Congressional Hearing on July 26 2023 on UAPs / UFOs - Witnesses Ryan Graves, David Grusch and Cdr. David Fravor - The 'X' Zone UFO Files

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:15):
The Subcommittee hearing on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenaor UAPs will come to order. Welcome
everyone, without objection. The Chairmay declare a recess at any time.
Additionally, without objection, the followingmembers are waived onto the subcommittee for the
purpose of participating in today's hearing.Mister Burchand of Tennessee, Miss Luna Florida,

(00:37):
Mister Gets of Florida, Mister Burlisonof Missouri, missus Ocazio Cortes in
New York, and mister Oglis ofTennessee. Without objections, so ordered for
today's subcommittee hearing. Both the Chairand ranking member will have ten minutes for
opening remarks. We may both begiving some of those minutes to other members
of our party. I'm now goingto recognize my cell for ten minutes.

(01:00):
I'm actually going to try to getout of here in about four and then
we'll give it to some of myfriends over here. Good morning, and
welcome to the mostly exciting, themost exciting subcommittee in Congress this week,
the Subcommittee on National Security of theBoarder in Foreign Affairs for discussion of Unidentified
Anomalous phenomenon. I'd like to thankthe brave military pilas in personnel such as

(01:23):
such as the witnesses on the paneltoday, for sharing their stories on how
they've engaged UAPs, which has broughtattention to this matter. Curiosity and speculation
from all walks of life have generatedinterest in studying what UAPs are and what
threats they may pose. I willsay that when I was younger in school,

(01:44):
I read a book, a nineteensixty six book called Flying Saucers Serious
Business, and for a while,when I was a little bit younger,
I thought it was the most importantissue out there, the lack of a
transparency regarding UAPs, which was oneof the themes of that book. In

(02:10):
any event, it's it's led interestin studying what UAPs are and what threats
they pose. The lack of transparencyregarding UAPs has field wild speculation and debate
for decades, evoting public trust inthe very institutions that are meant to serve
and protect them, as is evidencedby the large number of people we have
here. I also want to pointout in nineteen sixty six, Presidentierald Ford

(02:32):
claimed to have seen a UFO inIn nineteen sixty nine in Georgia, Jimmy
Carter claimed to have seen a UFO, so this has led Congress to establish
entities to examine UAPs. The NationalDefense Authorization Act of twenty twenty two established
the All Domain Anomaly Resolution Officer aro TO conduct or to coordinate efforts across

(02:57):
the Department of Defense and other federalagents federal agencies to detect, identify,
and investigate UAPs. However, aarrow's budget remains classified, prohibiting meaningful oversight
from Congress. In addition to aarrow's efforts, NASSAU is leading an independent
study on UAPs to identify how UAPdata is gathered from both civilian and government

(03:21):
entities that can be analyzed to shedlight on the topic. However, despite
these offices being established, their livesof pressing demand for government transparency and accountability
that cannot be overlooked. And that'sbeen a problem that's been around for fifty
years. The Biden administration handling ofthe Chinese by balloon that violated USAir space
is one example how the government isnot prepared for these The Biden administration's description

(03:46):
of events has show them that thegovernment continues not to be forthright. Between
the Chinese balloon being shot down andtwo UAPs substantly shot down following the event.
Earlier this year, the US governmentspent one and a half million dollars
and taxpayer dollars on missiles, yetwe have seen little clarity from the Biden
administration. We must demand transparency fromthe Department of Defense, our intelligence community,

(04:09):
in our defense industry on the UAPwork. We're going to ask some
questions about that today. Congress recognizesthe subject of UAPs is multifaceted and requires
a careful, data driven approach.Today we will see clarity from these witnesses
testimonies, or will see clarity asto what can be done to improve reporting
for military and civilians, and remaincommitted to objective inquiry. Congress should work

(04:33):
to ensure that knowledge is not drivenby fear. Today we are not just
debating the existence of UAPs. Weare deliberating on the principles that define our
republic, which is a commitment totransparency and accountability. I look forward to
hearing from our witnesses today about wayswe can improve government efficiency and openness when
it comes to UAPs. I thankeach of you for your presence here today

(04:57):
and for your dedication to safeguarding theinterests of the American people. Well,
I look forward to your testimony.I ain't gonna turn it over for two
and a half or three minutes torepresent a burchard from Tennessee. Thank you,
mister Chairman, Thank you all forbeing here. I want to thank
everybody for making this happen today,and I want to remind everybody this is
a nonpartisan issue that has nothing todo with party politics. I think the

(05:20):
cover up goes a lot deeper thanthat. I also want to thank my
colleagues, represent Annapolina, Luna sittingbeside me here, Jared Moskowitz, my
friend across the aisle. There's anincredible mind, and I'm anxious to hear
his questions. My buddy Eric Burlison. And it's not in my notes here,
but Matt Gates. If it hadn'tbeen for Matt Gates, myself,

(05:43):
him and Luna would still be downat Eglin Air Force Base trying to get
some answers. He's got an incrediblelegal mind. Also, I know I
saw it in the crowd there.George Knapp, my buddy Jeremy Corbell.
They're not witnesses, but they've providedsome statements on this subject, and I
seek unanimous consent to enter those statementsinto the record. Mister Chairman, without

(06:04):
objection, also would like to enterin I understand now that this is unclassified
its public record, but as weall know, that's sometimes difficult for the
public to get a hold of areport, defense intelligence reference documents, advanced
space propulsion based on vacuum spacetime metricengineering. Some light reading for some of

(06:25):
our members about objection, Thank you, you know. Mister Knapp wrote,
since nineteen sixty nine, the positionour military has been that UFOs post no
threat to national security and are notworthy of further study. I'd say that's
the biggest understatement of the decade.He also goes on to talk about the
dismissive attitude and said odds with whatwas revealed in documents, reports and internal

(06:47):
memos. And mister Cabell says,as he writes these words, the UFO
is emerging as a major topic ofglobal importance. I can state that as
a fact out there, I meta fellow who came in there all the
way from Denmark to be here forthis meeting. So this is huge,
This is worldwide. I think wesuspect what's going on. But I'd also

(07:11):
like to thank the members of Congresswho have supported our efforts to make this
hearing happen. Some of even confidedto me that they've had UFO sightings of
their own. Those members, ofcourse, some of them wished to remain
anonymous, and I'll keep it thatway. But also, finally, I
have to think that these three bravewitnesses here they took an oath. They
took an oath to uphold the ConstitutionUnited States, and dad gum, they're
doing it, and we owe thema detigraded kid. Y'all quit clapp and

(07:49):
you're cutting it all my time,this kid. These folks, they've got
nothing to gain from this, andI think you're going to find out that
they've endured quite a few slings andarrow. We need to remember them in
our prayers and their families, andI'm thankful them for their honest testimonies.
They have done interviews and appeared indocumentaries like Accidental Truth to get their stories
out there, and now they areall here to testify under oath for Congress.

(08:16):
It's been so difficult to get heretoday. I've said, you know,
in the Baptist Church. We'd saythat the devil's in our way,
and the devil has been in ourway through this thing. We've run into
roadblocks from members from the intelligence community, the Pentagon. I propose legislation to
go in the fa reauthorization that justsaid if an airline pilot has a sighting,

(08:37):
that when he makes that report tothe FAA, that it would come
to Congress. But I was toldthat the intelligence community did not like that,
and the bill was an amendment,was not even hurt in committee.
I think it's time for this countryto take back our country. We need
to tell the folks at the Pentagonthey work for us, Dad, we
don't work for them. And that'sexactly the point. This is an issue

(08:58):
of government transparency. We can't trusta government that does not trust its people.
We're not bringing Little Green Man orflying saucers into the hearing. Sorry
to disappoint about half y'all. We'rejust going to get to the facts.
We're going to uncover the cover up. And I hope this is just the
beginning of many more hearings and morepeople coming forward about this, and I
yield back the remainder of my time. I think is to represent Luna,

(09:22):
mister Chairman, or is it yeah, well we'll call him as Luna for
hers statement. The circumstances surrounding upshas captivated the intention of the American people
for decades, ingrand in even theminds of our nation's leaders, from Jimmy
Carter to Barack Obama, Hillary Clintonto Donald Trump, Marco Rubio to Chuck
Schumer, John Radcliffe to National SecurityCouncil officials. Yet from Roswell, New

(09:46):
Mexico, to the coast of Jacksonville, Florida, the sightings of UAPs have
rarely been explained by the people whohave firsthand accounts of these situations. This
is largely due to the lack oftransparency by our own governments and the failure
of our elected leaders make good ontheir promises to release explanations and footage,
and mountains of overclassified documents that continueto be hidden from the American people.

(10:07):
This isn't just how I feel.In fact, the American people largely believed
that the government has actively covered upthe truth about UAPs. One poll in
particular found that sixty eight percent ofAmericans believe that the government is hiding information
about UAPs and not being honest aboutwhat we know about them, and from
my personal experience, I believe thesame thing. Another poll found that nearly

(10:28):
half Americans believe that the federal governmentis doing a very bad or somewhat bad
job of dealing with reports of UFOsidings. As Representative Burchett just reference on
the FA bill that just went through, you can tell that that's exactly happening.
Considering the thousands of testimonies and videostaken on people's phones and eyewitnesses accounts
made by credible witnesses such as doctors, pilots, scientists, and active duty

(10:52):
service members, is unacceptable to continueto gaslight Americans into thinking that this is
not happening or that the potential ofintelligence intelligent life forms exists other than humans.
Even more alarming is the fact thatthese eyewitnesses are many of time service
members and have no assurance that theirlives will not be negatively impacted or even
harmed by their experiences. In beingan active duty service member working on an

(11:15):
airfield, I've had conversations with manypilots where they were in fear of coming
forward for retribution and or being takenoff flight status. How do we know
this because the government has said nothingto assure us otherwise. They have also
did nothing to calm the concerns ofover twenty percent of Americans who have reported
to have seen UFOs or UAPs.We are simply told not to question the

(11:37):
government and that the government has undercontrol. Today is the first hearing of
its kind where we will tempt toget down to the bottom of what is
actually happening with UAPs. But wewill hear from people who have had personal
sightings rather than Pentagon bureaucrats who havealways been sent to stonewall or investigations just
so that the press knows and thepeople know. We were even denied access

(11:58):
to a classified briefing in a skiftto this hearing. Do the amount of
hoops that we had to jump throughto grant temporary clearance to witness Grush who
has knowledge of classified information. Itis time to have an open minded discussion
on this topic, to hear theevidence and understand the magnitude of what this
means, not just for our nation, but for humanity. Thank you,
Chairman, I yell back their ustof my time. Thank you very much,

(12:20):
and I'd like to thank you,thank you, and mister burchand for
bringing this topic to my attention.Now we'll recognize National Security Subcommittee Ranking Member
Garcia for ten minutes. Well,thank you, mister Chairman, and I
want to thank first our witnesses forjoining us today. I want to begin
by thanking you all for your serviceto our country and for sharing your voices

(12:41):
today and your courage to be hereas well to mister Graves. Particularly grateful
to you to spend some time thatwe had for you to share with Candor
some of your experiences, so Iappreciate that as well. I do want
to thank all the members of oursubcommittee today and also those that are here
and have waved on for their incredibleinterests in this issue. It's particularly a

(13:03):
Congressman bird Should. I know thatyour leadership has brought up to this place
today, and I want to thankyou for that, as well as everyone
else that's been engaged in this work. I also want to think the oversight
staff why Now has been working veryhard to ensure that today's hearing is serious,
that it's transparent, that it alsoprovides appropriate answers as our oversight body
always demands. Now, it's reallyimportant that we're here in a bipartisan way

(13:26):
to have this conversation, which really, to the heart of it is about
national security and key to the subcommittee'score purpose. This is the Subcommittee on
National Security of the Oversight Committee.Now, our witnesses will testify today that
UAPs have posed a serious safety threat, and we must understand this more broadly.
We're dealing with real questions. Theyget to the heart of our faith

(13:48):
in government. Faith in our institutions, as we all know, is at
an all time low. Partisanship andalternative facts make it too easy to doubt
narrative or our institutions. But thishearing will offer the public que perspectives,
building on years of reporting by bothfederal agencies and the independent media. Now,
some of the earliest reporting on thisissue was a groundbreaking twenty seventeen New

(14:09):
York Times report which revealed research,as we know now on unidentified anomalists phenomena
of many call UFOs by the DefenseIntelligence Agency. Mister Grays and Commander for
Ever's experiences with UAPs have also beendocumented by the public, not just by
The New York Times, but CNNand many other national news outlets. Now,

(14:30):
the Office of the Director of NationalIntelligence has published public reports documenting UAPs,
and on June ninth, twenty twentytwo, NASA announced the agency is
commissioning a study to of course examineunidentified anomalist phenomena. Now, the sheer
number of reports Wilson blowers and storiesof unidentified anomalist phenomena should raise real questions
and warrant investigation and oversight. Andthat's why we are here today. Now.

(14:52):
Pilots have reported encounters for years now. Because of the stigma around reporting
these incidents, we still don't havea complete picture of a see what's going
on, particularly as your witnesses willtestify on the civilian side, and that
is a real problem that we havetoday in the country. Now, it's
very important that we show that Democratsand Republicans in Congress can come together in

(15:13):
a bipartisan way to cut through misinformationand to look at the facts in a
serious and thoughtful manner. If weare to advance oversight and public disclosure,
we must also gain the broad supportof the public. We will succeed getting
facts out to the public faster ifthere is a broad public support as part
of the process. Now, Iunderstand fully the Department of Defense is hesitant

(15:33):
to share information that could also undermineour national security by revealing information on the
capabilities of our own aircraft, ourcensors, and other sensitive material. At
the same time, many people believethat we're withholding information from them, and
that is dangerous. Also, Ibelieve in openness and transparency. That is
also the role of Congress, andI want to trust that the American people

(15:56):
will be able to weigh the evidenceand make up their own minds. Now,
we have incidents word in censors,sometimes even multiple types of sensors detect
things that we cannot explain. UAPs, whatever they may be, may pose
a serious threat to our military orcivilian aircraft, and that must be understood.
Now. My career in training asa long time and career educator and

(16:18):
teacher and researcher tell me that weshould never rule anything out. We know
that our space, of course isvast and undiscovered. I also want to
note that mister Seawan Kirkpatrick, directorof the All Domain Anomaly Resolution Office,
the component of the DoD office thatinvestigates UAP data, has testified before the
Senate this year that his unit hasfound no evidence of extra x real activity.

