The "Disclosure President"?

Giddierone

Giddierone

Senior Member.
A several figures in the UFO world have referred to Trump as "The Disclosure President".

For example, David Grusch on his recent Joe Rogan appearance (ep.#2560) made several mentions of Trump's "courage" on the topic and his unique ability to make disclosure happen.
I believe before Trump's term ends that it's all going to come out.
Click to expand...
[24:16]
before Trump leaves office, we're going to be in a new paradigm.
Click to expand...
[29:04]
if Trump doesn't enforce his order and see this through, I don't think any other president is going to be able to.
Click to expand...
[32:39]

Elsewhere, Michael Salla, is positively effusive about both Trump's personal knowledge and commitment to disclosure.
Source: https://youtu.be/rdXmz0VPd7Q?si=VquWqrz0-pD91s5U
[I didn't time stamp these remarks but they're just over half way in].

Other figures have explicitly called Trump the "Disclosure President" ; partisan cheerleaders Tim Burchett and Eric Burlison.
Source: https://x.com/timburchett/status/2079630453389299734?s=20

Trump is the Disclosure President - Podcast episode.
https://podscan.fm/podcasts/that-uf...n-exclusive-trump-is-the-disclosure-president

This just seems like obvious politicking for the low information voter.

It's also been noted in other threads https://www.metabunk.org/threads/wa...be-the-disclosure-president.14593/post-357936

So, what is it about Trump that makes people believe 1) that he has a better personal understanding of the topic than past presidents, and 2) that his administration is going to be the one that leads to a "new paradigm"? It seems completely at odds with any public statement I've heard Trump make about UFOs — speaking in his typical vague-bluster. His actions, such as the DOD releases, heavily redacted evidence of birds and balloons troubling US operators, are not evidence of alien visitation. He also started one and failed to end another war over a presumably obsolete fossil fuel (I'm assuming UFOs are not powered by petroleum).

There's also the unlikely idea that Trump would exercise his power to do something for the benefit of humanity as a whole, instead he seems only interested in alienating people by transactional politics. Perhaps, since we're only two short years from disclosure, to get the inside-line, we should have a whip round to raise the ($100k!) funds for early access to his Truth Social posts.
 
Last edited:
It is just people wanting to believe non existing stuff. And if you believe hard enough you think it is real. Look at religion.
 
From what I have read there seems to be 2 ways to look at it

1. People may think Trump is unpredictable, different and somewhat narcissistic so "maybe there's a chance he blabs about aliens" because "Biden wouldn't" or something.

2. An effort exists somewhat to boost Republican votes by engaging the conspiracy minded to believe what they want (Disclosure of aliens) is more likely with Trump/Republicans in power.
 
Last edited:
Just before his first term (2016), many conspiratorial people were certain that Trump would reveal the truth about Chemtrails.
I can't prove it, but have a hunch that some young people switched to Trump's Party, because they thought he was going to help vindicate their beliefs.
 
Leifer said:
Just before his first term, many conspiratorial people were certain that Trump would reveal the truth about Chemtrails.
I can't prove it, but have a hunch that some young people switched to Trump's Party, because they thought he was going to help vindicate their beliefs.
Click to expand...
That's probably because Trump paints himself as an anti-establishment president, tantalizing conspiracy theorists with the idea that he might expose secrets of deep-state powers.
So that can include UFOs, Kennedy, anything really.
 
Giddierone said:
A several figures in the UFO world have referred to Trump as "The Disclosure President".
Click to expand...
Nick Pope wrote about this in one of his last articles:

https://www.skeptic.com/article/ufology-from-fringe-to-mainstream-to-fringe/
External Quote:
Disclosure in 2027 would mean that Donald Trump would be the Disclosure President. There's a curious kind of logic in this, because if there truly is a decades-long official cover-up of an extraterrestrial presence, the secret has been scrupulously kept by successive administrations of both political parties. By inference, therefore, the reasons for secrecy must be exceptionally compelling. Perhaps only a populist, maverick, second-term President would disclose in such circumstances—more so, given that Trump will soon be in his 80s and is doubtless mindful of his legacy...

