A decorated intelligence official and Air Force veteran turned UFO whistleblower on Wednesday provided the most pointed public testimony ever given to Congress about claims that ‘non-human intelligence’ has visited the Earth and left behind craft and bodies, and the government has covered it up for nearly a century.
David Grusch, who served with the now-shuttered Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) Task Force (UAPTF), testified under oath before a House Oversight Committee’s subcommittee that he has evidence there is a cabal of people inside and outside the government involved in ongoing programs dealing with non-human craft and lifeforms. Those beings have visited the Earth, he said, and the cover-up has been going on since the 1930s.
He testified that the U.S. government possesses multiple alien craft and the remains of their crew; that government contractors have “misappropriated” money to fund these ongoing programs and that there have been efforts to silence those who come forward that may have even included murder. In addition, Grusch said the U.S. was working to reverse-engineer alien technology and that people were hurt in the process of attempting to do so. He said he had a list of witnesses, both cooperative and hostile, for future hearings that could provide additional answers through firsthand accounts.
He also joined the chorus of those who want to see the release of the images and video taken during the February shootdown of a Chinese spy balloon and other mysterious craft that flew over North America.
Grusch had previously raised these issues when he filed a whistleblower complaint with the U.S. Intelligence Community Inspector General about internal reprisals for his work on this issue. That complaint was deemed ‘credible’ at the time and the probe into it is still ongoing. He also spent nearly a dozen hours in closed-door congressional hearings and made similar allegations to two media outlets.
But Wednesday was the first time he’s made those statements in public under oath.
Grusch limited his statements to what he could divulge publicly without violating laws pertaining to classified information. His statements were what he was cleared to talk about after a Defense Office of Prepublication and Security Review (DOPSR). But he repeatedly said he would offer more detailed answers to sensitive questions in a closed Congressional hearing if those in attendance had the clearances to hear his answers.
He was one of three witnesses before the committee Wednesday. The other two were Ryan Graves and David Fravor, former Navy aviators who spoke about their own experiences witnessing UAPs while flying.
Beyond the testimony, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Florida) essentially outed a UAP incident near Eglin Air Force Base in the Florida panhandle, offering never-before-heard details of that encounter.
Grusch was an intelligence officer detailed to the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) as an Air Force reservist and later served in a similar capacity with the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA) from 2021 to earlier this year. He was that agency’s co-lead in Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) and transmedium object analysis and reported to the UAPTF and eventually the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) which replaced it.
He told the committee he became a whistleblower “following concerning reports from multiple esteemed and credentialed current and former military and Intelligence Community individuals that the U.S. government is operating with secrecy – above Congressional oversight – with regards to UAPs.”
In his opening statement, Grusch said he based his testimony “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. “
He added that he had “taken every step I can to corroborate this evidence over a period of four 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.”
In 2019, Grusch testified, “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, given his “extensive executive-level intelligence support duties,” Grusch said he 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,” Grusch said. “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.”
The Questions
Over the course of a hearing that lasted more than 2.5 hours, Grusch addressed many inquiries from a bipartisan panel of lawmakers who came together in an exceedingly rare display of unity to learn more about the claims made by Grusch and former Navy pilots Ryan Graves and David Fravor, who each were party to some of the most known UFO incidents in the last 20 years.
U.S. Rep. Timothy Burchett, (R-Tennessee) asked the first series of questions.
Q: Is the U.S. government in possession of UAPs?
A: Absolutely based on interviewing over 40 witnesses over four years.
Q: Where?
A: I know the exact locations and those locations were provided to the inspector general, and some of which, to the intelligence committees. I actually had the people with the first-hand knowledge provide a protective disclosure to the Inspector General.
Q: Have you faced any retaliation or reprisals for any of your testimony or anything on these lines?
A: Yeah. I have to be careful what I say in detail because there is an open whistleblower reprisal investigation on my behalf. I don’t want to compromise that investigation…but it was very brutal and very unfortunate some of the tactics they used to hurt me both professionally and personally, to be quite frank.
Q: Do you have any personal knowledge of people who’ve been harmed or injured in efforts to cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technologies?
A: Yes. Personally.
Q: Have you heard that anyone [has] been murdered? That you know of or heard of I guess?
A: I have to be careful asking that question. I directed people with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities.
Rep. Jeremy Raskin (D-NY) then asked several questions.
Q: What was your experience coming forward?
