As most of my readers likely know by now, there was a historic UFO hearing that took place in the House of Representatives on July 26th, 2023. Former Navy pilots Ryan Graves and Dave Fravor, along with former NRO and NGA official David Grusch, spoke before the House Oversight Committee on their experiences with UFOs during their time inside the US government.

At this point, the hearing has been covered by journalists and other analysts in detail that would be redundant to rehash again here, so my intention in this article is to provide context on a specific point that I personally find significant — and may have implications beyond what may appear at the surface level.

Grusch revealed that there has been significant wrongdoing by certain defense contractors in the name of UFO secrecy. In his interview with Australian journalist Ross Coulthart, he mentioned that he was aware of white-collar crime that had been committed to cover up the reality of UAP, and there were a few clues he left during his testimony that might give us some insight into what he was referring to.

A line of questioning by Democratic Rep. Jared Moskowitz may have been one of the most important of the day.

Moskowitz fired off question after question as Grusch responded knowledgeably and with full confidence, alleging a rampant abuse of power by agencies and companies fielding contracts through Independent Development and Research (IRAD) projects.

Moskowitz: Mr. Grusch, as a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct knowledge — or have direct knowledge yourself — of non-human origin craft?

Grusch: Yes. I personally interviewed those individuals.

Moskowitz: Mr. Grusch, 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 based on conventional advanced tech?

Grusch: I was briefed on the preponderance of the Defense Department's both space and aerospace compartmented programs, yeah.

Moskowitz: Do you have knowledge or do you have reason to believe that there are programs in the advanced tech space that are unsanctioned?

Grusch: Yes, I do.

Moskowitz: When you say that they're above congressional oversight, what do you mean?

Grusch: A complicated question. I would call it abuse here….so 10 U.S code section 119 discusses Congressional oversight of SAPs, discusses the [Deputy Secretary of Defense's] ability to waive Congressional reporting. However, the Gang of Eight is at least supposed to be notified if a waived or waived bigoted unacknowledged SAP is created, and that's public law.

Moskowitz: I don't want to cut you off, but how does a program like that get funded?

Grusch: I will give you generalities. I can get very specific in a closed session, but misappropriation of funds.

Moskowitz: Does that mean that there is money in the budget that is said to go to a program, but it doesn't, and it goes to something else?

Grusch: Yes, I have specific knowledge of that.

Moskowitz: Do you think U.S. corporations are over-charging for certain tech they're selling to the US government, and that additional money is going to programs?

Grusch: Correct, through something called IRAD.

Interestingly, the topic of defense contractors overcharging taxpayers for certain technologies has been a scandal that has come to light only in recent months. Contractors are able to name the price of certain spare parts and maintenance due to the lack of specialization regarding specific technologies throughout the industry, and the consolidation of companies over the years as smaller firms were swallowed up.

In a CBS 60 Minutes expose on this very issue back in May 2023, Bill Whitaker interviewed several Pentagon auditors who echoed Grusch's allegations of impropriety in the private defense sector — particularly when it came to intentionally inflating costs.

Assad points to the Patriot weapons system, a pillar of air defenses for the U.S., NATO, Ukraine and Taiwan. In 2015, Assad ordered a review and Army negotiators discovered Lockheed Martin and its subcontractor, Boeing, were grossly overcharging the Pentagon and U.S. allies by hundreds of millions of dollars for the Patriot's PAC-3 missiles.

Shay Assad: And over a seven-year period these companies just keep rakin' it in. 

Bill Whitaker: What level of profit are we talking about? 

Shay Assad: Well — if the average profitability that was negotiated in a firm fixed price contract was typically between 12% and 15%, so a company could make —

Bill Whitaker: — that's a good profit.

Shay Assad: Sure.

But Shay Assad told us Pentagon analysts found total profits approached 40%.

Shay Assad: Based on what they actually made, we would've received an entire year's worth of missiles for free.

Beyond overcharging the DoD for these technologies, the maintenance and repair costs are also awarded to the companies who are developing them in the first place. Since the proprietary information belongs to the private contractor, the Pentagon can no longer afford to control these programs themselves.

According to former Air Force General Chris Bogdan, this is precisely what happened with Lockheed Martin and the F-35. Bogdan described the scenario to Whitaker in detail.

General Bogdan says we've only begun to feel the full impact. In 2012, he was tapped to take the reins of the troubled F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program –  it was seven years behind schedule and $90 billion over the original estimate. But Bogdan told us the biggest costs are yet to come for support and maintenance, which could end up costing taxpayers $1.3 trillion.  

Chris Bogdan: We won't be able to buy as many F-35s as we thought. Because it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to buy air— more airplanes when you can't afford the ones you have.

The Pentagon had ceded control of the program to Lockheed Martin. The contractor is delivering the aircraft the Pentagon paid to design and build, but under the contract, Lockheed and its suppliers retained control of design and repair data – the proprietary information needed to fix and upgrade the plane.

Bill Whitaker: So you spend billions and billions of dollars to get this plane built. And it doesn't actually belong to the Department of Defense?