…If Donald Trump's presidency ends without Disclosure, I'll be 99.9 percent convinced that there's nothing to disclose. I'd have to accept that if extraterrestrials are visiting Earth, nobody in the government is aware of it. The acceptance of such a state of affairs might actually be rather good for ufology. After all, while some conspiracies are real, most conspiracy theories are false, and encourage a negative, accusatory approach.
I find this interesting for two reasons. First, Pope argues that Trump is more likely to disclose because he's a "populist, maverick" president. I don't think Pope was alone in reasoning this way. Second, it's nice to see that Pope was actually open to accepting the possibility that there might not be anything to disclose after all.
 
jarlrmai said:
From what I have read there seems to be 2 ways to look at it

1. People may think Trump is unpredictable, different and somewhat narcissistic so "maybe there's a chance he blabs about aliens" because "Biden wouldn't" or something.

2. An effort exists somewhat to boost Republican votes by engaging the conspiracy minded to believe what they want (Disclosure of aliens) is more likely with Trump/Republicans in power.
Click to expand...
In support of the second, let's recall to what very large extent the Trump political brand has been built on courting conspiracy theory believers and influencers.

It may also work in the other direction, with said influencers embracing Trump as the messiah of disclosure because so many conspiracy theory believers have been drawn into the Trump political movement. "My audience likes Trump, so I'll get more views if I talk him up..."
 
"Executive Order 14176, titled "Declassification of Records Concerning the Assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, and the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.", is an executive order signed by Donald Trump on January 23, 2025" (wikipedia), so Trump did release some conspiracy theory fodder. It's not entirely unreasonable to assume he might release other long-held government secrets, although the Epstein Files process shows that "conditions apply".

The Pentagon has released many "UAP files", see
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/wa...-war-releases-uap-files-2026-release-1.14870/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/department-of-war-uap-release-4.15005/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/us-department-of-war-uap-files-tranche-5.15045/

However, with all of these releases, if I was hoping for some long-held UFO secrets to come out, I'd be disappointed that this hasn't already happened. If the Pentagon releases are the pinnacle of what we're going to see (and I believe they are), then a lot of people are going to be quite disappointed in 2 years.
 
Last edited:
As an 'enthusiast', I think that what's going on is that there is a lot of traction with this issue among (especially Republican) politicians who have access to Trump. There is widespread belief that this issue is being brought to Trump's attention, and that Stephen Miller has taken a special interest. Many of us believe that this interest is warranted, and senior members of the government have confirmatory information not publicly available. With this as background - there seems to be a bit of an attempt to play to Trump's narcissistic traits and make him think that if he's the one who makes the big reveal, he indisputably earns an everlasting page in history.

If we believers are correct in these background assumptions - not the best plan in the world, but possibly not the worst either. I seems to be combined with ever increasing 'insider revelations' right now:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wsb0AhKd60c


Even if we're wrong and deluded - would Trump announcing 'disclosure' be the dopiest thing this president's done?
 
Last edited:
davo27 said:
Even if we're wrong and deluded - would Trump announcing 'disclosure' be the dopiest thing this president's done?
Click to expand...
Well, if you want to go there, there's this:
Article:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump disclosed highly classified information to Russia's foreign minister about a planned Islamic State operation, two U.S. officials said on Monday, plunging the White House into another controversy just months into Trump's short tenure in office.

or this:
Article:
Robert Cardillo, who was director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) from 2014 to 2019, said he did not recall any authorized release of an image similar to the image revealed by Trump to his 60 million Twitter followers; Cardillo said he was "certain" that the U.S.'s adversaries, such as Russia and Iran, would have used the image to assess the U.S.'s capabilities.