(16:41):
NASA has also stated that they don'thave evidence of extrass real life either.
And we've heard this, of coursefrom some of our government agencies,
and we should remind viewers and witnesses, which I think is really important,
that we also cannot share classified informationin public settings. But questions, of
course remain that people want to seedata and information and for themselves. The
enormous interest in the hearing today underscoresthe importance of a fair and open look

(17:04):
at the evidence from witnesses who canshare their unique perspectives. Now I know
I certainly have a lot of questions. I know that all the members of
our committee do as well. Weshould come to this hearing with an open
mind, and we should not letour existing ideas restrict us on either side.
I hear over and over from manyagencies, a stigma around reporting and
investigating UAPs prevents us from getting realanswers. We know that whistlebrowers have reported

(17:30):
harassment, intimidation or stigma as well, and this is not acceptable. If
people can't report incidents which would havenational security or safety implications, then that
also has serious consequences for us.As ranking member of this subcommittee, I
know my job would be completely impossibleif whistleblowers or others feel intimidated to come
before this committee. We can't beafraid of asking questions, and we can't

(17:51):
be afraid of the truth. I'mproudest that's just. Hearing builds upon bipartisan
work by members of the House andSenate dating many years back, which is
sought to increase awareness within the Departmentof Defense and more and to mandate more
of Congress of UAPs. We knowthe Senator is taking up an amendment to
their Defense Authorization Bill which will createa commission with broad declassification authority, and
we can all agree that that isan important step. Members of both parties

(18:15):
and senior officials and multiple administrations havetaken an interest in this issue, and
we're proud to carry and build thatconfidence in the American people. This hearing
will also not be the end ofthe discussion, but a new chapter and
start to years and years of workthat many folks, both both in the
public and within government have been workingon. We should encourage more reporting,

(18:36):
not less on UAPs. The morewe understand, the safer we will be.
We will here testimony from witnesses todaywith the long record of service to
the American people and with subject matterexpertise, our witnesses have a unique opportunity
to share the perspective, insights,and their experiences with the American people,
and I encourage all of my colleaguesto engage with these difficult questions with an

(18:57):
open mind and to follow the facton behalf of our country. I also
just want to say more broadly thatwe should look at this hearing with and
believe that everything is on the tableas it relates to UAPs. I think
an open mind is absolutely the bestI want to yield the two and a
half minutes the remainder of my timeto the representative from Florida, Representative Moskovitch

(19:18):
for an opening statement. He alsohas been very much engaged in this issue,
and I want to thank him forhis leadership. Congressman, thank you,
Ranking Member Garcia, thank you,mister Chairman. I want to thank
Tim Burchett and Annapolina Luna for theirleadership in pushing this hearing forward. I
want to thank obviously Committee staff andtheir staff working on this on a bipartisan
basis, because many Americans are deeplyinterested in this issue and it shouldn't take

(19:44):
the potential of non human origin tobring us together. Additionally, I want
to thank the witnesses for coming forwardto share your perspectives, your thoughts,
and the sightings of UAPs. Unlikeother hearings many times in Congress, you're
not here to help a political party, but you're here to share information with
the American people. And it's notsomething that is just going on in this

(20:06):
administration. It's something that's spanned manyadministrations. For decades. Many Americans have
been fascinated by objects mysterious and unexplained, and it's long past time that they
got some answers. The American publichas a right to learn about technologies of
unknown origins, non human intelligence,and unexplainable phenomena. Those are not the

(20:29):
words of a UFO Twitter account,though. That is a direct quote from
Majority Leader Chuck Schumer that the Americanpublic has a right to learn about technologies
of unknown origins, non human intelligence, and unexplainable phenomena. In an interview
with Fox News, recent former Directorof National Intelligence John Radcliffe confirmed the US
government is aware a lot more sightingsof UAPs and that they have not made

(20:53):
that information public. I quote,there are a lot more sightings that have
not been made public, Radcliffe saidto Fox News. For me, this
hearing is about transparency. We unfortunatelylive in a time in which many people
distrust government and our institutions, andoverclassification of information away from the American public
or even Congress contributes to today's politics. The American people have regular questions,

(21:18):
what are UAPs? How come themedia doesn't report more on them? Are
they foreign adversaries? Are the UStechnology? Are they something else? They
ask themselves. How come when aRussian jet shoots flares at one of our
drones? We have perfect pictures andvideos to show the American people and the
world, but when it comes toUAPs nothing. Of course, we must

(21:40):
always protect our national security to maintainour superiority, like when stealth helicopters were
only rumored to exist but were usedin the Osama bin Lanan raid in two
and eleven. But we can't allowthat to be used as a shield to
keep the American people completely in thedark from basic truth. The American people

(22:02):
deserve to hear more about special accessprograms. Congress has a right to know
if there's any unsanctioned weapons development satelliteimagery that has not been provided to Congress.
Congress created the All Domain Resolution Officein the NDAA of twenty twenty two.
In its initial analysis, there areone hundred and seventy one uncharacterized UAP

(22:23):
reports and this is the words fromthe report that appear to have demonstrated unusual
flight characteristics or performance capabilities. Ibelieve more information is known about one hundred
and seventy one instances. It's timefor Congress to reinsert ourselves. I call
on our military leaders and intelligence officialsto release more information to the American people

(22:45):
about UAPs and to our military leaders. If there's nothing to conceal, let
Congress go to write Patterson Air ForceBase, the Dugway Proving Ground, or
even Groom Lake in Nevada. Weshould have disclosure today, We should have
disclosure tomorrow. The time has come. Thank you, Recommember, Thank you,

(23:06):
mister Muskwitch, and I would yieldback now to our chairman. Thank
you. Right now, I'd liketo introduce our witnesses, our first witnesses,
Lieutenant Ryan Graves. He's the executivedirector of Americans for Safe Aerospace.
Lieutenant Graves is also a former USNavy F A teen pilot with his own
UAP experience. The next witness,David Grush, is a former senior intelligence

(23:29):
officer with the National Geospatial Intelligence Agencyand was a senior technical advisor for UAP
issues, and finally, finally retiredNavy commanded Date Commander David Fraber, squadron
leader who worked as a naval aviatorfor eighteen years. Mister Fraber has his
own UAP experience, known as theTikTok Event. I look forward to hearing

(23:51):
from all three of you today.Pursuant to Committee Rule nine G, the
witnesses will please stand and raise theirright hands. Do you solemnly swear it
or affirm that the testimony you areabout to give us the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but thetruth. So help you God, let
the records show that all the witnessesanswered in the affirmative. You may be

(24:15):
seated. We appreciate you all beinghere today and look forward to your testimony.
Or remind the witnesses that we haveread your written statements and they will
appear in full in the hearing record. Please try to limit your oral statements
to five minutes. As a reminder, please press the button on the microphone
in front of you so that it'son and the members can hear you.
When you begin to speak, thelight in front of you will turn green.

(24:37):
After four minutes it will turn yellow, and the red light when that
comes on, it tells you yourfive minutes have expired. I'll now recognize
mister Graves for five minutes for youropening statement. Thank you, Chairman Grothman,
Ranking Member Garcia, distinguished members ofthe House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security,
Representative Burchett and Luna. My nameis Ian Fob's Graves, and I'm

(25:00):
a form FA Team pilot with adecadtive service in the US Navy, including
two deployments in Operation and Enduring Freedomand Operation Inherent Resolve. I have experienced
advanced UAP firsthand, and I'm hereto voice the concerns of more than thirty
commercial aircrew and military veterans who haveconfided their similar encounters with me. Today,
I would like to highlight three criticalissues that demand our action as we

(25:22):
convene here. UAP are in ourairspace, but they are grossly underreported.
These sightings are not rare or isolated. They are routine military aircrew and commercial
pilots trained observers whose lives depend onaccurate identification are frequently witnessing these phenomenon.
The stigma attached to UAP is realand powerful and challenges national security. It

(25:44):
silences commercial pilots who fear professional repercussions, discourages witnesses. It is only compounded
by recent government claims questioning the credibilityof eyewitness testimony. Parts of our government
are aware of more about UAP thanthey led on, but excessive classification practices
keep information hidden. Since twenty twentyone, all UAP videos are classified as
secret or above. This level ofsecrecy not only impedes our understanding, but

(26:07):
fuel speculation and mistrust. In twentyfourteen, I was an F eighteen Foxstrop
pilot in the Navy Fighter Attack Squadroneleven, the Red Rippers, and I
was stationed to nas Oceania in VirginiaBeach. After upgrades were made to our
jets radar systems, we began detectingunknown objects operating in our airspace. At

(26:29):
first, we assumed they were radarerrors, but soon we began to correlate
the radar tract with multiple onboard sensors, including infrared systems, eventually through visual
ID During a training mission in warningarea at Whisky seventy two, ten miles
off the coast of Virginia Beach,two f eighteen super hornets were split by
UAP. The object, described asa dark gray or a black cube inside

(26:49):
of a clear sphere, came withinfifty feet of the lead aircraft and was
estimated to be five to fifteen feetin diameter. The mission commander terminated the
flight immediately and returned base. Oursquadrons submitted a safety report, but there
was no official acknowledgment of the incidentand no further mechanism to report the sightings.
Soon, these encounters became so frequentthat aircrew would discuss the risk of

(27:11):
UAP as part of their regular preflight briefs. Recognizing the need for action
and answers, I founded Americans forSafe Aerospace. The organization has since become
a heaven for UAP witnesses who werepreviously unspoken due to the absence of a
safe intake process. More than thirtywitnesses have come forward in Almost five thousand
Americans have joined us in the fightfor a transparency at Safe Aerospace dot org.

(27:34):
The majority of witnesses are commercial pilotsat major major airlines. Often they
are veterans with decades of flying experience. Pilots are reporting uapat altitudes that appear
above them at forty thousand feet,potentially in low earth orbit or in the
gray zone blow the carbon line,making inexplainable maneuvers like right hand turns and
retrograde orbits or j hooks. Sometimesthese reports are recurring, with numerous recent

(27:59):
sightings of Hawaii and in the NorthAtlantic. Other veterans are also coming forward
to US regarding UAP encounters in ourairspace and oceans. The most compelling involved
observations of UAP by multiple witnesses andcensor systems. I believe these accounts are
only scratching the surface, and morewill share their experiences once it is safe
to do so. In closing,I recognize the skepticism surrounding this topic.

(28:23):
If everyone can see the censor andvideo data eye witnessed, our national conversation
would change. I urge us toput a size stigma and address the security
and safety issue this topic represents.If up our foreign drones is an urgent
national security problem, if it issomething else is an issue for science.
In either case, unidentified objects areconcerned for flight safety. The American people

(28:45):
deserve to know what is happening inour skies. It is long overdue.
Thank you, mister Reisch, MisterChairman, Ranking Members in Congressman, thank
you. I'm happy to be here. This is an important issue and I'm
grateful for your time. My nameis David Charles Grush. I was an

(29:07):
intelligence officer for fourteen years in bothin the US Air Force, both active
duty, Air National Guard and Reserve, at the rank of major, and
most recently from twenty twenty one totwenty twenty five or twenty twenty three,
at the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency NNGAat the GS fifteen civilian level, which
is the military equivalent of a fullbird Colonel. I was my agency's co

(29:33):
lead and Unidentified Anomalist Phenomena and TransmediumObject analysis, as well as reporting to
the UAP Task Force UAPTF and eventually, once it was established, the All
Domain Anomaly Resolution Office AERO. Ibecame a whistle blower through a PPD nineteen
urgent concern filing in May twenty twentytwo with the Intelligence Community Inspector General following

(30:00):
concerning reports from multiple esteemed and credentialedcurrent and former military and intelligence community individuals
that the US government is operating withsecrecy above congressional oversights with regards to UAPs.
My testimony is based on information I'vebeen given by individuals with a long

(30:21):
standing track record of legitimacy and serviceto this country, many of whom also
have shared compelling evidence in the formof photography, official documentation, and classified
oral testimony to myself and many myvarious colleagues. I have taking every step
I can to collaborate this evidence overa period of four years while I was

(30:44):
with the UAP Task Force, anddo my due diligence on the individual sharing
it. This is because of thesesteps I believe strongly in the importance of
bringing this information before you. Iam driven by a commitment of both to
truth and transparency, rooted in ourinherent duty to uphold the United States Constitution

(31:06):
and protect the American people. I'masking Congress to hold our government to the
standard and thoroughly investigate these claims.But as I stand here under oath now,
I am speaking to the facts asI've been told them in the US
Air Force, in my National ReconnaissanceOffice NRO, reservist capacity. I was
a member of the UAP Task Forcefrom twenty nineteen to twenty twenty one.

