. I am driven in this duty by a conviction to expose what I viewed as a grave
congressional oversight issue and a potential abuse of executive branch authorities.

This endeavor was not born out of malice or dissatisfaction, but from an unwavering commitment
to truth and transparency, an endeavor rooted in our inherent duty to uphold the United States
Constitution, protect the American People, and seek insights into this matter that have the potential
to redefine our understanding of the world.

In an era, fraught with division and discord, our exploration into the UAP subject seems to resonate
with an urgency and fascination that transcends political, social, and geographical boundaries. A
democratic process must be adhered to when evaluating the data and it is our collective
responsibility to ensure that public involvement is encouraged and respected. Indeed, the future of
our civilization and our comprehension of humanity's place on earth and in the cosmos depends
on the success of this very process.

It is my hope that the revelations we unearth through investigations of the Non-Human Reverse
Engineering Programs I have reported will act as an ontological (earth-shattering) shock, a catalyst
for a global reassessment of our priorities. As we move forward on this path, we might be poised
to enable extraordinary technological progress in a future where our civilization surpasses the
current state-of-the-art in propulsion, material science, energy production and storage.

The knowledge we stand to gain should spur us toward a more enlightened and sustainable future,
one where collective curiosity is ignited, and global cooperation becomes the norm, rather than the
exception.

Thank You
[Added missing text, thanks to @spoot]

All three statements can be downloaded here:
https://oversight.house.gov/hearing...ty-public-safety-and-government-transparency/
Also attached
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Mick West said:
My testimony is based on information I have been given by individuals with a longstanding track record of legitimacy and service to this country - many of whom also shared compelling evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony.
Click to expand...

The only interesting bit here is "photography" if it's not LIZ.

The rest just reads: "My testimony is based on what Luis Elizondo, Chris Mellon, Jay Stratton, Bob Lazar, James Lacatski and Travis Taylor have told me, but which sounds much more convincing if they're mentioned anonymously by vague appeal to their former DoD roles."
 
LilWabbit said:
The only interesting bit here is "photography" if it's not LIZ.

The rest just reads: "My testimony is based on what Luis Elizondo, Chris Mellon, Jay Stratton, Bob Lazar, James Lacatski and Travis Taylor have told me, but which sounds much more convincing if they're mentioned anonymously by vague appeal to their former DoD roles."
Click to expand...
will the "photography" been shown or will that be portion be classified?
 
LilWabbit said:
The only interesting bit here is "photography" if it's not LIZ.

The rest just reads: "My testimony is based on what Luis Elizondo, Chris Mellon, Jay Stratton, Bob Lazar, James Lacatski and Travis Taylor have told me, but which sounds much more convincing if they're mentioned anonymously by vague appeal to their former DoD roles."
Click to expand...

Well, in earlier conversations we've speculated that he went around snooping and asking about programs he shouldn't have been talking or asking anyone about either out of personal interest in Ufology or some other not-okay reason.

This part at least explains his having done so without making it sound like he was in the wrong:

"In 2019, the UAPTF director tasked me to identify all Special Access Programs & Controlled Access Programs (SAPs/CAPs) we needed to satisfy our congressionally mandated mission."
 
Mick West said:
I was informed, in the course of my official duties, of a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and
reverse engineering program to which I was denied access
Click to expand...
This is the core of Grusch's claims: the coverup.
His exposition is still unclear on who "informed" him, and who he asked for access.
If AARO interviewed the same people and received access, this is a big nothingburger.
I would be pleasantly surprised if the hearing sheds light on this, but I anticipate it won't.
If Grusch had been cleared to talk about this in public, he should/would already have done so.

And in any case, the committee is going to have to invite everyone who gave Grusch this information that he reports as hearsay. His opening statement, in line with his previous claims, suggests that second-hand information is all he has.
 
Grusch said:
My testimony is based on information I have been given by individuals with a longstanding track
record of legitimacy and service to this country - many of whom also shared compelling
evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony.
Click to expand...

Grusch said:
But as I stand here under
oath now, I am speaking to the facts as I have been told them.
Click to expand...

why wouldnt he be speaking to the evidence he collected/saw that confirm the [alleged] facts that were told to him?.
maybe just bad writing. ??
 