Metabunk members have long voiced concerns that revealing to adversaries what US systems can identify, and what they can not identify, poses a national security risk. In that sense, the "disclosure movement" is playing for the enemy team, especially if there are no non-human visits to disclose.

And we know there aren't any non-human visitors, because Congress created AARO, and they said there's zero evidence of it. The disclosure guys simply choose not to trust AARO, as they will continue to distrust anyone who does not tell them what they want to hear.

Trump, on the other hand, has a long history of making promises that play well with his audience, and then not delivering on them. Wanna bet whether "UFO disclosure" falls in that category?
 
Last edited:
Mendel said:
Well, if you want to go there, there's this:
Article:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump disclosed highly classified information to Russia's foreign minister about a planned Islamic State operation, two U.S. officials said on Monday, plunging the White House into another controversy just months into Trump's short tenure in office.

or this:
Article:
Robert Cardillo, who was director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) from 2014 to 2019, said he did not recall any authorized release of an image similar to the image revealed by Trump to his 60 million Twitter followers; Cardillo said he was "certain" that the U.S.'s adversaries, such as Russia and Iran, would have used the image to assess the U.S.'s capabilities.


Metabunk members have long voiced concerns that revealing to adversaries what US systems can identify, and what the can not identify, poses a national security risk. In that sense, the "disclosure movement" is playing for the enemy team, especially if there are no non-human visits to disclose.

And we know there aren't any non-human visitors, because Congress created AARO, and they said there's zero evidence of it. The disclosure guys simply choose not to trust AARO, as they will continue to distrust anyone who does not tell them what they want to hear.

Trump, on the other hand, has a long history of making promises that play well with his audience, and then not delivering on them. Wanna bet whether "UFO disclosure" falls in that category?
Click to expand...
Good points. With one logical exception: DoD created AARO's precursor the UAPTF. The UAPTF (or at least it's head) says there is not only evidence, there's proof (I know, I know - "show me", right?). If "we know there aren't any non-human visitors", why pick one of these sources as credible, but not the other?

"The disclosure guys simply choose not to trust AARO, as they will continue to distrust anyone who does not tell them what they want to hear."
- yes. Guilty as charged.
 
davo27 said:
Good points. With one logical exception: DoD created AARO's precursor the UAPTF. The UAPTF (or at least its head) says there is not only evidence, there's proof.
Click to expand...
Remind me, please?
Who said what where?
(Bonus points if you link to the thread where we discussed it. :-))

The UAPTF reports that I recall leave some reports unexplained, but that's not proof of non-human intelligent activity.
 
Mendel said:
Remind me, please?
Who said what where?
(Bonus points if you link to the thread where we discussed it. :-))

The UAPTF reports that I recall leave some reports unexplained, but that's not proof of non-human intelligent activity.
Click to expand...
In that very recent interview above. Jay Stratton says he's seen craft and bodies with his own eyes. I'm sure we could probably argue exactly how far you need to go to constitue proof, but it sounds pretty proofy to me.
 
Mendel said:
Remind me, please?
Who said what where?
(Bonus points if you link to the thread where we discussed it. :-))

The UAPTF reports that I recall leave some reports unexplained, but that's not proof of non-human intelligent activity.
Click to expand...
AARO also has unexplained reports, but they simply state that unexplained events are not sufficient proof of extraterrestrial beings on earth.
davo27 said:
there's proof (I know, I know - "show me", right?). If "we know there aren't any non-human visitors", why pick one of these sources as credible, but not the other?
Click to expand...
Because to be credible one has to prove it first.

Edit:
You can't prove a negative, AARO says they have not found evidence of aliens. They don't say they have found evidence that there are no aliens, no one could practically do that.
 
davo27 said:
The disclosure guys simply choose not to trust AARO, as they will continue to distrust anyone who does not tell them what they want to hear."
- yes. Guilty as charged.
Click to expand...
But that's a very unskeptical view, so forgive us if we cast a wary eye at it. You seem to have fallen down the rabbit hole, and have gone from the usual route of asking questions that have factual answers into (for want of a better term) a kind of "faith". It is often fed on stories from unvetted sources and from people who have a book to sell or a video to monetize, and it has "legs" because of the near-impossibility of proving a negative.