(31:30):
I served at the Innro Operations Centeron the Director's Briefing staff, which included
the coordination of the Presidential Daily briefand supporting variety of contingency operations which I
was the Reserve Intelligence Division chief backup. In twenty nineteen, the UAP Task
Force Director asked me to identify allspecial access programs and controlled access programs also

(31:55):
known as SAPs and caps. Weneeded to satisfy our congressional mandated mission and
we were direct report at the timeto the Depth SECT death At the time,
due to my extensive executive level intelligencesupport duties, I was cleared to
literally all relevant compartments and in aposition of extreme trust both in my military

(32:15):
and civilian capacities. I was informedin the course of my official duties of
a multidecade UAP crash retrieval and reverseengineering program to which I was denied access
to those addition read ons when Irequested it. I made the decision based

(32:36):
on the data I collected, toreport this information to my superior superiors and
multiple Inspectors General and in effect becominga whistleblower. As you know, I've
suffered retaliation for my decision, butI am hopeful that my actions will ultimately
lead to a positive outcome of increasedtransparency. Thank you, and I'm happy

(32:58):
to answer your questions. Thank you, Commander Fraver, Thank you, Thank
you, mister Chairman, Carsman,and counters women. I want to first
thank you for the invitation to speakto the committee on the UAP topic that
has been in the news for thepast six years and seems to be continuing
to gain momentum. As you know, my name is David Fraverer. I'm

(33:21):
retired commander in the United States Navy. In two thousand and four, I
was a commanding officer of Strike FighterSquadron forty one, the world famous Black
Aces. You're attached to carry airingeleven station on board US Snimmits and have
begun a two month work up cycleoff the coast of California. On this
day, we were scheduled for atwo V two aired air training with the
USS Princeton as our control. Whenwe launched off knwits, my wingman was

(33:43):
joining up. We were told thatthe training was going to be suspended,
and we were doing we're going toproceed with real world tasking. As we
proceeded to the west, the aircontroller was counting down the range to an
object that we were going to,and we're unaware of what we were going
to see. When we arrived,the controller told us that these objects had
been observed for over two weeks,coming down from over eighty thousand feet,

(34:07):
rapidly descending to twenty thousand feet,hanging out for hours, and then going
straight back up. For those don'trealize above eighty thousand feet is space.
We arrived at the location at approximatelytwenty thousand feet and the controller called merge
plot, which means that our radarblip was now in the same resolution cell
as the contact. As we lookedaround, we noticed that we saw some
whitewater off our right side. It'simportant to note that the weather on this

(34:28):
day was as close to perfect asyou could ask where off the coast of
San Diego, clear skies, lightwinds, calm seas, no white caps
from waves. So the white waterstood out in a large blue ocean.
All four of us because we werein f eighteen F so we had pilots
and whizzle in the backseat looked downa small, saw white tic tac object
with a longitudinal access pointing north southand moving very abruptly over the water like

(34:49):
a ping pong ball. There wereno rotors, no road or wash,
or any sign of visible control surfaceslike wings. As we started clockwise towards
the object, my Whizzer and Idecided to go down and take a closer
looked, with the other aircraft stayingand high covered to observe both us and
the tic tac. We proceeded aroundthe circle about ninety degrees from the start
of our descent, and the objectssuddenly shifted its longitudinal axis, aligned it

(35:13):
with my aircraft, and began toclimb. We continued down another two hundred
and seventy degrees nose low where thetik tak or we can two hundred and
seventy degrees to where, and wewent nose lowd to where the tik tak
would have been. Our altitude atthis point was about fifteen thousand feet in
the tik tak was about twelve thousand. As we pulled nose onto the object,
we then about a half mile ofit. It rapidly accelerated in front

(35:34):
of us and disappeared. Our wingmenroughly eight thousand feet above us lost contact.
Also. We immediately turned back tosee where the whitewater was at and
it was gone also, So asyou started to turn back towards the east,
the controller came up and said,sir, you're not going to believe
this, but that thing is atyour cappoint roughly sixty miles away in less
than a minute. You can calculatethe speed. We returned to Emmits.
We were taking off our gear.We were talking to one of my crews.

(35:55):
It was getting ready launched. Wementioned it to them and they went
out and luck he got the videothat you see that ninety second video.
What you don't see is the radartaped. It was never released and we
don't know where it's at the actof jamming that the object put on an
APG seventy three radar and I canget into modes later if you're interested.
What is shocking to us is thatthe incident was never investigated. None of

(36:15):
my crew were ever questioned, tapeswere never taken, and after a couple
of days that turned into great storywith friends. It wasn't until two thousand
and nine until Jay Stratton had contactedme to investigate. Unbeknown Stall, he
was part of the eight Tip programand the Pentagon, led by Lui Alzando.
There was an unofficial official report thatcame out that's now on the internet.
Years later, I was contacted bythe other pilot, Alex Dietrich,

(36:36):
and asked if I'd been contact andI said no, but I'm willing to
talk. I was contacted by misterAlizondo and we talked for a short period
of time and he said we'd bein contact. A few weeks after that,
I was made aware that lou hadleft the Pentagon in protest and joined
forces with Tom DeLong, Chris melland Steve Justice and others to form Two
Stars Academy, an organization that pressedthe issue with leading industry experts and US

(36:58):
government officials. They worked with LesleyKeene, who was present today, Ralph
Blumenthal, and Helene Cooper to publishthe articles in the New York Times twenty
seventeen New York Times, and itremoved a stigma on the topic of UFOs,
which is why we're here today.Those articles open the door for the
government and public that cannot be closed. It has led to an interest from
our elected officials who are not focusedon little green men, but figuring out

(37:20):
where these craft are, where theyfrom, the technology they possess, how
do they operate. It also ledto the Whistleblower Protection Act in the NDAA.
There are multi witnesses coming forward tosay that have firsthand knowledge, and
mister Grush just covered that. Whatconcerns me is that there's no oversight from
our elected officials on anything associated withour government processing or working on craft.
Believe it not from this world.This issue is not a full public disclosure

(37:44):
that can undermine national security, butit is about ensuring that our system of
checks and balances works across all workdone in the government using taxpair of funds.
Relative to government programs, even unacknowledgedwave programs, have some level of
oversight by the appropriate committee members inthe House and Senate, and this work
that is said to be occurring fromwhistable or testimonies should not be exempt.
In closing, I would like tosay that the TikTok object we engaged in

(38:05):
two thousand and four was far superiorto anything that we had on time,
have today or looking to develop inthe next ten years. If we in
fact have programs that possessed this technologyand needs to have oversight from those people,
that the citizens of this greed countryelected an office to represent what is
best for the United States and bestfor the citizens. I thank you for
your time. Thank you very much, Thank you very much. I know
it's very difficult for all of youasked to try to eliminate this issue.

(38:30):
Calling myself first for some questions,I'm going to start with, mister Graves.
Are your pilots are pilots that youinteract with as part of your organization?
Do you feel adequately trained and briefedon how to handle encounters with UAPs?
No? Right now, Military witnessesto UAP have limited options for reporting

(38:50):
UAP. But more concerning is thatcommercial aviation sector has not adapted to the
lessons that the military has implemented.The Military Department Defense has stated that UAP
represent a critical aviation safety risk.We have not seen that same language being
used in the commercial markets. Theyare not acknowledging this risk. Okay,

(39:13):
what steps do you think you haveto be taken to improve a pilot's UAP
reporting? Get military are commercial?Right now? We need a system where
pilots can report without fear of losingtheir jobs. There's a fear that the
stigma associated with this topic is goingto lead to professional repercussions, either through
management or perhaps through their yearly physicalcheck. So having a secure system reducing

(39:35):
the stigma and making this available,this information available through the public is going
to reduce the concerns that aircrew have. Could just give me a little idea
that the degree in which reports inthe past are not made public right now,
well, I don't think there hasbeen a proper reporting system to gather
those reports and thus not report them. So to answer your question, I

(39:55):
think there is a dearth of datadue to the fact that the reporting has
been limited up to the time.Could you tell me why you believe it's
kind of play the Devil's advocate,a reason why some of this stuff should
not be available to the public.There's certainly some national security concerns when we
use our advanced sensors in our tacticaljets to be able to identify these these

(40:15):
objects. Whoever, there's no reasonthat the objects themselves would be classified.
I would be curious to see howthe security classification guideline actually spells out the
different nuances of how this topic isclassified. From the perspective of up not
national security, I get file upon it. Assuming that there are reasons
why not all this should be madepublic. This has been around for a

(40:37):
long period of time. Can youthink of can any of the three of
you think of any reason why anythingrelated to UAPs, say fifteen years and
back, should not be immediately madepublic. I think one of it is
acknowledging a vulnerability both from a collectionand I'll just see a counter measure perspective.

(41:01):
So it's now we haven't cracked formany years, even say twenty years
back. Is there any reason whywhen you go back that far thing shouldn't
be made public unless it shows aspecific national security vulnerability as it relates to
a weakness and particular defenses. Okay, mister favor. The tik tak incident
that you that you were engaged occurredin two thousand and four. What kind

(41:24):
of reporting took place after that incident? No, and we had a standard
debrief for the backseaters, went downto our carrier intel center and brief what
had happened, and that was it. No one else talked to us,
and I was in the top twentyin the battle group. No one came
that. Captain was aware, Admiralwas aware, nothing was done. Your
commanding officers provide any sort of justification. No, because I was a commanding

(41:49):
officer the squadron. So no,Was this incident the only UAP event that
you and Carter why you were apilot, Yes, it was. Okay,
this is for any one of you, based on based off of each
of your experiences and observations, doyou believe you aps pose a potential threat
to our national security? Yes?And here's why. The technology that we

(42:16):
faced was far superior than anything thatwe had, and you could put that
anywhere if you if you had one, you captured one, you reverse engineered
it, you got it to work. You're talking something can go into space,
go someplace, drop down in amatter of seconds, do whatever it
wants, and leave and there's nothingwe can do about it. Nothing.

(42:37):
Okay. The other you, well, I would also like to add from
commercial aviation and military aviation perspective,we deal with uncertainty in our operating space
as a matter of our protection professionalactions. Identifying friend from foe is very
important to us, and so whenwe have unidentified targets, and we continue
to ignore those due to a stigmaor fear of what it could be.

(43:00):
That's an opening that our adversaries cantake advantage of what steps should be taking
to better understand and respond to UAPencounters. In the interest of national security.
There needs to be a location wherethis information is centralized for processing,
and there needs to be a twoway communication loop so that operators on the
front end have a feedback and canget best practices on how to process information,

(43:21):
what to do, and to ensurethat they they're reporting is being listened
to. Right now, there's nota lot of back and forth, mister
Gresh, and you're complaining to theintelligence community. Inspector you, inspector general.
You claim that you believe information isbeing hidden. What kind of information
do you think was hidden and doyou think it should remain hidden? Yes,
I can speak to that very brieflyand unclassified manner. As you know,

(43:43):
the preponderance of my complaint was classifiedto the intelligence communities, both material
acquisition exploitation activity also baselining the UAPs, but not sharing it with intelligence professionals
that are actually doing step briefs.The pilots that kind of information. Yeah,
okay, thank you very much.Now will what mister Garcia, thank

(44:07):
you um again, thank you allfor your service and for testifying today.
Want to just talk about the uapiecesrelates to what we're seeing in the pilots
interaction with UAPs, particularly mister Grays. One of that think concerns that for
members of this committee is this ideathat pilots there's no system to actually report
UAPs and the stigma around pilots andso can you can you just briefly you

(44:28):
mentioned that they're you working with thirtypilots right now that they've had encounters with
UAPs, but you've also, Ibelieve I'm discussed and know of many more
pilots. This is just those thatyou're currently working with. Is that correct?
Can you expand on that? Certainly? I'll break that down in two
ways. First, when we werefirst experiencing these objects off the Eastern Cboard
in the twenty fourteen twenty fifteen timeperiod, anyone that had upgraded their radar

(44:51):
systems, we're seeing these objects.So there was a large number of my
colleagues that were detecting these objects offthe Eastern Cboard. They were further correlating
that information with the other onboard centers, and many of them also had their
own eye sightings as well of theseobjects. Now, that was our personal,
first, firsthand experience at the time. Since then, as I've engaged
as topic, others have reached outto me that shared their experiences, both

(45:15):
on the military side as well asa commercial aviation side. On the military
aviation side, veterans that have recentlygot out have shared their stories and have
expressed how the objects we were seeingin twenty fourteen, twenty fifteen continued all
the way to twenty nineteen, twentytwenty and beyond, and so it became
a generational issue for naval aviators onthe Eastern seaboard. This was something we

(45:35):
were briefing to new students. Thisis something that was included in the notice
to airmen to ensure that there wasno accidents. And now with commercial aviators,
they are reaching out because they're havingsomewhat similar experiences as our military brothers
and sisters, but they do nothave any reporting system that they can send
us to. And let me justadd both to mister Faber as well as

(45:58):
mister Grays. Not having this forreporting um would you both agree that it
is harmful to not just our nationalsecurity interest, but to understand this phenomenon
of what's happening with UAPs. Ithink it's it's a it's a it's actually
it's a travesty that we don't havea system to correlate this and actually investigate.
You know. So if you tookthe East coast, you know,

(46:20):
there's there's there's coastal radars out therethat monitor our air defense identification zone,
so about to two hundred miles.They contract these, you know, so
when you see them, they couldactually go and pull that data and get
maneuvering. And instead of just havingthe airplanes, there's other data sources out
there. And I've talked to othergovernment officials on this. So you need
a centrally located repository that these reportsgo to. So if you just stuck

(46:40):
it in DD, you wouldn't getanything out of the Intelligence Committee because they
have a tendency to not to talk. But if you had a central location
where these reports would come in,not just military but also commercial aviation,
because there's a lot of that goingon, especially if you talk to anyone
that flies from here to Hawaii,over the Pacific they see odd lights.
So I think you need to developsomething that allows you a central point to
collect the data in order to investigate. Mister Graves, I would concur with

(47:06):
everything mister Fraver said. I'll continueto say that the commercial pilots that have
reached out to me through Americans forSafe Aerospace are doing so because they don't
feel there's another way for them toreport the safety issue. And I think
one of the clear outcomes of thishearing already is that there has to be
a safe and transparent reporting process forpilots, both on the commercial side and
the military side, to be ableto report UAPs in a way that's also

(47:28):
transparent but also understands the scope ofour national security interests and what may be
classified or not. But I thinkthere has to be some sort of system,
and so that's something that I hopecan be an outcome that this committee
can work on. Is there anythingelse for just for the two of you,
briefly beyond this reporting system, thatyou think that we can do with
the government to encourage and facilitate morecivilian reporting. I'm just doing you right

(47:51):
now, Okay. I think thishearing is going to show the American people
that their government takes this topic seriously. And and how about civilians it may
not be pilots, what kind ofprocess could be in place for civilians who
are not pilots who may have UAPencounters. Do either of you have any
suggestions that could facilitate that. Myrecommendations would make would be to make that
a sense a sensor centric operation inorder to make it as objective as possible.