Chris Bogdan: The weapon system belongs to the department. But the data underlying the design of the airplane does not.

Bill Whitaker: We can't maintain and sustain the planes without Lockheed's--

Chris Bogdan: Correct. And that's because— that's because we didn't— we didn't up front either buy or negotiate getting the— the technical data we needed so that when a part breaks, the DOD can fix it themselves.

The fact that Lockheed Martin has the ability to overcharge the Pentagon — and therefore taxpayers — to the point that the government can no longer control the program is nothing short of outrageous. The lack of leverage over these negotiations by those who are supposed to represent the American people seems like a concern for Congress and draws clear parallels to the UFO coverup that has been going on for decades.

When you add on top of that the Pentagon's revolving door of military service members into and out of public service and the private sector, sweetheart deals and kickbacks could easily be camouflaged through the seemingly legitimate awarding of contracts.

If this kind of brazen, Pentagon-sanctioned corruption is happening out in the open with publicly acknowledged projects such as the F-35, it is unsettling to imagine what kind of insidious behavior might be taking place in the classified world — particularly in programs intentionally restricted from Congressional oversight.

IRAD programs are different from regular contracts in that they allow contractors to charge the US government for research and development they conduct solely on their own, as long the efforts that incur those costs are of potential interest to the DoD.

Contractors essentially conduct this research with all of their own proprietary technology and then invoice American taxpayers. So if, as Grusch alleges, these companies are overcharging for these independent efforts, how might they relate to the reverse engineering of UFOs?

During his testimony, Grusch left another breadcrumb to this effect in an answer he gave to Rep. Anna Paulina Luna. Luna asked Grusch to elaborate on previous comments he had made in his interview on NewsNation with Ross Coulthart.

Luna: You mentioned white-collar crimes potentially taking place in regard to a coverup. Can you please elaborate?

Grusch: I have concerns, based on interviews I conducted under my official duties, of potential violations of the Federal Acquisitions Regulations. The FAR.

As it turns out, these FAR violations may be exactly what Grusch had been talking about in his reference to IRAD — and a very specific definition that is likely applicable to the reverse engineering of UFOs.

FAR 31.205-18 details the costs allowable to charge the government for independent research and development bids and proposals. This section separates the definitions of research into two separate categories — basic and applied.

Basic research is defined as research directed toward increasing knowledge in science. Applied research is the application of that knowledge toward development that would be of interest to the DoD. It is worth examining the definition of applied research in full.

Applied research means that effort which (1) normally follows basic research, but may not be severable from the related basic research, (2) attempts to determine and exploit the potential of scientific discoveries or improvements in technology, materials, processes, methods, devices, or techniques, and (3) attempts to advance the state of the art. Applied research does not include efforts whose principal aim is the design, development, or test of specific items or services to be considered for sale; these efforts are within the definition of the term "development," defined in this subsection.

The reverse engineering of advanced non-human technology would likely meet the criteria of applied research. Exploiting crashed UFO materials — state-of-the-art technology, by any definition — would be considered under this interpretation, and potentially used as a justification to seek reimbursement from the government.

I'm not going pretend to be anything close to an expert in Federal Acquisition law, but this is likely what Grusch was referring to in terms of IRAD and its connection to the UFO coverup, and specifically his basis for the allegation of white-collar crime.

There is a lot more to pick apart from this hearing, and I will be doing so in subsequent articles.

On Wednesday, April 19th, 2023, the second Congressional hearing on the UFO/UAP phenomenon in fifty years was held by the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities.

The head of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, gave testimony and answered questions from Chairwoman Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and two other members of the committee.

Interestingly, the open hearing followed the classified briefing that was reportedly given to additional Senators. This left the public portion with only three Senators asking questions in what felt like a side room of the Capitol, giving off an impression of unimportance or indifference to the subject at hand.

Once the Senators, the audience, and Dr. Kirkpatrick were situated, the reading of the opening testimony began.

Dr. Kirkpatrick seemed mostly sincere, if somewhat disinterested, in addressing the UAP topic and the work his office had been undertaking for the past nine months.

Dr. Kirkpatrick rattled off what he described as AARO's accomplishments over the past year, repeatedly describing the organization as "young" and adding several caveats that more time would be necessary to produce results that would hold up to scientific scrutiny.

He listed the military services and government agencies AARO had "partnered" with their efforts to centralize data on anomalous phenomena. He highlighted the importance of collaborating with the new "Tiger Team" interagency UAP task force established by the White House in the wake of the recent Chinese spy balloon saga and subsequent shootdowns of three still-unidentified objects back in February of this year.

Kirkpatrick then went on to describe his own personal vision of how the office should be run, along with his administrative definition of unidentified anomalous phenomena and the current established process of determining the origin of unidentified craft in US airspace.

He stressed the importance of the scientific method, once again emphasizing how these processes likely won't take place at the speed desired by the public who have already been waiting 75 years for basic answers to these questions.

Kirkpatrick also dismissed civilian-led research conducted through necessity due to the decades-long information vacuum resulting from the lack of data and proliferation of disinformation by government agencies.