If you and others want to play the part of UFOlogists, then your positive claim must provide evidence of the claims. Believing without evidence is just another opinion. And "So and so said___" is not evidence in itself, just hearsay.
 
davo27 said:
In that very recent interview above. Jay Stratton says he's seen craft and bodies with his own eyes. I'm sure we could probably argue exactly how far you need to go to constitue proof, but it sounds pretty proofy to me.
Click to expand...
Except we know that Jay Stratton's standard of proof is not very high. (For example, he got told that the GIMBAL video shows a gimbal artifact before he released it, and he chose not to believe that; but Metabunk worked out down to a 3D computer simulation that that's what it is.)

We have tons of threads on what the Skinwalker Ranch guys saw and reported on their TV show, and none of it is undebunkable; and it's very similar to what Stratton says he saw.

"Proof" must be based on evidence that goes beyond witness reports. Because witnesses are prone to being mistaken, it's human nature.
 
Mendel said:
Except we know that Jay Stratton's standard of proof is not very high. (For example, he got told that the GIMBAL video shows a gimbal artifact before he released it, and he chose not to believe that; but Metabunk worked out down to a 3D computer simulation that that's what it is.)

We have tons of threads on what the Skinwalker Ranch guys saw and reported on their TV show, and none of it is undebunkable; and it's very similar to what Stratton says he saw.

"Proof" must be based on evidence that goes beyond witness reports. Because witnesses are prone to being mistaken, it's human nature.
Click to expand...
When Stratton says "his own eyes" what we suppose it means; does he mean he's been in the same room as alien bodies/craft (a very strong claim) or he's just seen videos/photos which could be of dubious quality or provinence?
 
davo27 said:
In that very recent interview above. Jay Stratton says he's seen craft and bodies with his own eyes. I'm sure we could probably argue exactly how far you need to go to constitue proof, but it sounds pretty proofy to me.
Click to expand...
The problem I have with statements like that is they are vague and unsupported.

Where did he see them? (was he blindfolded and driven/flown around for days before he entered the location. So he has no idea where it was?)
When did he see them? (once, many times, day/month/year?)
Who was with him at the time who could support his claim? (surely he as not wandering around in a secret facility unaccompanied, who brought him there?)
How long was he able to view them? (for a second through a briefly opened door?)
What was he told about what he saw? (how obtained, what studies have been made of it, who controlled it, etc.)

Some people might say "with his own eyes" in reference to only seeing a photograph of such things 'with their own eyes'. To boost credibility.

Finally, what so many people forget is the idea he only makes vague statements is somehow protection against being thrown in jail is not true. Simply confirming the "fact of" certain topics/capabilities would justify prosecution, especially in the SAP world. Yet we see Mr. Grusch telling more and more tall tales seemingly ignoring the idea he might get arrested. Or that being vague is protection against the MIB hit squads that so many claim are regularly 'removing' people.

What doesn't get you arrested is fantasy and fiction and outright lies.
 
FDSaussure said:
When Stratton says "his own eyes" what we suppose it means; does he mean he's been in the same room as alien bodies/craft (a very strong claim) or he's just seen videos/photos which could be of dubious quality or provinence?
Click to expand...
Good question. We previously had second hand accounts of Stratton's alleged experiences in Skinwalkers at the Pentagon (by Lacatski, Kelleher and Knapp, 2021), but in his new book, Out of the Shadows (2026), Stratton provides a direct account of some of his alleged encounters. He definitely claims he is seeing and interacting with things personally. The claims sound pretty far-fetched.