(48:15):
Okay, sir, mister Favorite,I agree with mister Graves on that.
Okay, um, just just justbriefly, I also just want to
um note for particularly for the twopilots, and of a question for mister
Crush. One of the things thatI found fascinating in our discussion mister Graves
last night as well, is thatyou've both described um UAPs and formations and
the way they they they they areobserved in space or or in our air,

(48:37):
and the way that they move isessentially um ways in which current technology
or aircraft that we know of areunable to actually function or move. And
so will you just pour the publicrecord again once once again? Um just
uh briefly, uh, just eitherdescribe or note that aircraft are being witnessed,
particularly by the thirty folks that you'reworking with, or essentially outside the

(49:00):
scope of anything that we know oftoday in the technology we have to day,
mister Graves and mister rab Yes,the objects that are being seen by
commercial pilots are performing maneuvers that areunexplainable to due to our current understanding of
our technology and our capabilities as acountry. And that applies for the military
as well. Yeah, I concurwith that we have nothing that can stop

(49:21):
in mid air and go the otherdirection, nor do we have anything that
can, like in our situation,come down from space, hang out for
three hours and go back up.Thank you my last question, and sometimes
I know that you have also saidsome of these answers in the past.
We're trying to get them on thepublic record as well, which is really
important. Mister Gresh. Finally,do you believe that our government is in
possession of UAPs? Absolutely? Basedon interviewing over forty witnesses over four years

(49:44):
and where I know the exact locations, and those locations were provided to the
Inspector General and some of which tothe intelligence committees. I actually had the
people with the firsthand knowledge provide aprotective disclosure to the Inspector General. Thank
you, mister Chairman. I wouldjust say that I think that these questions
are important questions and I look forwardto being involved in the process to get

(50:05):
those answered. I know there'll bea lot of questions from the committee members.
I yield back. Thank you.We'll go to mister Richard himself.
Thank you, mister chairman. Thankyou, mister Garcia. I would like
to have you on my legislation todo just that on the reporting and we'll
get together on that. Maybe youcan be my post sponsor on that.
That'd be really cool. Thank youfor those great questions. Mister Graves.

(50:30):
Again, i'd like to know,how do you know that these were not
our aircraft? Some of the behaviorsthat we saw in a working area.
We would see these objects being atzero point zero mock. That's zero air
speed over certain pieces of the ground. So what that means, Just like
a river, if you throw abobber in, it's going to float downstream,

(50:52):
these objects were staying completely stationary andcategory four hurricane wins. These same
objects would then accelerate to supersonic speedsone point one one point two Mark and
they would do so in very erraticand quick behaviors that we don't I don't
have an explanation for. Okay,have you spoken to um commercial military pilots,
Um, they have seen these offof our east coast. Okay,

(51:15):
Um, mister Faber, I noticedthat, um um in the tik tak
video. Uh, it's tik taklike the candy, not TikTok like the
Chinese communist app. That's correct,Yes, sir, I just want to
make that because my daughter corrected meon that and called me a boomer and

(51:37):
say boomer and I said, no, baby, it's tik tak like the
candy. You're gonna have to justlook it up and um, but now
I would love its. I liketo say today is a is a day
of many First, it's a miraclethat we're having this this meeting, and
it's also a miracle that my wifehas put up with me for nine years.
Today today as my anniversary. SoI want to tell my wife happy
anniversary and that I'll love her verymuch. Um. As she likes to

(52:00):
say this, nine years have beenthe best two years of her life.
So thank you, mister Favor.What astonished you the most about the flight
capabilities of these TIC TAC very briefly, the performance, absolute performance it was,
and you're you're not aware of anyother objects that anybody in the world

(52:23):
has in this world that has thosecapabilities. No, I think it's far
beyond actually our material science that wecurrently possess. Are you aware of any
other reconnaissance platforms that attract or recordof the TIC TACs maneuvers, maybe the
nora AD system or any of theothers. I am not. Okay,
mister Grush, Thank you for beinghere, brother, Thank you all very

(52:45):
much. Have you faced any retaliationor reprivals for any of your testimony or
anything on these lines. Yeah.I have to be careful what I say
in detail because there is an openwhistle bl reprisal investigation on my behalf,
and I don't want to compromise thatinvestigation by providing anything that may help provide

(53:07):
somebody information. But it was verybrutal and very unfortunate some of the tactics
they use to hurt me, bothprofessionally and personally. To be quite frank,
yeah, it's very unfortunate. Asthey say, when you're open to
target, that's when they do themost by fire and at you. Do
you have any personal knowledge that peoplehave been harmed or injured in efforts to

(53:29):
cover up or conceal these extraterrestrial technology. Yes, personally, have you heard
anyone been murdered that you would thinkthat you know of or have heard of?
I guess I have to be carefulasking that question. I directed people
with that knowledge to the appropriate authorities. Maybe in a if we could get

(53:50):
it get in a confidential area ofskiff, we could talk about that.
But unfortunately we were denied access tothe skiff, and that's very unfortunate in
this scenario. Um, mister favor, you believe that you witnessed an additional
object under the water in relation toyour encounter, I will say we did

(54:15):
not see an object. There weresomething there to cause the white water,
and when we turned around it wasgun so there was something there had obviously
moved. Okay it was. Itwas not the same object though that you
were you were looking at. Correct. No, we actually joked that the
tik tak was communicating with something.When we came back and cold because of
whitewater disappeared. We were In anotherinstance, we're told about the capabilities of

(54:37):
a jamming during viewing of when therewere some people chasing some of these objects.
Did you were experience any of thatjamming or interrupting your radar or weapons
system? And my crew that launchedafter we landed experienced significant jamming to the
APG seventy three radar, which waswhat we had on board, which is
a mechanically scan very high end systemprior to the APG seventy nine. And

(55:00):
yes, it did pretty much everythingyou could do, range, velocity,
aspect, and then it hit thelock and the targeting pot is passive.
That's what we're able to get thevideo on. I'm about to run out
of time, but are you awareof any of our enemies that have that
capability? No? Okay. Iwould also like to note for the record
that like George Knapp breaking area fiftyone, he's the reason I knew about

(55:22):
that, and the reason I knowabout the TIC tax is Leslie Kane from
New York Times article, and Iwouldencourage everybody to read that. Thank you,
miss Chairman. You're back to youno time, Very good, mister
Askin, Thank you, mister chairman. Mister Graves, you reported UAP encounters

(55:43):
during training flights. I think andhave since come forward to warn the Pentagon
that these encounters may be putting pilotsat risk. My first question is you've
identified these as taking place on theEast Coast. Is it just on the
East Coast where these encounters have beenreported? No. Since the events initially

(56:08):
occurred, I've learned that the objectshave been detected essentially where all operations Navy
operations are being conducted across the world, and that's from the Ultimate Anomaly Resolutions
Office reporting. Can you describe yourexperience after you decided to come forward and
go public with your experience? Certainly, like many others in twenty seventeen,

(56:32):
I saw the New York Times articlecome out as well, and for me
it was it was special because Irecognized the voices on the video. I
recognized the video itself. I hadseen it when it was taken, I've
seen it when it was debriefed,and so that was kind of shook me
because I realized that this problem wasstill ongoing, and so I reached out
the colleagues back on the East Coastand realized that this was still a safety

(56:55):
risk that they were dealing with,that they had essentially hit a wall with
how they could move forward on thisconversation. It was at that point when
I decided to try to move theconversation forward myself. Are there common characteristics
to the UAPs that have been citedby different pilots and can you describe what
the convergence of descriptions is. Certainlywe were primarily seeing dark gray or black

(57:17):
cubes inside of a clear sphere.I'm sorry, dark gray or black cubes.
Yes, inside of a clear spherewhere the apex or tips of the
cube we're touching the inside of thatsphere. And that was primarily what was
being reported when we were able togain a visualality of these objects. That
occurred over almost eight years, andas far as I know, is still
occurring. So I take it thatyou're arguing what we need is real transparency

(57:45):
and a reporting system so we canget some clarity on what's going on out
there, because there are many pilotsin your situation, but we should have
a way of developing a systematic inventoryof all of such an honors. Is
that right? Yes? And Ithink we need both transparency and the reporting.
We have the reporting, but weneed to make sure that information could

(58:06):
be promulgated to commercial aviation as wellas the rest of the populace. Mister
Gresh, what about you? Whatwas your experience after you came forward.
Well, it's only been in abouttwo months or so, so I guess
my experience has been overwhelming support fromformer colleagues of mine that have privately messaged
me, and I do appreciate that. But I do have knowledge of active

(58:31):
planned reprisal activity against myself and othercolleagues, and it's very, very upsetting
to me coming from where certain seniorleadership at previous agencies I was associated with.
And that's all I'll say publicly,but I can provide more details in
a close environment. Okay, Well, I hope you understand that there would

(58:52):
be bipartisan rejection of any attempt tovilify, demonize, or engage in other
reprisals against our witnesses and people whoare telling the truth from their perspective.
Yeah, there were certain colleagues ofmine that were brutally administratively attacked, and
you know, actually makes me veryupset as a leader to see that happen

(59:12):
to other co workers and actually superiorsof mind over the last three years.
How do you account for that responsethat seems like a bizarre response. I
called administrative terrorism. That's their theirquiver, their tool in the toolbox to
silence people, especially you know,the career government service cares about their career,
cares about their clearance, their reputationto climb the ladder, and when

(59:35):
you threaten that float career path,a lot of people back off. But
I'm here to represent those people.So, mister Favor, what about you?
What has your experience been since you'vecome forward with your perspective on this.
Actually, I've been treated very well. And the six people that were
involved, myself included, all ofthem have or will be retiring from the

(01:00:00):
military, ZOFIZ sixes and all myfriends that are very senior three and four
stars. I've talked to them.They they believe they understand there's a problem.
But now i've I was actually treatedreally well. And what is your
general interpretation of these phenomena or whatis your current thinking of trying to make

(01:00:22):
sense of them? Well, I'llsay, you know, I'm not like
a UFO fanatic. It's not it'snot me, but I will tell you
that what we saw with four setsof eyes over a five minute period,
still there's nothing we have nothing closeto it. It was it was amazing
to see. I told my buddyI wanted to fly it. But yeah,

(01:00:42):
it's just an incredible technology. AllRight, mister Chairman, thank you
very much. I'll go back toyou. Thanks I NA Miss Luna,
mister grush In speaking to you yesterday. Um, I just wanted to follow
up on Representative Raskin's questions. Inthe last couple of years, have you

(01:01:05):
had incidences that have caused you tobe in fear for your life for addressing
these issues? Yes, personally,I just want everyone to note that he's
coming forward in fear of his life. To put in perspective if they were
really not scared about this information comingout, why would someone be intimidated like
that? To your knowledge, ournhis working with adversarial foreign governments in either

(01:01:30):
technology exchange programs or back engineering programs. I don't have data on that.
I'm not sure have you heard oryou had people come forward to present that
evidence, not that particular evidence thatyou just expoused. Okay. On the
nineteenth of April, doctor Kirkpatrick,head of Arrow, had said that he
did not find any evidence of UAPs. You also stated that you had in

(01:01:52):
your interview that you had briefed himon information that you were uncovering, but
that he did not follow up withyou. Were the items that you divulged
to him into national security? Yes, him and I had a classified conversation
in April twenty twenty two before hetook over Arrow in the July twenty twenty
two and I provided him some concernsI had. Do you know why he

(01:02:14):
might not have fallen up with you? Unfortunately I cannot read his mind.
Um, I wish he did.I was happy to give sage counsel to
him on where to look when hetook the helm of Arrow. Okay.
And then my last question for youbefore I moved to mister Graves, is
you received prior approval from the DefenseDepartment to speak on certain issues correct correct

(01:02:37):
through a dopster dot prepublication and securityreview. And I just want to remind
the public they're just looking from asecurity perspective. These are my own personal
views and opinions, not the departments. Okay. I'm asking that though,
mainly because I think that there aremany people that would like to discredit you.
So it does bring a certain amountof credibility to your testimony. I'm

(01:02:58):
required by law to do that asa former eligience officer, or I go
to jail for revealing classified information.Yeah, we don't want you to get
to jail. My next question wouldactually be for mister Graves. Can you
please explain to me in detail theevent that occurred at VanderBurg Air Force Base.
Certainly in the two thousand and threetime frame, a large group of

(01:03:22):
Boeing contractors were operating near one ofthe launch facilities at VanderBurg Air Force Base
when they observed a very large hundredyard sided red square approached the base from
the ocean and hover at low altitudeover one of the launch facilities. This
object remained for about forty five secondsor so before darting off over the mountains.

(01:03:45):
There was a similar event within twentyfour hours later in the evening.
This was a morning event, Ibelieve eight forty five in the morning.
Later in the evening, post sunset, there were reports of other sightings on
base, including some aggressive behaviors.These objects were approaching some of the security
guards at rapid speeds before darting off, And this is information that was received

(01:04:06):
through one of the witnesses that haveapproached me at Americans for Safer Space.
Was this documented in any official form, whether it was a police blotter.
Yes, they had official documentation andrecords from the event that the witness held
over the years. And I'm notgoing to ask you to do right now
for time reasons, but you wouldbe able to sketch what was witness correct

(01:04:26):
And have you seen that before onany other equipment and or during your flight
time. I have not seen whatthey've described. This object was estimated to
be almost the size of a footballfield, and I have not seen anything
personally in that large Okay. Andthen another question on follow up referencing the
gimball video Go Fast incident, canyou just clarify because to our understanding,
the footage was actually cut off ata certain point. But what happens at

(01:04:48):
the end of that video, justfor those Americans specifically there that I wanted
to know about the rest of thatfootage. Certainly there was some uncertainty or
instability with the object. It seemedto rock a bit. And that's the
last last yacina of the video.Much of the data that I would recommend
be analyzed would consist of radar datathat would provide precise kinematics on the object

(01:05:10):
as well as the fleet of objectsthat we're operating nearby. Okay, and
follow up in regards to the reportingprocedures that mister Garcia had addressed on as
well as Representative Birchett with the FAA, to your understanding, pilots that are
seeing this, commercial airline pilots,are they receiving season assist letters from corporations
for coming forward with information in regardsto safety for potential airline passengers. I

(01:05:32):
have been made privy to conversations withcommercial aviators who have received seasoned assist orders.
So the American public should know thatcorporations are putting their own reputations on
the basic, not the line,but ahead of the safety of the American
people. And I think would youagree with that statement? Okay, I
guess this would be my last.I'm out of time. I yield,

(01:05:57):
I'll be back. Good mister Maskewoodz, thank you, mister chairman. Gentlemen,
let's talk about the laws of physicsfor a second. Mister Graves in
commander favor, I heard you talkabout speed. When those objects broke the
sound barrier, did they make asonic boom? I was in a jet.