He derided blogs and social media as insufficient avenues to find answers to this phenomenon, platforms for transparency activism that researcher Grant Cameron humorously pointed to as the reason for his "butt being forced into a chair to testify" at the hearing in the first place.

Dr. Kirkpatrick went on to share some examples of the information collected by AARO in the form of charts and heat maps, with data points such as morphology, propulsion, color, and altitude.

He also shared two new UAP videos. One video showed a metallic orb filmed in the Middle East that still had yet to be identified, while the other was an example of a successful identification of a commercial aircraft in South Asia.

During the question and answer session, one of the more concerning admissions by Dr. Kirkpatrick had to do with the mechanism in place regarding his office's direct reporting requirements.

When asked by Senator Gillibrand if AARO had been set up correctly as a subordinate to the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Dr. Kirkpatrick revealed that the office still reported to the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence.

Gillibrand immediately pressed the issue, inquiring upfront if she needed to address and update AARO's reporting requirements in next year's National Defense Authorization Act.

Kirkpatrick responded in a somewhat evasive and vague manner, stating, "I think they're planning on coming back to you with an answer on what the plan is, and I think at that time, that will inform what you want to do."

As many familiar with the current push for UFO transparency will recall, Luis Elizondo has stated repeatedly in interviews and on social media that his old office of the USD(I) has a history of persecuting whistleblowers and others advocating for the release of information regarding the issue.

When AARO's predecessor AOIMSG was announced during the Fall of 2021 in what turned out to be a brazen attempt to circumvent Congressional intent, Elizondo took to Twitter and wrote a thread explaining the reason this development would be detrimental to the progress of UFO disclosure.

1. Important update: Before anyone gets too excited about the recent Pentagon announcement of a new UAP group, please consider the following: USDI is precisely the same organization that has underplayed and tried to kill the UAP effort for years.

2. USDI is an oversight organization and non-operational. Nowhere is there a requirement to provide unclassified findings to Congress, or work with our international partners.

3. Given that elements still exist in the Pentagon who are actively underplaying the significance of this topic, this is akin to giving an alcoholic the key and control to the liquor cabinet.

4. If you want to maintain UAP/UFO secrecy, this is exactly how to do it.

5. This is a direct and blatant attempt to circumvent and undermine the Senate, @SenGillibrand ,@SenRubioPress, @RepRubenGallego, @MartinHeinrich, @RepTimBurchett, and others.

The fact that AARO — the latest version of the office referenced by Elizondo in his tweets above —  is still under the control of the USD(I) after nine months does not seem to bode well for the chances of UAP information reaching the public.

Fortunately, the Senators leading this push have the power to mandate further requirements, though whether or not the Department of Defense will ever follow these policies is anyone's guess at this point.

Another concerning aspect of this briefing once again had to do with the USD(I)'s involvement, this time explicitly pertaining to the release of public information.

Senator Gillibrand directly asked Dr. Kirkpatrick if there was any plan for public engagement by AARO, and his response was less than assuring.

So we have a number of public engagement recommendations according to our strategic plan. All of those have been submitted for approval. They have to be approved by the USD(I&S), we're waiting for approval to go do that.

So just to review, the new AARO is still reporting to the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence.

According to former USD(I) employee Luis Elizondo, this office having control over the UFO issue "is akin to giving an alcoholic the key and control to the liquor cabinet," and these same officials "have tried to kill the UAP effort for years."

This is the exact reason he resigned from the Pentagon in the first place.

AARO was mandated by Congress in legislation to no longer be under USD(I) nine months ago, a mandate which is clearly being violated in what appears to be an intentional manner.

Now Kirkpatrick is saying that plans for public engagement on the UAP issue by AARO do exist and are part of the office's strategy.

But now, since the public engagement needs to be given the green light by USD(I), we have reached a point where the obstruction has become a public spectacle and blatant abuse of power by the Pentagon.

This pattern of behavior is an indictment of the USD(I), and exposes their contempt for the American public who pays their salaries so they can provide for their families.

Employees of their office have been forced to resign in their attempts to counteract this obfuscation, risking their reputations and future job prospects because a few individuals at the top are scared of being embarrassed.

As much as some in the UFO community would love to write this hearing off as a "nothingburger" or just another bureaucratic hat tip to Congress, the reality is that this was something much more profound.

The shameless arrogance and disregard for public trust displayed by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security were laid bare in front of the entire country, and nobody took the time to notice.

There is a blatant withholding of information being admitted to on live television, and nobody in the media seems to give a shit because the subjects involved have been stigmatized by the very organizations preventing the release of said information.

Pentagon officials are handing any semi-competent journalist a blockbuster scandal on a silver platter.

Is nobody going to take them up on it?

Subscribe now

The Chinese balloon/UFO saga has continued into another week, so I felt it would be appropriate to address the situation from my point of view in a longer format. I have some thoughts I’d like to share that requires a bit more nuance than Twitter provides.

I’m not going to go into the details of the timeline, as it’s been exhaustively communicated in mai…

Read more