From the preface titled "Awakening":
External Quote:
It's 4:00 a.m., March 12, 2014, in rural Southern Maryland. My eyes snap open. Time to get up for work. My wife, Michele, is still sound asleep next to me. Our sons, Jonny and Chris, won't be up for hours. I step out of our bedroom and turn down the dark hallway; it is leading to a bright light illuminating my living room.

Cautious, I approach the end of the hallway. Jonny, our younger son, is asleep on the living room couch. He has been sleeping there due to the sheer number of terrifying anomalous incidents that occurred in his bedroom. Sensing something, I look to the window, where I see what is unmistakably a non-human being staring at my son. It's gray and has a large head with small black eyes, no noticeable nose, and a small mouth. Startled, it turns to face me. We have a few seconds of a standoff, then the light goes dark, and it's gone. I run out the front door into the cold, predawn silence. Nothing's there.

I clock the area as I move down our sidewalk toward the driveway, triggering our security light. It gives off a soft glow, much different than the
very bright light that had been coming into the living room window. None of the signatures I was trained to look for are present. No strange smells, no craft or electricity in the air, no strange feelings. I check the living room window, almost 9 feet off the ground. How could anyone or anything look at me from that window and disappear in seconds?

As shocking as this may sound, at this point in my life, I was not surprised that my family and I were being observed by non-human intelligent life. I had been investigating unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP), also known as unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and non-human intelligence (NHI) for about nine years as a Senior Defense Intelligence Officer (D1O) on behalf of the U.S. Government. My family and I had never had any personal experience with UAP or NHI prior to my investigations, but we have had plenty of experiences since then. Were they paying attention to me because I was paying attention to them? It certainly seemed that way.

The U.S. intelligence community (IC) tracks and observes foreign operatives spying on U.S. intelligence officers. Maybe the same dynamic was
at play with the NHis that I was focusing on.

As I gained more seniority, eventually becoming the civilian equivalent of a two-star Admiral, and more deeply involved in the topic on behalf of the government, the events escalated. To this day, my wife and I, our now-adult children, and even our family dogs, all regularly deal with encounters with NHI.
 
I check the living room window, almost 9 feet off the ground. How could anyone or anything look at me from that window and disappear in seconds?
Click to expand...
This is all you need to read.

Seeing a non-human entity/cryptid looking in through a upper story window is a well worn trope going back to Spring Heel Jack and Victorian ghost stories which was later repeated by UFO hoaxers like Stan Romanek (who also immediately runs outside only to see nothing there).

Utter nonsense.

1792025009240.png
 
Does he ever say where he got the training (from post 24)?

None of the signatures I was trained to look for are present. No strange smells, no craft or electricity in the air, no strange feelings.
Click to expand...
 
RTM said:
Does he ever say where he got the training (from post 24)?
Click to expand...
He's certainly not concluding that the "training" is useless.

I'm just drawn to this:
External Quote:
My family and I had never had any personal experience with UAP or NHI prior to my investigations, but we have had plenty of experiences since then.
So, from our model that people make sense of their surroundings through what they have learned, this tracks: as soon as they learn to pull out the paranormal explanation when they see something strange, they will; it did not happen to Stratton before he learned to do that.

Kinda like how you train as a witchfinder and then start "finding" witches.

But Stratton never questions his own perceptions; instead he resorts to a self-aggrandising fantasy to explain the change: "Were they paying attention to me because I was paying attention to them?" (I'm calling it a fantasy because there is certainly no evidence to support it.)
 
Lots of great responses above. I agree with a lot to varying degrees*. The main point I was picking up on was:
Mendel said:
And we know there aren't any non-human visitors, because Congress created AARO, and they said there's zero evidence of it. The disclosure guys simply choose not to trust AARO, as they will continue to distrust anyone who does not tell them what they want to hear.
Click to expand...
We all have our biases. The claim here is that AARO are trustworthy when they say there are no NH visitors because they are government selected. You can make the same claim about the government-selected Stratton, or James Lacatski (who says he's worked on, and entered a craft in a hanger somewhere).