(01:06:19):
You can't hear anything. It's kindof allowed in there. Yeah,
you're not able to actually personally tellwithin the vehicle. Will say, the
objects that we were seeing there werespherical, and they were observed up the
mock too, which is a verynon aerodynamic shape. What about g forces,
let's talk about G forces of thosevehicles. Could a human survive those
G forces with known technology today?No? No, not for the acceleration

(01:06:43):
rates that we observed. Okay,what about what they look like? How
close did you get? Did yousee a seam or a rivet or a
section? And what I mean isobviously the jets you're flying have all those
things. Did these objects have those? Do you want to go right?
I didn't have. I didn't havethe detail to be able to tell that.
So we got within a half mileat tic Tech, which people say

(01:07:03):
that's pretty far, but in airplanesthat's actually relatively close. No, it
was perfectly white, smooth, nowindows, although when we did take the
original Flear video that is out there, when you put it on a big
screen, it actually had two littleobjects that came out of the bottom of
it. But other than that,no windows. No, seems no,
nothing, mister Gresh. As aresult of your previous government work, have

(01:07:25):
you met with people with direct knowledgeor have direct knowledge yourself of non human
origin craft? Yes, I personallyinterviewed those individuals, mister Gresh. As
a result of your previous government work, have you met with people with direct
knowledge or have direct knowledge yourself aboutats advanced technologies that the US government has

(01:07:45):
based on conventional advanced tech? Iwas brief to the preponderance of the Defense
Departments, both Space and Aerospace,Compartment of Programs. Yeah, do you
have knowledge or do you have reasonto believe that there are programs in the
advanced tech space that are unsanctioned?Yes? I do. Okay, And
when you say that they're above congressionaloversight, what do you mean? Complicated

(01:08:11):
question? So there's you know,some I would call it abuse here,
So congressional oversight of conventional special accessprograms. And I'll use title TENS or
d D as an example. Right, So ten US Code Section one nineteen
discusses congressional oversight of SAPs. Discussesthe depth SEC depth's ability to wave congressional
reporting. However, the Gang ofEight is at least supposed to be notified.

(01:08:35):
If you know a waved or wavebigoted an acknowledge SAP is created and
that's public law. Well, sothat how does I mean? I don't
want to cut you off, buthow does a program like that get funded?
I will give you generalities. Ican get very specific in a close
session. But a misappropriation of funds? And does that mean? Does that

(01:08:55):
mean that there is money in thebudget that is said to go to a
program but it doesn't and it goesto something else? Yes? I have
specific knowledge of that. Yep.Do you think US corporations are overcharging for
certain tech they're selling to the USgovernment and that additional money is going to
programs? Correct? Through something calledirad okay, satellite imagery. Let's talk

(01:09:16):
about satellite imagery. We have satellitesall over the place, some that we're
aware of and many that we're notaware of. Right, we're taking pictures
of everything at every point in second, mister Grush, are you aware do
you have direct knowledge? We talkto people direct knowledge that there are satellite
imagery of these events. That wasone of my primary tasks at NGA,

(01:09:38):
since we process, exploit, anddisseminate that kind of information. I've seen
multiple cases, some of which tomy understanding, and of course I left
NG in April, so that's myinformation cut off date. But I personally
reviewed both what we call overhead collectionand from other strategic and tactical platforms that
were I could not even blame prosaically. And I have a degree in physics,

(01:10:00):
by the way, as well,and I had. I am aware
that you guys have not seen thesereports unfortunately, and I don't know why
it is. Do you have directknowledgy we with spoken people with direct knowledge
that this imagery applies to crash sitescrash crash imagery. I can't discuss that

(01:10:21):
in an open session. Okay.Do you have any information that the US
government is involved in a disinformation campaignto deny the existence of certain UAPs.
I can't go beyond what I've alreadystated publicly in my News Nation interview because
it touches other sensitivities. Okay,I'll yield the balance of my time back.

(01:10:45):
Thank you, mister chairman, MissFox, thank you, mister chairman,
and I thank our witnesses for beinghere today. Mister Grouch, in
your foreign testimony, you state thatthe United States government has retrieved supposedly extraterrestrial

(01:11:10):
spacecraft and other UAP related artifacts.You go so far as to state that
the US is in possession of quotenon human spacecraft end quote, and that
some of these artifacts have circulated woulddefense contractors. Several other former military and

(01:11:30):
intelligence officials have come forward with similarallegations, albeit in non public settings.
However, doctor Sean Kirkpatrick, thedirector of AARO, previously testified before Congress
that there has been an I quoteno credible evidence thus far of extraterrestrial activity

(01:11:56):
or of quote off world technology broughtto the attention of the Office. To
your knowledge, is that statement correct? It's not accurates. I believe doctor
Kipatrick mentioned he had about thirty individualsthat have come to ARROW thus far.
A few of those individuals have alsocome to Arrow that I also interviewed,

(01:12:20):
and I know what they provided doctorKpatrick and their team. Okay, I
was able to evaluates. Okay,I need to go on sure. But
my understand that this his statement isaccurate, came from a direct quote,

(01:12:40):
and this contradiction is a perfect exampleof why we need to inject transparency into
our government. And for another example, look no further than the pitiful response
to the Chinese five balloon debacle earlierthis year. You may remember the mass
confusion and sued when the balloon wasfirst spotted over Montana, four days after

(01:13:03):
it first entered US airspace over Alaska. The Biden Administration's initial inability to address
the object grew into a continuous seriesof embarrassments. After news of the balloon
reached the main mainstream media, wewere assured that the balloon posed no threat

(01:13:23):
to our security. However, afterthe balloon was allowed to transit the entire
continental United States fighter jets were scrambledoff the coast of South Carolina to shoot
it down. This flip flopping andobjuscation caused needless confusion, fear, and
panic across the country. It's myhope, mister Chairman, that this sort

(01:13:45):
of confusion will not be repeated.We should investigate the extent to which elements
of our government possess or do notpossess, information that is of critical value
to the people. We owe itto the citizens of this nation to make
sure that our government is transparent andaccountable. We must make sure that our

(01:14:09):
government provides answers, and Congress mustdo its duty to solicit those answers.
With that, mister Chairman, Iyield back, yeah, mister Frost,
Thank you, mister Chairman. Intwenty twenty two, NASA announced that it
was commissioning an independent study team toexamine UAPs. The NASA team is comprised

(01:14:32):
of scientists across different fields, aswell as former astronauts and pilots. In
May, the independent study team heldthat its first public meeting, which included
the perspectives from NASA senior leaders aswell as perspectives from the Department of Defense
and Intelligence agencies. The NASA studyteam is also expected to release its first

(01:14:54):
rapport pretty soon, and I thinkit's safe to say that we all eagerly
await its results. Mister Graves,How might NASA's research influence the commercial industry
regarding safety in UAP. I thinkNASA has a big role to play as
far as commercial aviation's safety, andit's one of their original charges as an
organization. One of the recommendations thathave been put forward is to utilize their

(01:15:16):
existing aviation safety reporting system to serveas a short term fill and trusted platform
for pilots that want to report onUAP. It also has built in analytics
capability and is funded by Congress.Gotcha? And also, mister Graves,
are there any other industries that maybe influenced by the NASA research on a
UAPs? And if so, howso? Well? I think there is

(01:15:38):
a large swath of commercial capabilities thatcould be brought to bear on this topic,
from space based or ground based sensorsystems that are available open source or
through commercial marketplaces. And I thinkNASA's work as they work to identify and
highlight specific parameters that can be found, we can take that information and promulgate
this through the public sectors so thatwe can have more open conversation about what

(01:15:59):
we're seeing, you know. Intwenty twenty, the Department of Defense released
several videos of UAPs, including misterFreyer's experience. US Navy pilots that recorded
footage. In twenty twenty one,the Office of the Director of National Intelligence
released a preliminary report on UAP events. NASA Administrator Bill Nelson stated that NASA

(01:16:20):
would begin to investigate these events.In fact, I sit on Science,
Space and Technology Committee, and whenwe were doing a hearing with the NASA
Administrator Bill Nelson, I asked,you know why NASA needed to be fully
funded, and there were many greatreasons, but one of them was actually
had to do what UAPs he actuallymentioned, you know, is their life

(01:16:41):
out there? I don't know.And so either way, these actions ultimately
led NASA to assemble the independent studyteam that I mentioned earlier. Also in
twenty twenty one, Harvard University stoodup the Galileo Project to research and examine
the origins of UAP. So itseems like both from NASA and in the
higher education community, because of thework that y'all have done and people standing

(01:17:05):
up, you know, I thinkwe're seeing some of that stigma slowly going
away. Mister Freyer, do youbelieve that military pilots feeling empowered to share
their UAP experiences has directly impacted thescientific communities research goals on this topic.
I would say yes. I wouldsay that, you know, starting in

(01:17:27):
twenty seventeen, when it actually cameout, it took that stigma away.
I mean, I've talked to multipleSenators who said, prior to that,
if you'd mentioned UAP, you'd havebeen laughed off the hill. And now
you we're sitting here today for apublic testimony on what's actually going on.
You know, I'm hoping that thiscurve will be more of an exponential and
we'll get more and more transparent tothe level that we can Yeah, yeah,

(01:17:48):
and yeah, I mean it's important. I couldn't imagine, you know,
I'm not a pilot, but Iused to fly gliders and civil air
patrol. H Yeah, I gotpilot. Yeah, and so either way,
I mean, I couldn't imagined,you know, being in the glider
and seeing something and then not feelinglike I had the agency to talk about

(01:18:12):
it. Mister Graves, can youdiscuss the importance of seeking scientists to sit
on your advisory board? Absolutely?I think ultimately this is going to be
a scientific problem, and not onlythat, it's also an engineering problem.
I've been working with the American Instituteof Aeronautics and Astronautics to help them stand
up a UAP integration committee to helpintegrate their engineering prowess into this problem.
And so, yes, very much, I think this is an engineering and

(01:18:35):
scientific problem as much as a nationalsecurity problem. And how might Congress help
to facilitate partnerships between the scientific communityand the UAP focus groups within government?
Well, I think one of thethings they can do is to have these
types of hearings to communicate to thepublic that this is a topic of interest.
I think that there is a pseudomarket, if you will, of

(01:18:55):
interested capabilities and talent that want toapproach this topic, and we're seeing that
start to grow now. So Ithink continued conversation reduction of stigma is going
to allow that to flourish and allowanswers to help generate themselves. Thank you
all for being here. Thank youfor your work. I think it's important
that we keep our top scientific mindsfocused on this issue and look for ways
to increase collaboration. Thank you somuch. I yield back, mister Comer,

(01:19:18):
Thank you, Miss Chairman. Letme say, I want to thank
you for having this hearing, andI want to thank mister Burchett, Miss
Luna for leading this hearing, andwith that I yield by five minutes to
mister Burchett. Thank you, misterChairman. I'm gonna direct this, I
believe to mister Grush, but ifany of you all feel like you need
to jump in, just jump rightin and we're good. As a US

(01:19:39):
government become aware of actual evidence ofextraterrest to otherwise unexplained forms of intelligence,
and if so, when do youthink this first occurred. I'd like to
use the term non human. Idon't like to denote origin. Keeps the
aperture open, both scientifically certainly,like I've discussed publicly previously, nineteen thirties.

(01:20:01):
Okay, can you give me thenames and titles the people with direct
firsthand knowledge and access to some ofthis crash retrieval some of these crash retrieval
programs, and maybe which facilities militarybases that would the recovered material would be
in. And I know a lotof Congress talked about we're gonna go to
area fifty one and you know,there's nothing there anymore anyway, It's just

(01:20:25):
you know, and we move likea glacier and s as we announce it.
I'm sure the moving vans would pullup. But please, I can't
discuss that publicly. But I didprovide that information both to the Intel committees
in the Inspector General, and wecould get that in the skiff if we
were allowed to get in a skiffwith you, would that'd be probably what
you would think? Sure, ifyou had appropriate accesses? Yeah, what
special access programs cover this information?And how is it possible that they have

(01:20:50):
evaded oversight for so long? Ido know the name is Once again,
I can't discuss that publicly, andhow they've evaded oversight in a close setting,
I can tell you the specific tradecraftuse. All right, when do
you think those programs began? Andwho authorized them? I do know a

(01:21:11):
lot of that information, but that'ssomething I can't discuss publicly because they want
to jump in on any of this. You're more than welcome to what level
of security clearance is required to fullyaccess these programs or anybody who has And
I say that because myself, representingGates and represented BALLOONO were basically turned away

(01:21:33):
at one point at Eglin. Soplease go out ahead. Certainly difference between
member access and say somebody like me, But anybody who has a t SSCI
clearance and meets the eligibility criteria,the access adjudicative authorities should be able to
grant your access miss vertum of fialyield. So, just to be put
a fine point on that, there'snothing that you're aware of that's above Special

(01:21:55):
Access program classification. It's a misnomerthat there's anything above Top secret. Executive
Order thirteen five to twenty six delineatesthe classification levels, right, But I
draw a point of that because wecan have access to those programs, and
so the notion that we're not beinggiven that access sort of defies our typical
muscle memory here in Congress. Thankyou, miss Birch. I'll go back

(01:22:16):
to you, thank you, misterGates along those lines titled ten that you
might not know this or not,but that Title ten and Title fifty authorization,
as they seem to say, they'reinefficient. So who gets to decide
this? In your opinion in thepast, it's a group of career senior

(01:22:36):
executive officials, okay? Are thegovernment officials do what both in and outs
of government? And that's about asfar as I got you, all right,
Well, that's it leads to mynext question, which private corporations are
directly involved in this program? Howmuch taxpayer money has been invested in these

(01:22:57):
programs to your knowledge? I mean, we know, we know we oughtit
the Pentagon every year and I've beenhere five years and they failed the dead
gun thing. Every year. Theylose over a billion dollars a year,
we think, And I've just toldthe Department of Fens maybe sixty percent of
their assets are unaccounted for. Whateverthe heck that means. In the public's
sector, you go to jail forthat kind of crap. So tell me.