Mendel said:
If AARO interviewed the same people and received access, this is a big nothingburger.
I would be pleasantly surprised if the hearing sheds light on this, but I anticipate it won't.
If Grusch had been cleared to talk about this in public, he should/would already have done so.
Click to expand...
Yes, so in that sense expect nothing too concrete over those 2-3h where Fravor/Graves are also questioned. It's interesting whether Grusch will be more or less relaxed than in the interview with fringe NewsNation, now that he'll be in the mighty halls of Congress testifying under oath. Not a big fan of "body language" studies, but a comparison between interview and hearing may be revealing.

To the AARO point, wouldn't also a Rubio/Schumer (Gang of Eight) be able to ask about the access denied Grusch? They might have without telling us of course.
 
So what do they expect to achieve with this? I expect it will be a case of being told that information is being withheld, and unless they can say who is withholding it then it just reeks of a publicity stunt and show boating.
 
deirdre said:
why wouldnt he be speaking to the evidence he collected/saw that confirm the [alleged] facts that were told to him?.
maybe just bad writing. ??
Click to expand...

It seems he didn't actually "collect" any evidence. I'm not even sure if he saw any, I'd have to go back and look, but I thought he was always a little vague on if he actually saw pictures or the people talking to him saw the pictures.

In any event, I think the whole crux of his case is that he CAN"T confirm all the things that were told to him because they are in classified programs that are denied to him and are being hidden from congress.

I really expect to just get a rehash of his TV interviews because:
  1. He can't give up his sources, because they were not supposed to be telling him things he wasn't cleared to hear about. That would put them in jeopardy.
  2. He can't confirm his claims if he's not giving access to the secret programs, which according to him, he wasn't.
  3. If he has evidence from secret programs he wasn't allowed to access and did anyway and then shares them, he's in jeopardy.
  4. The whole point is to get congress to open up these secret programs, therefore proving him right.
I guess if his sources are Davis and the SRW crowd, maybe he can say he heard some of these things from them, as it's not anything they haven't already said in public.
 
Anybody know who WILL be chairing it? I assume Chairman James Comer, not sure who else could "pull rank" and take the wheel like that.

I sense an attempt by more mature heads to prevent a circus from developing, but that is of course speculative. I suspect the reaction among the conspiracy-minded will be interesting. Let's watch, shall we?
 
Last edited:
NorCal Dave said:
I'm not even sure if he saw any, I'd have to go back and look, but I thought he was always a little vague on if he actually saw pictures or the people talking to him saw the pictures
Click to expand...
he says in the opening statement Mick linked (the bit i quoted) "many of whom also shared compelling
evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony". I assumed when he says "shared" he means "shared with him".
 
deirdre said:
he says in the opening statement Mick linked (the bit i quoted) "many of whom also shared compelling
evidence in the form of photography, official documentation, and classified oral testimony". I assumed when he says "shared" he means "shared with him".
Click to expand...

Yes mam, I would take that to mean he saw pictures. Pictures of what, we don't know. I like the "classified oral testimony", it makes it sound like they were giving him a report on classified programs. But if his big complaint is that he was not read into these classified programs, what "testimony" is he hearing? It still seems like the "classified oral testimony" is more like water cooler talk. Well, so and so told me so and so.
 
deirdre said:
is it because he called them "war pimps" on FOx News? smh.
Click to expand...
This is what I find (Reddit, per another party: I don't use Reddit) but it doesn't explain as much as I'd like to know.
IMG_0213.jpeg
 
Last edited:
JMartJr said:
Anybody know who WILL be chairing it? I assume Chairman James Comer, not sure who else could "pull rank" and take the wheel like that.
Click to expand...
Sounds like Glenn Grothman will be leading with Robert Garcia as co-chair from what various reporters are tweeting. Still waiting for a major outlet to report so it's not just twitter rumors.
 
Ann K said:
This is what I find, but it doesn't explain as much as I'd like to know.
View attachment 60691
Click to expand...

Who wants to bet a couple of donuts this will be portrayed as a coverup? The courageous Burchett tried to force discloser and the nefarious "man" came after him to protect the Dulce base accords between the government and the aliens.