A: Well, it’s only been about two months or so. So I guess my experience has been overwhelming support from former colleagues of mine, a few who privately message me, and I do appreciate that. But I do have knowledge of active planned reprisal activity against myself and other colleagues and it’s very, very upsetting to me.
Q: Coming from where?
A: Certain senior leadership at previous agencies I was associated with and that’s all I’ll say publicly, but I can provide more details and closed environment.
Grusch added that “certain colleagues of mine that were brutally administratively attacked,” to which Raskin asked why.
A: I call it administrative terrorism. That’s a tool in the toolbox. They silence people. Especially the career government service [personnel] who cares about their career, cares about their clearance, their reputation. the climb up the ladder. When you threaten that… career path, a lot of people back off, but I’m here to represent those people.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Florida) followed up Raskin’s line of questioning.
Q: In the last couple of years, have you had incidents that have caused you to be in fear for your life for addressing these issues?
A: Yes. Personally.
Q: On the 19th of April, Dr. [Sean] Kirkpatrick, head of AARO, said that he did not find any evidence of UAPs. You also stated that in your interview that you briefed him on information that you were uncovering, but they didn’t follow up with you. Were the items that you divulged to him pertinent to national security?
A: Yes. Him and I had a classified conversation April 2022 before he took over AARO. July 2022 I provided him some concerns I had.
Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Florida) asked Grusch whether as a result of his previous government work, he “met with people with direct knowledge or have direct knowledge yourself of non-human-origin craft?”
A: Yes, I personally interviewed those individuals.
Q: As a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct knowledge or have direct knowledge yourself about ATs – advanced technologies – that the US government has.
A: Based on conventional advanced tech, I was briefed to the preponderance of the Defense Department’s both space and aerospace department programs.
Q: Do you have knowledge or do you have reason to believe that there are programs in the advanced tech space that are unsanctioned?
A: Yes, I do.
Q: And when you say that they’re above congressional oversight, what do you mean?
A: It’s a complicated question. So there’s some I would call it abuse here. [Federal law] discusses the [Deputy Defense Secretary’s] ability to waive Congressional reporting. However, the Gang of Eight [the top four leaders in Congress and the head Republican and Democrat from both the Senate and House Intelligence committees] is at least supposed to be notified… [you can read all about how this all works in this past feature of ours]
Q: How does a program like that get funded?
A: I will give you generalities. I can get very specific in a closed session. But this is misappropriation of funds.
Q: Does that mean that there is money in the budget that is set to go to a program but it doesn’t and it goes to something else?
A: Yes, there’s specific knowledge to that.
Q: Do you think U.S. corporations are overly overcharging for certain tech it’s selling to the US government and that additional money is going to programs?
A: Correct. For something called IRAD. [That’s an acronym for Internal Research & Development Program, but he did not explain which specific IRAD program or programs it was and no one on the panel asked, so we reached out to the Pentagon and will provide additional details when available].
Q: Let’s talk satellite imagery. Are you aware, do you have direct knowledge or did you talk to people with direct knowledge, that there is satellite imagery of these events?
A: That was one of my primary tasks at NGA, since we process, exploit and disseminate information. I personally reviewed both what we call overhead collection and from other strategic and tactical platforms that I cannot even explain prosaically, and I have a degree in physics, by the way as well. And I am aware that you guys have not seen these reports, unfortunately, and I don’t know why.
Q: Do you have direct knowledge, or have you spoken people who have direct knowledge that this imagery applies to crash sites – crash imagery?
A: I can’t discuss that in an open session.
Rep. Virginia Foxx, (R-North Carolina) asked Grusch whether his statements contradicted those by AARO’s Kirkpatrick “who previously testified before Congress that no credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity or quote ‘off world technology’ was brought to the attention of the office.”
Q: To your knowledge, is that statement correct?
A: It’s not accurate.
Foxx added that “this contradiction is a perfect example of why we need to inject transparency into our government.”
Returning for another round of questioning, Burchett asked Grusch for “the names and titles – the people with direct first-hand knowledge and access to – some of these crash retrieval programs and maybe which facilities military bases that would recover material would be in.”
A: I can’t discuss it publicly. But I did provide that information both to the Intel committees and Inspector General.
Q: What Special Access Programs cover this information and how is it possible that they have evaded oversight for so long?
A: I do know the names. Once again, I can’t discuss that publicly and how they’ve evaded oversight. In a closed setting, I can tell you the specific tradecraft used.
Q: When do you think those programs began and who authorized them?