(01:23:21):
Yeah, I know, when I'mI'm a dollar off of my DTS
travel voucher, I get hammered.But it seems like it doesn't work the
other if you sell over, ifyou sell over six hundred dollars worth of
stuff on anbay, now you geta call from the RS. So please
what corporations? Yeah, I don'tknow these specific metrics. Towards the end
of your question, the specific corporationsI did provide to the committees in specific

(01:23:42):
divisions, and I spent eleven anda half hours of both Intel committees.
So, okay, has there beenany there has there been an active US
government disinformation campaign to deny the existenceof unidentified aerial phenomena? And if so,
why I can't go beyond what I'vealready exposed publicly about that? What

(01:24:11):
you said, Okay, I've beentold to ask you what that what that
is and how to get it inthe record. Which what have you stated
publicly in your interviews for the Congressionalrecord? H if you reference my News
Nation interview, and I talk abouta multidecade, you know, campaign to

(01:24:34):
um disenfranchise public interests. Basically whenI'm going yeah, thank apologize much,
Chairman. I yield back negative twentyone seconds. Thank you music, Oh,
come Ocasio Cortez. Thank you,mister Chairman, and thank you to
our witnesses for coming here today.I do concur with the ranking member as
well as several other members here onthis committee that this is a committee for

(01:24:56):
whistle blowers and for the protection ofwhistle blowers as well. So we under
stand what you're putting on the tablehere and we're putting on the line here,
and we thank you for that.Mister Greesh, you sat on the
Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon task Force created inthe twenty twenty NDAA. Correct. Yes,
there have been some things that havebeen mentioned here during this hearing that
I wanted to pick up on.Mister Graves. You mentioned specifically, during

(01:25:20):
the answer to one of your questions, you named Boeing contractors being engaged in
an incident regarding this red cube abouta football football field wide. I was
wondering if you could speak a littlebit about the interaction or mister Greesh,
either of you the interactions between defensecontractor companies and any UAP related programs or

(01:25:43):
activities. So I'll just say thatthe information about the contractor themselves were provided
by a witness, and I haveno particular detail in that relationship. Mister
Gresh, the kind of general unclasswavetops. Certainly the contractors you know are
the metal benders, so to speak, the ones actually doing specific performance on
government contracts. Are they required toissue any disclosure regarding UAP sightings or do

(01:26:08):
they engage in any reporting around thisIn terms of the contractors, not that
I'm aware of, they do not. Okay, Now, when it comes
to notification that you had mentioned about, I WRAP program I read programs.
We have seen defense contractors abuse theircontracts before through this committee. I have

(01:26:31):
seen it personally, and I havealso seen the notification requirements to Congress abused.
I am wondering one of the loopholesthat we see in the law is
that there is, at least frommy vantage point, is that depending on
what we're seeing, is that thereare no actual definitions or requirements for notification.

(01:26:51):
Are there? What methods of notificationdid you observe? Like when they
say they notified Congress? How didthey do that? Do you have insight
into that? For certain I readactivities, I can only think of one's
conventional in nature. Sometimes they flowthrough certain out to say SAP programs that

(01:27:14):
have cognizant authority over the Air Forceor something, and those are congressionally reported
compartments. But I reads literally internalto the contractors. So as long as
it's money, either profits, privateinvestment, access, whatever they want to
put a finer point on it.When there is a requirement for any agency
or company to notify or any agencyto notify Congress, do they contact the

(01:27:38):
chairman of a committee? Do theyget them on the phone specifically? Is
this through an email to hypothetically adead emailbox. A lot of it comes
through what they call the PPR periodicProgram review process if it's a a SAP
or controlled access program equity, andthen those go to the specific committees,
whether it be the SaaS task tosee thank you, I apologize, I

(01:28:00):
just my time is limited, misterGraves. One of your main concerns that
the FAA currently does not have anofficial process to receive reports of UAP from
pilots or others. Correct. Correct, and in your experience. What data
should the AERO program prioritize for potentialcollection? We have, you know,
location, date, time, butare there other specific activity characteristics that should

(01:28:26):
be included in these reports? Certainly, I think that there's two categories that
would be important. One would bekinematics and understanding the specifics of how the
vehicle or objects are moving. Andthe second would be a more zoomed out
approach of being able to look atorigin and destination after before the incident,
as well as getting a better contextualunderstanding of how these objects are interacting with

(01:28:46):
each other. Thank you now,because I only have a minute left,
I apologize we only have five minutestoday. But for the record, if
you were me, where would youlook titles, programs, departments, regions,
if you could just name anything,And I put that as an open

(01:29:11):
question to the three of you,I'd be happy to give you that in
a closed environment, I can tellyou specifically. Thank you. I'm Commander
Fever, and I would say,and I've told people that you have to
know where to look. They're notgoing to divulge it to you because of
the classification levels. But if youknow where to look and who to talk
to, which is exactly when misterGreshton point you, then you then you
have them. Okay, mister Greeves, I was an operator, so I

(01:29:33):
was defending on folks like mister Grossto do that homework. Okay, thank
you very much. I look backto the chair mister Bigs. Thanks thanks,
mister chairman. I think the witnessesfor being here today. I'm over
here, thank you so much forbeing here. I want to get into

(01:29:56):
specifics here. And the reason I'mgoing to go this way is because you've
talked a bit about what I wouldcall misdirection by official US government with regard
to UPS, right, and soI'm going to get to that in a
second. But last week, WhiteHouse NSC spokesman John Kirby stated that UPS

(01:30:18):
are having an impact on our trainingranges and need to be treated as a
legitimate issue. Do you concur withthe statements that's for each of you?
Yes, yes, yes, Okay. Now, having said that, I'm
going to take you to specific instancesaround the Phoenix Valley because that's where I

(01:30:39):
live. In ninety seven, wehad the famous Phoenix light case. I
don't know if any of you werefamiliar with that. There were there were
two things that went along with that, and the explanation was Military Training Range
off Luke and the Berry Goldwater Range. Do you know anything different other than

(01:31:00):
the official explanation of those lights?Only what's in the public vernacular about it?
That was outside the scope of myduties. And if we wanted to
just my question, along with mycolleagu from New York, Massacazio Cortez,
if we wanted to find out moreabout that, where would we go to
find the files and who would weaddress? And are you can tell me

(01:31:21):
we need to go to a skift, So you can tell us in a
skift, I could potentially give youa vector on that that specific case.
I'm not I mean, I'm familiarwith it in terms of public but I
give you a vector in closed environment. Yeah, that would be good.
Thank you. So, if ifit's true that UAPs are having an impact
on training ranges, and this administrationconsiders it to be a legitimate issue,

(01:31:45):
what steps can Congress take to addresstraining range impacts? And I say that
having two very large training ranges inmy state. And so we'll start with
mister Graves and going down the panel, some of the initial procedures have been
implemented, such as within the UnitedStates Navy that have a range foul report
that gathers information from pilots. Iunderstand that a service wide reporting mechanism is

(01:32:09):
still pending, however, that wouldbe a great next step, not only
for gathering information, but for showingthe troops that is an acceptable topic and
reducing the stigma. Okay, please, I'll of you continue. Yeah.
As a recipient of a lot ofthose training range reports, sometimes we only
get contextual, kind of oral reporting. It'd be nice if they attached all

(01:32:30):
sensor data and there's a system inplace that can handle multiple classifications of data.
And that's an issue with the Fthirty five, right. That jet
was never built to be an ISRplatform, and it's a pain in the
will to say, but to getthat data off. So yeah, great,
thank you. Yeah. I wouldagree with the previous two being a
user of those training ranges, thatthe data has to be out there.

(01:32:51):
You have to acknowledge that you're seeingthem, and then you have to collect
the data. Right now, youget the report someone says I saw something,
but no one collects the RATEAR datato back it up and do research.
Okay, do you believe that thetwenty nineteen classification guidelines for UAP's interferes
with the federal government's ability to betransparent with the American people? And do
you think we need to be moretransparent with the American people all of you.

(01:33:14):
Yeah, I'll say yes to that. I'm familiar with the at least
the UAP Task Force twenty nineteen SecurityClassification Guide. I think it's fair.
Um, I did actually help authorthat with the oh you got a bias
that, But I will say I'llcall it a lazy attitude about declassifying videos.
I mean, I've seen some ofthe videos of you know, the

(01:33:35):
recent shootdown, and I saw noreason that couldn't have been released as long
as they mask, you know,some data. The American people deserve to
see that that imagery and full motionvideo, I would think, Well,
in my opinion, I will saythings are overclassified. I know for a

(01:33:56):
fact the video or the pictures thatcame out in the twenty twenty twenty report
that had the stuff off the Eastcoast, they were taken with an iPhone
off the East coast. The buddyof mine was one of the senior people
there and he said, they're originallyclassified at TSSCI, And my question him
was, what's t SSCI about theseThey're an iPhone right literally off the vacapes.
That's not t SSCI. So they'reoverclassified. And as soon as they
do that, they go in avault and then you all have to look

(01:34:16):
for him. Yeah. So withthe overclassification, that may be one way,
or there are other ways that theDoD or intelligence agencies are keeping this
information from the American people or evenfrom Congress. I think part of that
has been not encouraging reporting. Ifthe problem is not something that could be
measured, it's not something that's goingto be fixed. Okay, very good,

(01:34:39):
But if I'm out of time,and I thank you, missus,
chairman, and now you'll bet.First of all, without objection, Representative
Nick Langworthy of New York has waveddown the subcommittee for a purpose of questioning
witnesses. Is today's subcommittee hearing.And then we go to mister Burlson.
So thank you, miss chairman.I appreciate you guys coming out today testifying.

(01:35:01):
Look, I've been here for sixmonths and I'm pretty skeptical. I
don't trust anything in this town.And um, and so I and I
think that's because I'm from Missouri.You've got to show me, right.
Um. With that being said,UM, there's been a lot of things
that have been said, um inthe public, mister grush and, and

(01:35:21):
so I want to get down toif we can some specifics, right.
So, UM, at one pointyou had said that they're there there there
has been harmful activity or aggressive activity. Has any of the activity um been
aggressive been hostile in your reports?I know of multiple colleagues of mine that

(01:35:45):
got physically injured, and uh,the activity and buy buy UAPs or by
by people within the federal government.Okay, So there has been activity by
by alien or non human technology andor beings that has caused harm to humans.

(01:36:11):
I can't get into the specifics inan open environment, but at least
the activity that I personally witnessed.And not to be very careful here,
because you don't really tell you neverto acknowledge tradecraft, right. So what
I personally witnessed myself and my wifewas very disturbing. Okay. UM.
One of my constituents actually sent thisnext question, and I figured I had

(01:36:35):
to ask it since I had thesame thought you've said that US and has
intact space spacecraft. You said thatthe government has alien bodies or alien species.
Have you seen have you? Haveyou seen the spacecraft? I have
to be careful to describe what I'veseen firsthand and not in this environment,

(01:36:57):
but I could answer that question behindbehind closed doors, and have you seen
any of the bodies? That's somethingI've not a witnessed myself, Okay,
And so with that being said,you know, and the other statement that
has been made that was intriguing tome because and it's intriguing because my view
has been that we are billions oflight years away from any any other system.

(01:37:23):
And the concept that an alien speciesthat is technologically advanced enough to travel
billions of light years gets here andsomehow is incompetent enough to not survive Earth
or crashes is is something that Ifind a little bit far fetched. And
with that being said, you havementioned that there's interdimensional potential. Could you

(01:37:45):
expound on that. I'll have toanswer your first question, and you know,
I'm here as a fact witness,an expert, but I will give
you a theoretical framework at least towork off to kind of expouse crashes regardless
of you know your level of sentience, right, you know, planes crash,
cars crash, and number of sortieshowever high a small percentage, you're

(01:38:06):
going to end and you know missionfailure fuel as we say in the Air
Force. And then in terms ofmultidimensionality that kind of thing. The framework
that I'm familiar with, for example, is something called the holographic principle.
Both it it derives itself from generalrelativity and quantum mechanics. And that is,

(01:38:28):
if you want to imagine three Dobjects such as yourself casting a shadow
onto a two D surface, that'sthe holographic principle. So you can be
projected quasi projected from higher dimensional spaceto lower dimensional It's a scientific trope that
you can actually cross literally as faras I understand. But there's probably guys
of PhDs that we could probably argueabout that. But you have not seen

(01:38:48):
any documentation that that's what's occurring,only a theoretical framework discussion. Yes,
okay, okay. Acam's razor isthat this these aircraft, have they been
identified that they are being produced byby domestic um you know, military and

(01:39:12):
contractors. Has there any evidence thatthat's what's being recovered not to my knowledge.
Plus, the recoveries predate a lotof our advanced programs that I previously
am witting of. So um wouldit be safe to say that there could
be scenario today where you have anaircraft that crashes and because it's been involved

(01:39:34):
in one program from one federal agencyand but the but the agency that retrieves
it is not aware of that program, and to them it appears alien in
origin. I mean, that's ahypothetical situation. I'm not aware of any
historical situation that would match that thatyou've described. So you're not aware it

(01:39:57):
has not happened that you're aware ofthat. I'm aware, Thank you,
Miss Truman. A yell back.Several months ago, my office received a
protected disclosure from Eglin Air Force Baseindicating that there was an UAP incident that
required my attention. I saught abriefing regarding that episode and brought with me

(01:40:23):
Congressman Burchett and Congresswoman Luna. Weasked to see any of the evidence that
had been taken by flight crew inthis endeavor and to observe any radar signature,
as long as well as to meetwith the flight crew. We were
not afforded access to all of theflight crew, and initially we were not

(01:40:43):
afforded access to images and to radar. Thereafter, we had a bit of
a discussion about how authorities flow inthe United States of America, and we
did see the image, and wedid meet with one member of the flight
crew who took the image. Theimage was of something that I am not
able to attach to any human capability, either from the United States or from

(01:41:09):
any of our adversaries. And I'msomewhat informed on the matter, having served
on the Armed Services Committee for sevenyears, having served on the committee that
oversees DARPA and Advanced Technologies for severalyears. When we spoke with the flight
crew and when he showed us thephoto that he'd taken, I asked why
the video wasn't engaged, Why wedidn't have a flear system that worked.