Seriously, be interesting to see where this goes. For the record I'm a registered Republican, but in a libertarian "don't bug me I won't bug you" kinda way in a solidly Republican corner of solidly Democratic California, where my vote is largely meaningless. But I have little tolerance for Religious nutters like Burchett.
 
MonkeeSage said:
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Ryan-HOC-Testimony.pdf
Click to expand...



Article:
Chairman Grothman, Ranking Member Garcia, distinguished Members of the House Oversight
Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs, Representatives Burchett
and Luna, thank you for holding the first public hearing on UAP to hear from military pilots and
whistleblowers.
 
deirdre said:
youre not allowed to say that. too impolite
Click to expand...

Sorry. As a fellow Republican I have a profound disagreement with any elected official that uses their personal religious beliefs as a standard for congressional hearings, especially concerning the limited evidence for UAPs.

But I do think public politicians making claims about UFOs are open to a bit more scrutiny.

deirdre said:
Twitter people are all over Robert Garcia saying Lockheed is in his district and he took money from them for his campaign. Not sure what Lockheed has to do with alien bodies but...
Click to expand...

I assume the argument is Lockheed, as one of the nation's biggest defense contractors, is a major beneficiaries of reverse engineering of alien technology, so that needs to be covered up. Maybe?
 
NorCal Dave said:
Sorry. As a fellow Republican I have a profound disagreement with any elected official that uses their personal religious beliefs as a standard for congressional hearings, especially concerning the limited evidence for UAPs.

But I do think public politicians making claims about UFOs are open to a bit more scrutiny.
Click to expand...

:) i'm talking about Metabunk's politeness policy, not the sentiment you expressed (which i agree with, although you could drop the 'religious" and it would still be true..and still be against the Politeness Policy)
 
Not sure what the last paragraph means, but ...
Article:
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) will not lead a House Oversight subcommittee hearing focused on UFOs slated to take place Wednesday.

Burchett told The Hill that subcommittee chair Glenn Grothman will chair the hearing. But, he had expected to lead it after spearheading the hearing with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.).

...
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said Burchett misunderstood his role, saying, "he's not a committee chairman."

"Tim misunderstood. He is going to give an opening statement. He's going to get to ask 20 questions.:

"You don't — I mean, he's not a committee chairman," Comer added. "You don't have a subcommittee. We're gonna have a good UFO hearing tomorrow."



note: Burchett and Luna arent even members of that subcommittee, maybe thats what last paragraph was starting to say then he stopped.
https://oversight.house.gov/subcommittee/national-security/
 
Last edited:
NorCal Dave said:
I like the "classified oral testimony", it makes it sound like they were giving him a report on classified programs.
Click to expand...

Sounds more like a euphemism for "gossip". He's trying to make his primary data-collection method (collecting anecdotes from people to fit his narrative) sound more rigorous and objective because he himself knows it sounds weak.
 
Looking at this tweet from Anna Paulina Luna, does she say this with in mind that people will be watching that have never heard of if before? Or does she claim that a lot of new info will be talked about today? I mean, other than talking about stuff, we will not see new video or photos. Unless I am wrong here.

Screenshot 2023-07-26 at 09.46.19.png
 
Most likely it will be the same stuff we've heard but to a new audience (Congress and the wider public) who have actually had access to all this stuff before but have never delved into the details, and thus it's new to them.

There will possibly more person X saying thing we've heard from person Y already but person Y is probably the source but will only be addressed anonymously to leave open the interpretation that there is person/evidence Z which is the real source.

Am I right in saying the "No-one said it's aliens, we're not saying it's aliens, (but it's aliens)" gloves are off as per Grusch's testimony and Burchett's barking and now its just literally "it's aliens, we're saying it's aliens and mostly every story is true"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Eburacum
November 13 2024 Congress hearings
3 4 5
Replies
179
Views
11K
NorCal Dave
NorCal Dave
Nemon
“Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets" established by House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
Ann K
Ann K
M
Avi Loeb's Galileo Project posts first results to near total silence
Replies
18
Views
1K
Mendel
Mendel
AllTheQuestionsToday
UAP Disclosure Act of 2024
Replies
6
Views
2K
MapperGuy
M
BoulderRiver
Immaculate Constellation - Alleged USAP focused on UAP identification and crash-retrieval
2 3 4
Replies
159
Views
15K
Mendel
Mendel

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top