The trustworthiness here isn't being ascribed to the believability or likelihood of the story - it rests on credibility of the source, based on government selection. Some of us prefer one appointee, some of us prefer others. I think that that's a fair observation for this claim.

*don't spit out your cornflakes - but I consider myself a skeptic. Religion, homeopathy, chem-trails, flat earth - I've got 35 years of dismissing it all. But - the slippery slope is real. I got hooked by the NYT story (very interesting about Keane and Hopkins - wasn't aware of that!) was seduced by the adjacent telepathy/consciousness stories, and now, while I still see religious books as little more than fairy tales, I'm less dismissive of the possibility of life after death, separated consciousness and something bigger. Was very uncomfortable about this for a long time. Probably all as a result of UFOs.

Now - it's really not too important for me. Take it seriously, hold it lightly. If I've been fooled, I'd be happy to find out. There are an awful lot of us quite serious enthusiasts who despair of the more credulous. I regularly help people see that they're really seeing starlink, planes, or even stars. I am regularly left shaking my head by actual UFO nutters. I was expelled form a UFO summoning group for not being enough of a believer (despite being flabbergasted and excited by seeing some weird things that seemed to be on the edge of confirming my motivated thinking). Maybe I'm just ever so slightly less deluded - but it is fun living on the edge of possibility, waiting for tomorrow's installment of "what next?" and wondering about a mind-meld with a sentient UFO...

I apologise if I've triggered anyone calling myself a skeptic. Skepticy? Skepticish?
 
Last edited:
RTM said:
Does he ever say where he got the training (from post 24)?
External Quote:
None of the signatures I was trained to look for are present. No strange smells, no craft or electricity in the air, no strange feelings.
Click to expand...
I wonder if (and how) anyone can be trained to look for "strange feelings".
 
davo27 said:
The trustworthiness here isn't being ascribed to the believability or likelihood of the story - it rests on credibility of the source, based on government selection. Some of us prefer one appointee, some of us prefer others. I think that that's a fair observation for this claim.
Click to expand...
Not really. AARO delivered work product, and Sean Kirkpatrick was very open about how AARO works, and what it can access. I don't know Kirkpatrick or anyone else who works for AARO, but I can see how they go about what they're doing, and I trust their processes, while I don't trust Stratton's—and there are clear reasons for that.
This is not about which guy we prefer. This is about capabilities.
AARO has done much better work than UAPTF.
davo27 said:
If I've been fooled, I'd be happy to find out.
Click to expand...
I can do no more but quote Klass's "UFO Curse" (1983):
External Quote:
THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF PHILIP J. KLASS

To ufologists who publicly criticize me, ... or who even think unkind thoughts about me in private, I do hereby leave and bequeath: THE UFO CURSE:

No matter how long you live, you will never know any more about UFOs than you know today. You will never know any more about what UFOs really are, or where they come from. You will never know any more about what the U.S. Government really knows about UFOs than you know today. As you lie on your own death-bed you will be as mystified about UFOs as you are today. And you will remember this curse.
There's nobody who's going to tell you more about how you're getting fooled than the AARO Historical Report and Metabunk do. If you don't realize it by now, then have a good hard think what evidence it would take for you to acknowledge you've been fooled? If you can't answer that, you'll never find out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Montauk
TIME: Trump Says Government Will Declassify Alien Files
2
Replies
49
Views
12K
Todd Feinman
Todd Feinman
Jack Mallory
Walter Kirn believes Trump will be the "Disclosure President."
Replies
35
Views
6K
Smythe Bacchus
Smythe Bacchus
FatPhil
Trump's inadvertent hat-tip to Stalin
Replies
9
Views
3K
Todd Feinman
Todd Feinman
JMartJr
Acetaminophen (Tylenol) and Autism
2 3
Replies
106
Views
15K
Ann K
Ann K
Mick West
Donald Trump's Health
2
Replies
51
Views
9K
Todd Feinman
Todd Feinman

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top