(01:41:31):
Here's what he said. They wereout on a test mission that day over
the Gulf of Mexico, and whenyou're on a test mission, you're supposed
to have clear airspace, not supposedto be anything that shows up. And
they saw a sequence of four craftin a clear diamond formation for which there
is a radar sequence that I andI alone have observed in the United States

(01:41:56):
Congress. One of the pilots goesto check out that diamond formation and sees
a large floating what I can onlydescribe as an orb again, like I
said, not of any human capabilitythat I'm aware of, And when he
approached, he said that his radarwent down. He said that his flear
system malfunctioned and that he had tomanually take this image from one of the

(01:42:21):
lenses and it was not automated incollection as you would typically see in a
test mission. So I guess I'llstart with Commander Fraverer in how should we
think about the fact that this craftthat was approached by our pilot had the

(01:42:41):
capability of disarming a number of thecensor and collection systems on that craft.
Well, I think this goes tothat national security side, and you can
go back through history of things showingup at certain areas and disabling our capabilities,
which is disheartening and for us.I mean, like I said,
it completely disabled the radar and aircraftwhen I try to do and the only

(01:43:01):
way we could see it as passively, which is how he got that image.
So I think that's a that's aconcern on what are these doing,
not only how do they operate,but their capabilities inside to do things like
this, and how should we thinkabout four craft moving in a very clear
formation equidistant from one another in adiamond In all of the phenomenon, perhaps,

(01:43:26):
mister Grave, that you've analyzed,have we ever seen multiple craft in
a single formation. I had oneparticular case, and that was during the
gimbal it'sn't it The recording on theat flaar system shows a single object that
rotates. You hear the pilots referto a fleet of objects that is not
visible on the fleaar system, andthat was something that I witnessed during the

(01:43:47):
debrief as part of the radar dataon the situational Awareness page. I would
like to add, whoever, Congressman, there's small small bit of anger,
I would say, I would feelthat those pilots are still facing that difficulty
in reporting this topic and they don'thave the tools to be able to mitigate
this issue. It just goes toshow how serious this is and why this
is such an important issue for ourpilots and for our nation. It was

(01:44:10):
stated explicitly to me by these testpilots that if you have a AP experience,
the best thing you can do foryour career is forget it and not
tell anyone, because any type ofreporting, either above the surface or below
the surface, does have a perceivedconsequence to these people, and that is
a culture we must change if wewant to get to the truth. A

(01:44:32):
Miss Chairman, I would observe thatperhaps as as we move forward from this
hearing, there are some obvious nextsteps. Every person watching this knows that
we need to meet with mister Grushand a secure, compartmentalized facility so that
we can get fulsome answers that donot put him in jeopardy and that give
us the information we need. Second, I would suggest that the radar images

(01:44:59):
that we're collected of this formation ofcraft out of Egland Air Force Base,
and specifically the actual image taken bythe actual flight crew that we can actually
validate, be provided to the Committeesubpoena if necessary, so that we're able
to track how to get this typeof reporting and analysis done in a more
fulesome way. That would be myrecommendation, humbly, as a guest here

(01:45:21):
of the Fine Oversight Committee, Iyield back miss Mace, thank you,
mister Chairman, and good morning toour witnesses who are testifying today. I
want to thank each of you forbeing here to discuss a topic of grave
importance to our national security. Earlierthis year, Chinese spy balloon was shot

(01:45:41):
down off the coast of my homestate of South Carolina. Since the Roswell
incident in nineteen forty seven, manyAmericans have wondered about the dangers of unknown
objects criss crossing our skies, whetherthese are UAPs, or whether from phenomena
advanced technology from American, allied orenemy forces, or something more out of
this world. So my first question, I have several questions, and I'll

(01:46:03):
if we could just be quick onthese first two. I'm gonna ask each
of you the same question, andthen I'll get to each of you individually.
The first one, when you reportedyour experiences with a UAP, did
interview face any repercussions with your superiors? Yes? Or no? No,
No, I've actually never seen anythingpersonally believe or not? All right?

(01:46:27):
And then do you believe there's anactive disinformation campaign within our government to deny
existence of UAPs? Yes or no? I don't have an answer to that
as previously stayed publicly Yes, Ithink previously with like Project Bluebook, yes,
but currently I don't speak for theUnited States government. Okay, thank
you. I have a few questionsfrom mister Graves. What percentage of up

(01:46:50):
sightings and your belief go unreported byour pilots? This is an approximation based
off of my personal experience speaking witha number of pilots, but I would
estimate where somewhere near five percent reporting, perhaps so like ninety five percent basically
don't report seeing UAPs. That's justmy personal estimate. In the incident off
R Junior Beach, do you believethe Navy took the danger to your aircraft

(01:47:13):
seriously after it was reported? Absolutely? A few questions from mister Faber,
as an expert naval aviator, haveyou ever seen an object that looked and
moved like the TIC tac UAP.No, did the TIC tac UAP move
in such a way that defied thelaws of physics the way we understand them.
Yes, many dismissed up reports asclassified weapons testing by our own government.

(01:47:39):
But in your experience as a pilot, does our government typically test advanced
weapons systems? Right? Next?To multimillion dollar jets without informing our pilots.
No, we have test ranges forthat. It took over fifteen years
for your encounter with the TIC TACto be declassified. Do you feel there
was a good reason to prevent lawmakersfrom having access to this footage? No?

(01:48:02):
I just think it was ignored.When would happened and it just sat
somewhere in a file, never gotreported and endore It happens a lot up
here. Shocker, mister Gresh.A couple of questions for you too,
sir this morning. What percentage ofUAPs do you feel are adequately investigated by
the US government? Of the fivepercent that I reported, I can only

(01:48:23):
speak for my personal leadership over atNGA. I tried to look at every
report that came through that I couldtriage. So do you believe that officials
at the highest levels of our nationalsecurity apparatus have unlawfully withheld information from Congress
and subverted our oversight authority? Thereare certain elected leaders that had more information

(01:48:45):
that I'm not sure what they've sharedwith certain Gang of Eight members or etc.
But certainly I would not be surprised. Okay, you've said that the
government is in possession of potentially nonhuman spacecraft. Based on your experience and
extensive conversations with experts, do youbelieve our government has made contact with intelligent

(01:49:06):
extraterrestrials? Something I can't discuss inpublic setting. Okay, I can't ask
when you think this occurred? Ifyou believe we have crashed craft stated earlier,
do we have the bodies of thepilots who piloted this craft? As
I've stated publicly already in my NewsNation interview, biologics came with some of

(01:49:30):
these recoveries. Yeah, were theyI guess human or non human? Biologics?
Non human? And that was theassessment of people which recknowledge on the
program I talked to that are currentlystill on the program. And was this
documentary reverences, video photos, eyewitnesslike, how would that be determined the

(01:49:50):
specific documentation I would have to talkto you in a skiff about. Yeah,
okay, so, and you mayor may not be able to answer
my last question, and then maybewe get into a skiff at the next
hearing that we have. But whoin the government, either what agency,
subagency, what contractors? Who shouldbe called into the next hearing about UAPs

(01:50:12):
either in a public setting or evenin a private setting, and you probably
can't name names, but what agenciesor organizations, contractors, etc. Do
we need to call in to getthese questions answered, whether it's about funding,
what programs are happening, and what'sout there. I can give you
a specific cooperative and hostile witness listof specific individuals that we're in those and

(01:50:33):
how soon can we get that list. I'm happy to provide that to you
after the hearing. Super thank you, and I yield back. Okay,
Ali, Yeah, mister Langworthy's here, Okay, thank you very much.

(01:50:53):
I'd like to thank all of thewitnesses for being here today to discuss this
very unique topic. And I'd liketo jump right into my questions if you
don't mind, Commander frav can youbriefly describe your background? Yeah, I
was an enlisted Marine Naval Academy graduate, Navy flew for eighteen years, got

(01:51:14):
a masters from University Houston, andI've worked in the private sector for the
last what now, nineteen sixteen years, seventeen years. I do a lot
of defense work, so really goldplated credentials. Commander Fraver, have we
have all seen the floating tic Tacvideo that you engage with on November fourteenth,

(01:51:35):
two thousand and four. Can youbriefly talk about why you were off
the coast of San Diego that day. Yeah, we were at a work
up with all the battle groups.So we integrate the ships with the carrier,
the airwing with the carrier, andwe start working. So we're doing
an airitor defense to hone not onlyour skills but those of the USS Princeton
when they had been tracking them fortwo weeks. The problem was that there
was never manned aircraft airborne when theywere tracking them, and this was the

(01:51:58):
first day and four. We werethe ones airborn and went and saw it.
Do you remember the weather that dayor was it cloudy or windy or
anything out of the ordinary on thePacific coast? It was actually, if
if you're familiar with San Diego,was a perfect day, light winds,
no white caps, clear skies,not a cloud. It was for a
flying It was the best. Nowis it true that you saw, in

(01:52:18):
your words, a forty foot flyingTikTok shaped object? That's correct or for
some people that can't know that TikTokis, it's a giant flying propane tank
fair enough. Did this object comeup on radar or interfere with your radar
or the USS Princeton. The Princetontracked it, the Nimitz tracked it,

(01:52:39):
the E two tracked it. We'dnever saw it on our radars. Our
fire control radars never picked it up. The other airplane that took the video
did get it on a radar.As soon as it tried to lock it
a jam the radar spit the lockand he's rapidly switched over to the targeting
pod, which you can do inthe f A team from which you saw
that day and what you've seen onvideo, did you see any source of
propulsion from the ying object, includingon any potential thermal scans from your aircraft?

(01:53:04):
No, there's none. There's noir plume coming out. And Chad
who took the video, went throughall the EO which is black and white
TV, and the IR modes andthere's no visual signs of propulution. It's
just sitting in space at twenty thousandfeet. In your career, have you
ever seen a propulsion system that createsno thermal exhaust? No? Can you

(01:53:24):
describe how the aircraft maneuvered abruptly verydeterminate. It knew exactly what it was
doing, It was aware of ourpresence, and it had acceleration rates.
I mean it went from zero tomatching our speed and no time at all.
Now, if the fastest plane onEarth was trying to do these maneuvers
that you saw, would it becapable of doing that? No? Not

(01:53:46):
even close. And just to confirm, this object had no wings? Correct,
no wings. Now was the aircraftthat you were flying? Was it
armed? No? Felt threatened atall? If the aircraft was armed,
you believe that your aircraft or anyaircraft in possession of the United States could

(01:54:09):
have shot the tik Tak down.I'd say no. Just on the performance,
it would just left in a splitsecond. It looks like that we
have a problem here that needs furtherinvestigation. Yes, in your belief,

(01:54:30):
is this this flying tik tak?I mean, is this Is it capable
of being the product of any othernation on the Earth? No? Actually,
I said like I said earlier,I think it defies current material science
and the ability to develop that muchpropulsion. And I know there's been some
physicis of them calculations which is beyondanything that we have. Well, either

(01:54:51):
the United States has an adversary herein this world that we don't know or
we really have some serious investigations todo. I I really appreciate you being
here. Is there anything else aboutthe November fourteenth, two thousand and four
incident that you think is important forthis committee to know? That you haven't
been asked here today. No,I you know, it's it's been said.

(01:55:14):
It's probably the most credible UFO citingand history based on all the sensors
that we're tracking it, and thenfor us to get visual and to go
against the naysayers it's something on thescreen or whatever. I mean, there's
four sets of human eyeballs. We'reall very credible. Of the six of
us that were involved in the thing, including the video, every one of
us is going to do twenty plusyears in the military in very responsible positions.
So I'd say the world needs toknow that it's not a joke.

(01:55:38):
Thank you very much for your testimonyhere today for all of you, and
I yield back, mister Chairman.It's drugless. Thank you, mister chairman,
and thank you all for being hereand the courage it took to come
forward, and again the sacrifice thatyou have made. I serve on the
National Security subcommittee for the Financial ServicesCommittee, so I really want to stay

(01:56:00):
the national security lane, if Imay. So, when we think about
traditional adversaries and both US towards themand them towards us, you know,
we probe other capabilities, We lookfor weaknesses, and we collect that data
that reconnaissance for in the event weneed it in the future. For each

(01:56:20):
of you, yes or no.Question, based off of your own experience
or the data that you've been privyto, is there any indication that these
UAPs could be essentially collecting reconnaissance information? Mister Graves, Yes, mister Grush,
fair assessment. Mister Fraver, verypossible. Again in the national security

(01:56:43):
vein, is it possible that theseUAPs would be probing our capabilities? Yes
or no, mister Graves, Yes, Rush, Yes, Fraver, definitely.
Is it possible that these UAPs aretesting for vulnerabilities in our current systems?
Yes, yes, possible. Doyou feel, based off of your

(01:57:03):
experience of the information that you've beenprivy to, that these you pay ups
provide are an existential threat to thenational security of the United States? Mister
Graves, potentially, Yes, orpotentially same answer, potentially, I would
say definitely potentially, mister Graves andFraver. You know, in the event

(01:57:24):
that your encounters have become hostile,would you have would would you have had
the capability to defend yourself, yourcrew, your aircraft. Absolutely not,
sir, No, is based offof the information that you've been privy too.
Is there any indication that these UAPsare interested in our nuclear technology and

(01:57:44):
capabilities? Yes, by external observation, sure, if that could be a
fair assessment. Yeah, yes.Is there any indication the Department of Energy
is involved in UAP data collection andhousing? I don't have an answer.
I can't confirm or deny that inpublic setting. And could you do it
in a secure setting? Yes,for sure, favor No, I don't

(01:58:09):
know, mister Chairman. You know, I think I'm the last member to
go. But there clearly is athreat to the national security of the United
States of America. As members ofCongress, we have a responsibility to maintain
oversight and be aware of these activitiesso that, if appropriate, we take

(01:58:32):
action. I would encourage the Chairmanto demand that we have any and all
but in particular, mister Grush,talk to us in a skiff, and
if that access is denied, Iwill personally volunteer to initiate the home and
rule against any personnel, or anyprogram, or any agency that denies access

(01:58:57):
to Congress, Mister Chairman. Withthat, I will yield the remainder of
my time to my fellow colleague fromTennessee, mister Bircherd, Thank you,
Mis Chairman, Thank you Miss Strugglesfor the great questions. Brother, mister
Grush. I might have asked thisbefore, but I want to make sure.
Do you have any personal knowledge ofsomeone who's possibly been injured working on

(01:59:18):
legacy UAP reverse engineering? Yes?Okay, how are they injured? Was
it? Is it something like aradioactive type situation or something we didn't understand.
I've heard people talk about Havana syndrometype of incidents. Is what was

(01:59:39):
your recollection of that? I can'tget into specifics, but you can imagine
assessing an unknown unknown there's a lotof potentialities you can't fully prepare for.
How do you think we ought tohandle you AP whistleblower complaints like yours in
the future. Yeah, there wassome issue with mine, so you know
PPT nineteen process the Intel committees eventhrough PPD nineteen or D one twenty.