A: I do know a lot of information but that’s something that can’t discuss publicly.
Burchett pressed Grusch about who was denying access to these programs.
A: It’s a group of career senior executive officials.
Q: Are they government officials?
A: Both in and out of government and that’s about as far as I can go there.
Q: That leads me to my next question. Which private corporations are directly involved in this program? How much taxpayer money has been invested in these programs to your knowledge?
A: I don’t know the specific metrics towards any of your question. The specific corporations I did provide to the committees in specific divisions and I spent 11 and a half hours in both intel committees.
Asked by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Arizona) about whether the classification of UAP information is interfering with the government’s ability to be transparent, Grusch noted that he helped author the UAP Task Force 2019 Security Classification guidelines, which he called fair. However, when it came to the shootdown of the Chinese balloon that traversed the U.S. earlier this year, Grusch said there was “a lazy attitude about declassifying videos. I mean, I’ve seen some of the videos of the recent shoot down and I saw no reason that couldn’t have been released as long as they mask some data. The American people deserve to see that imagery and full-motion video.”
Rep. Eric Burilson (R-Missouri) asked Grusch for more details about aggressive or hostile activity experienced by him or his colleagues in relation to the UAPs
A: I know of multiple colleagues of mine that got physically injured.
Q: By UAPs or by people in the federal government?
A: Both.
Q: So there has been activity by alien or non-human technology and/or beings that has caused harm to humans?
A: I can’t get into the specifics of in an open environment, but at least the activity that I personally witnessed – I have to be very careful because you don’t want to acknowledge tradecraft, right? So what I personally witnessed – myself and my wife – is very disturbing.
Q: You’ve said that U.S. has intact spacecraft. You said that the government has alien bodies or alien species. Have you seen the spacecraft?
A: I have to be careful to describe what I’ve seen firsthand. Not in this environment, but I can answer that question behind closed doors.
Q: Have you seen any of the bodies?
A: That’s something I’ve not witnessed myself.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina) asked Grusch about whether “officials at the highest levels of our national security apparatus have unlawfully withheld information from Congress and subverted our oversight authority.”
A: There are certain elected leaders that had more information that I’m not sure what they’ve shared with certain Gang of Eight members etc. l but certainly I would not be surprised.
Q: You say that the government is a possession of potentially non-human spacecraft. Based on your experience and extensive conversations with experts, do you believe our government has made contact with intelligent extraterrestrials?
A: Something I can’t discuss in a public setting.
Q: Do we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted these craft?
A: As I’ve stated publicly already in my News Nation interview, biologics came with some of these recoveries.
Q: Were they human or non-human biologics?
A: Non-human and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge of the program I talked to that are currently still in the program.
Q: And was this documented evidence – was there video, photos, eyewitness? Like how would that be determined?
A: The specific documentation I would have to talk to you in a [Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility] SCIF about.
Q: What agency, sub-agency – what contractors – who should be called into the next hearing about UAPs – either in a public setting or even in a private setting. And you probably can’t name names, but what agencies or organizations, contractors etc. do we need to call in to get these questions answered, whether it’s about funding, what programs are happening and what’s out there?
A: I can give you a specific – cooperative and hostile – witness list of specific individuals that were in those.
Q: And how soon can we get that?
A: I’m happy to provide that to you after the hearing.
In another set of questions, Burchett asked Grusch if he has “a personal knowledge of someone who’s possibly been injured working on legacy UAP reverse engineering.”
A: Yes.
Q: Was it something like a radioactive type situation or something we didn’t understand?
A: I can’t get into the specifics but you can imagine assessing an unknown unknown. There’s a lot of potentialities, you can’t fully prepare for.
Q: Are you aware of any individuals that are participating in reverse-engineering programs for non-terrestrial craft?
A: Personally, yes.
Q: Do you know anyone who would be willing to testify if there were protections for them?
A: Certainly closed-door and assurances that breaking your NDA, you are not going to get administratively punished.
As we discussed yesterday, the Oversight Committee hearing appeared to be a major first step toward learning more about this mystery and now it has gone officially from a focus on encounters with UAP, to the allegations of potentially major criminal activity and major conspiracy.
This is in addition to the claim that a small group of unelected people basically edited the course of human history totally outside any government oversight. These are incredibly tall and damning claims. Now that they are under scrutiny at the highest levels of government, it will be highly interesting to see what comes of them.
We will certainly be paying close attention and will update this story when warranted.
Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com