(02:00:03):
There's not a good way for theIntelligence Community Inspector General to provide that to
other committees. And I asked myinformation to be sent to the House and
Senate Armed Services Committee because there areTitle ten equities at play, but there
was no smooth process to do.So, yeah, it's a trash.

(02:00:23):
Can Are you aware of any individualsthat are participating in reverse engineering programs for
non terrestrial craft personally? Yes,you know anything would be willing to testify
if there were protections for them,certainly closed door and assurances breaking their n
DA they're not going to get administrativelypunished for. So yeah, I yield,

(02:00:47):
sure, thank you. I'm gonnado something a little bit out of
the ordinary here. We're going togive three people a chance at additional three
minutes. So mister Vircha Johanna,keep going. Why don't you come back
to me miss chairman, miss Lonaif she is on the issue on that

(02:01:09):
list, sure, Chairman. I'dlike to submit for the record an article
by News Nation and it follows misterGrush's full interview for the record without objection.
Thank you, mister Grush. Whyis it that you referred to the
phenomenon as non human intelligence? Whydo you beat from the basis of extraterrestrial

(02:01:32):
life? I think the phenomenon isvery complex, and I like to leave
an open mind analytically to specific origin. When you say specific origin, are
you referring Can you elaborate on thatfor those of m if it's a traditional
extraterrestrial origin or something else that wedon't quite understand from either biological or astrophysics

(02:01:58):
perspective. Yeah, I just likethe keep an open mind on what it
could be. Yeah, okay.And referring to your News Nation interview,
you had referenced specific treaties between governments. Article three of the Nuclear Armed Treaty
with Russia identify as UAPs. Itspecifically mentions them to your knowledge, are
there safety measures in place with foreigngovernments or other superpowers to avoid an escalatory

(02:02:20):
situation in the event that a malevolentevent occurs. Yeah, you're referring to
actual public treaty in the U NRegister. It's funny you mentioned that the
Agreement on Measures to Reduce the Riskof Outbreak a Nuclear war sign in nineteen
seventy one Unclassified Treaty publicly available,and if you cite the George Washington University

(02:02:43):
National Security Archives, you will findthe declassified in twenty thirteen specific provisions in
the specific red line flash message trafficwith the specific codes pursue into article three,
an article also situation two, whichis in the previously classified NSA archive.

(02:03:04):
What I would recommend, and Itried to get access, but I
got a wall of silence at theWhite House, was those specific incidents when
those message traffic was used. Ithink some scholarship on that would open the
door to a further investigation using thosepublicly available information. Thank you. And

(02:03:26):
then my last question, with fiftyone seconds remaining, you mentioned white collar
crimes potentially being taking place in regardsto a cover up. Can you please
elaborate. I have concerns, basedon the interviews I conducted under my official
duties, of potential violations of thefederal acquisition regulations the far Thank you very

(02:03:47):
much, Chairman, I yield theremainder of my time. Okay, we'll
go to mister Raskin for three minutes. Thanks mister Scherer. I thank the
witnesses for their endurance and service today. Um, mister Faber, you've described
your episode in detail now and youcall it the most credible uf UFO siting

(02:04:09):
in history. Um. But Iwonder was this the first time that you
encountered a UFO or a uaping intwo thousand and four? Yes? And
what was your general attitude or perspectiveon the UFO discussion before that happened.

(02:04:33):
I never felt it. We werealone with all the planets out there.
But I wasn't a UFO person.I wasn't. I wasn't watching History Channel
and movef on and all that.And um. Have you had experiences or
encounter since that happened? No?Um, And so have you formed any

(02:04:55):
general conclusions about what you think youexperienced? Then? Yes, I think
what we experienced was, like Isaid, well beyond the material science and
the capabilities that we had at thetime that we have currently or that we're
going to have in the next tento twenty years. Very good, mister
Gresh. You've been able to answerin great detail on certain questions, and
then other things you say you're notable to respond to. Can you just

(02:05:19):
explain where you're drawing the line?What's the basis for that? Yeah,
based on my dopts or security reviewin what they've determined that is unclassified.
I see. So you're answering anyquestions that just call upon your knowledge of
unclassified questions, but anything that relatesto classified matters you're not commenting on in

(02:05:42):
this context in an open session,but happy to participate in a close session
at the right level. Yeah,okay, And mister Graves, you've said
that there are dozens of fellow pilotsmilitary pilots. Are there also commercial pilots
who've encountered the same kind of sightingsthat you described before. They are similar

(02:06:05):
pilots. Commercial pilots have less rangeand less censors to be able to reach
out and look for objects over wideswass of airspace, and so pilots are
sem. Commercial pilots are SEM,and they're typically closer and the range of
what they're seeing is is pretty large. What is the most vivid concrete sighting
with the naked eye of the objectsthat you described before? The cube like

(02:06:30):
objects, certainly, I think themost vivid sighting of that would have been
near a near midair that we hadat the entrance to our working area.
One of these objects was completely stationaryat the exact entrance to our working areas
not only geographically but also at altitude, so it was right where all the
jets are going, essentially on theeastern seaboard. The two aircraft flew within

(02:06:51):
about fifty feet of the object,and that was a very close visual sighting.
And you were in one of theaircraft. I was not. I
was there when the pilot landed.He canceled the mission after and I was
there. He was in the readyroom with all his gear on, with
his mouth open, and I askedhim what the problem was, and he
said he always hit one of thosedarned things. He said he was fifty
feet away from it, yes,sir, And his description of the object

(02:07:15):
was consistent with the description you gaveus before. A dark gray or a
black cube inside of a clear sphere, inside of a clear sphere, and
with no self evident propulsion system,no wings, no iron energy coming off
of the vehicle, nothing tethering itto the ground. And that was that
was primarily what we were experiencing outthere. I'm over time. Thank you

(02:07:38):
very much for your service, andthen you go back to mister Chaman.
Very good, mister Burchett, thankyou, mister Chairman. This is for
all three of y'all starting, misterRaye, why did you come forward on
this issue? I came forward becauseI felt that my colleagues did not have
a way to mitigate the safety threat, and I wanted to help them.
I was trained as an aviation safetyofficer by the Navy, and it just

(02:08:01):
felt right. I felt like Ihad to help the folks that were still
flying and dealing with this. MisterGresh, purely a sense of duty.
My first sworn oath when I wasa cadett eighteen years ago, and I
still have pulled that even out ofthe uniform commander. I was pestered by
a friend and I asked why,and he said, you're the one person

(02:08:22):
that they can't discredit, and you'lladd credibility to the New York Times article.
And so after about six times,I said, okay, yeah,
this town isn't made, unfortunately aboutpeople like y'all. We thank you,
and I do want to also thankthe people in the audience and the people
that are watching this. It can'tbe people all over the world that have

(02:08:43):
kept this issue alive. You've enduredcriticism and derogatory remarks, and we're trying
to get to the bottom of it, and so God bless y'all. Thank
y'all so much. We really appreciateyou, guys and gals. That's why
we need term limits. You'll keepclapping as politicians, just keep talking.

(02:09:05):
So let me ask you out,how can we the public contribute to UAP
reporting and what avenues you should thinkare available to the public to report these
sidings right now? I don't thinkthere is a lot of public options for
the every man to be able toreport on this. I think even for
professionals that have sensor data that areseeing these on a regular basis, they're

(02:09:26):
still hesitant to come forward. Andso for the general public, I think
encouraging the conversations that we're having todaylooking for technology solutions that can be distributed
so the objective data can be gatheredis the first place to go. Mister
Grash, I'll just touch on thewhistleblower sign of it. I do encourage
you know, current former military intelligencecommunity and industry contractors to come forward in

(02:09:48):
a legal way, either through theIC or duty or whatever the cognistant digs
are to lead lead you join mein this discussion. Come Internet. I
guess I should say this for therecord, My daddy was United States Marine
Corps, first Marine Division, Soyes, sir, he was old school

(02:10:09):
him and CHESTI puller on pillow loose, So thank you. Bow Yes,
I'm I'm not anything like my daddy. He was incredible. I'm very mediocre
to say the least, but goahead. He seemed to be doing fine
man for me. You know,I was an accident investigator. So the
biggest thing that you learned, andI think that witnesses neither to do,
is one, don't try and makethe fish bigger than it was. Stick

(02:10:31):
to the facts. Write it down, and don't speculate what you think it
is, because all s were yourdecision. Just write the facts down.
We can get all the facts togetherand we can start to investigate and get
a real honest story instead of itwas just big Thank you all, and
I want to thank everybody we madea history of today. Mister chairman,
I yield, thank you much.Mister Garcia. Yeah. Think I know

(02:10:52):
now we're going to be making someclosing remarks and so I just wanted us
to say a few things first toour witnesses. I want to thank all
of you for being here with today. I know that it takes a lot
a lot of courage. You aretelling really important information to this committee,
and I just want to thank youalso for your all three of you year
service to our country. I alsowant to just note that today's hearing was

(02:11:15):
both important but also serious, andI want to thank our subcommittee chairman,
mister Grothman, I think, forrunning a very fair and substance hearing.
I do want to thank the committeestaff on both sides for the amount of
work that I took to put thishearing in place, and certainly to all
the members that have been involved inthis issue to prior to the hearing.

(02:11:35):
I also want to note for ourwitnesses and for the public that I'm a
freshman member of Congress and I've onlybeen here for seven months, but this
is by far the most bipartisan conversationand discussion that I have seen happen in
the Congress. And I think thata topic of this significance, as it
relates to our national security, asit relates to information that we're trying to

(02:11:58):
gather for the for the for theAmerica in public, does bring people together,
and I think that's been really greatto see. I think it's also
important to note for the public wetoday in our hearing, we had on
our side also both our full rankingmember, which is mister Raskin, and
our vice ranking member, which isMiss Acasto Cortez. Both here and our
hearing. I think it shows theimportance and seriousness that our side of the

(02:12:22):
Aisle is taking to this important hearing, but also the broader issue as it
relates to working with our Republican counterpartson this committee. I want to additionally
add that I think and I encourage, I think it's really important that we
have and continue these discussions and thesehearings. Clearly there's a lot of information
that we don't know, but it'salso very clear that we have to continue

(02:12:45):
our investigation and accountability on asking theright questions and ensuring that they're part of
the public record. One thing thatis important today is some folks might wonder
why are we asking questions that mightalready be out there or that have been
asked before. It's important that they'reasked and put into the public record as
it relates to this committee. Andso I want to thank you for I'm,
you know, answering some questions multipletimes. I know, not just

(02:13:07):
in maybe meetings you had with somemembers, but also here in the public.
Let me also just add an additionalnote that it's important also that are
our friends in the media and thosethat are not just reporting on this hearing,
but that a reporter on this topicand that made in the future.
The media has an important role inthis process, and it's very important that

(02:13:30):
the media engages does independent investigation andreports on not just what happened today,
but what they what they see independentlyas what's happening with around UAPs in the
broader community. That is also animportant um public benefit that we have in
trying to get the information and thefacts as it relates to this. Let

(02:13:52):
me also just say finally that asa as a teacher and an educator a
long time, a long time teacherand researcher, that I also really believe
in following facts in doing your homework, and I'm making sure that you follow
science as we try to give mostinformation as possible, and so I want
to thank you all for agreeing todo that today. Transparency is a cornerstonner

(02:14:16):
of government. We live in avast galaxy a lot of unanswered questions,
and thank you all for being heretoday, mister Chairman, Thank you.
I liked it one more time.Thank mister Burchen Luna for bringing this to
our attention. It's a topic thathas interested me since I was in school.

(02:14:37):
It was a very illuminating hearing.Obviously, I think several of us
are going to look forward to gettingsome answers in a more confidential setting.
I assume some legislation will come outof this. Sure, I apologize,
Miss Chairman. I need to complementto folks in my office that did a

(02:14:58):
lot of the work on this.Rachel and Noah sitting behind me here.
They're very quiet and humble, butif without them this thing would not have
come off like it did, soI apologize them. Thank you. I
think we're gonna want to look intowhat we can do to make more of
this information public. I think there'scertainly a time period after which it should
always be made public, and peoplehave been concerned about these issues, like

(02:15:22):
I said, since I was inhigh school. But in any event,
like to thank everybody who was heresticking through through the entire hearing without objection.
The members will have five legislative daysto submit materials and to submit additional
written questions. For the witness witnesseswhich we afford to the witnesses for their
response. If there's no further business, without objection, the Subcommittee stands abjourned,

All Episodes

Congressional Hearing on July 26 2023 on UAPs / UFOs - Witnesses Ryan Graves, David Grusch and Cdr. David Fravor

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Congressional Hearing on July 26 2023 on UAPs / UFOs - Witnesses Ryan Graves, David Grusch and Cdr. David Fravor